3COM NIC ping=good, all else ping=bad

why not full duplex? you sure the different cards are the same config as the 3 coms?

i went to the tomshardware forums and all i got was this lousy signature.

hi jihiggs,

the reson I have been manually forcing the half duplex is: it is my understanding that I would need a switch not a hub to properly utilize this full duplex operation without causing problems due to data collisions (whatever). I have verified that this seems true using Qcheck since the throughput goes to almost 0 with all cards set to full duplex.

The only configuration setting I have changed from the default is the media type, and I have been religously changing this to 100MB, half duplex on all systems in question.

In general I have found that I have no idea what any of the other settings are for and so just leave them at default. That is true for 3COMs and the others.

I take it I am not experiencing normal behavior, eh?

Kevin

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by knewton on 02/07/02 06:56 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

with a hub you are always going to get collisions, but its not going to affect you too much with only 4 computers on a hub. but i dont think that would affect ping time. maybe theyre cards are just lame.

i went to the tomshardware forums and all i got was this lousy signature.

^
Shots in the dark, and haphazard guesses now welcome.

you could check to see if they have any other protocals other than tcp/ip and ipx, if for some strang reason they had a bunch of network protocols running that could slow them down. could swap out their nics for decent ones. check your cables, make sure they are cat5, if they are cat5, see if they are in good shape. if you can try a different hub keep the cables away from the surge protectors. all i can think of.

i went to the tomshardware forums and all i got was this lousy signature.

Hi again jihiggs,

I've had the Netgear FA311 over for testing, it used to be mine. I actually had it in one of my boxes at one point. Let's just say that I'm fairly certain about all of the involved hardware except perhaps this (FA311) NIC and maybe the hub(doubt it, but don't have a replacement to test with). I used Qcheck to verify. Guess what. The SAME results. Bad ping. Great throughput.

The problem is that test isn't complete. I haven't for example had a chance to test on a network only containing FA311's for example. Perhaps due to some fluke this NIC is malfunctioning, but not bad enough to fail completely, or even perceptibly in any other way for that matter.

My evidence says: FA311's, SiS900's and probably most everything else is all a load of useless crap, and the only NIC's worth anything is the 3C905C's. My problem is can I believe this evidence? I mean it seems like at least somebody else would have noticed this by now. Doesn't everybody test their network performance?

Perhaps my evidence is bunk. What are more realistic ping values for NIC's of the class listed?

Sorry if I seem a little carried away with it. It's a nagging little inconsistency, and it's really bothering me that I can't reason my way through it.

Kevin

Edit: oops, as for the other PC with the SiS900. It's a ECSK7S5A I built. I only stuck TCP/IP on there.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by knewton on 02/13/02 00:29 AM.</EM></FONT></P>