Hhmmm, doing the math, 4.8M * 64B * 8b == 2.29Gb transfer rate. How much higher were you expecting?
Thank you for your reply. I was expecting 10gbps because It was 10 Gbps when I tested x 540 in the same environment. I used 14880000 packets with pktgen. As you know, if it's a 64 byte packet, it is equivalent to 10 G with 14880000 packets.
In the measurement, x540 - t2 received all 14.88 million packets, while x550 - t2 received only 4.8 million packets.
As for specs, the expected result of x550 - t2 was worse than x540 - t2, although the performance is better for x550 - t2 than for x540 - t2. If you know the reason why it will result like this, could you teach me ?
What I was getting at is that there can be transactional costs that limit the overall effective bandwidth. If you were to, for example, send 256 byte packets, I am sure you would see the effective bandwidth improve.
Yes, it would seem that the performance of this adapter is worse than the previous. We need folks with the right knowledge level to answer this question. I am going to move this conversation into the Wired Ethernet forum, where more-knowledgeable folks should be lurking...
To the respondent
Thank you for your valuable answer.I think your response is credible.
because our measurement results match what you are saying.
By moving this discussion to Wired Ethernet forums, I will expect high precision answers
and maybe ask someone who is familiar with this matter like you again in that forum. Thank you very much and I look forward to your kind cooperation.