Intel NIC vs RealTek NIC - Performance Testing

[joeschmuck]

NAS Performance Testing with RealTek 8111 NICs vs. Intel NICs​

And SSD ZIL and L2ARC Performance Testing​

The purpose of this test is to show the performance difference between the motherboard installed RealTek NIC’s which are very predominate in our hardware and the add-on card Intel NIC. I will not make any assumptions that a motherboard installed Intel NIC would product the same results as the add-on card NIC.

The tests will be conducted while there is no other network traffic on the network. The LAN connections will plug into a single Rosewill 8-port Gigabit switch (RC-410LX) with no other connection to the switch. I will also connect a single Ethernet cable between the two devices to see if the switch has any effect on throughput.

Testing will consist of the following tests:
1) dd for baseline FreeNAS internal speed test. This will be done once only just to show there are no slowness problem plaguing the system.
2) Intel NAS Performance Toolkit (NASPT) which can easily be located on the Intel website, just Google search it. (Between each test the created test data will be deleted)
3) Crystal DiskMark version 3.0.1 (32-bit)
4) Copy a large single file from the NAS using Windoze.
5) Copy a large single file to the NAS using Windoze.
6) Reboot both systems and rerun the tests.
7) Install Intel NIC into main computer, rerun the tests.
8) Install a second Intel NIC into the FreeNAS computer, rerun the tests.
9) Install the SSD into the FreeNAS computer, set it up as ZIL, rerun the tests.
10) Setup the FreeNAS SSD to also be an L2ARC, rerun the tests.

System Configuration:
Main Computer:
Motherboard: Gigabyte X58-USB3
CPU: Intel i7 950 (3.06 GHz)
RAM: 24GB
MB NIC: RealTek 8111L
Hard drives: SSD (two) Crucial M4 256GB as individual drives, one 2TB Samsung HD204UI.
OS: Windows 7 w/Service Pack 1

FreeNAS Computer:
Motherboard: Gigabyte P45T-ES3G
CPU: Intel E8500 (3.16 GHz)
RAM: 8GB
MB NIC: RealTek 8111D
RAIDZ1: four WD Red 2TB + one Samsung 2TB HD204UI (no SWAP space on drives).
FreeNAS Configuration: 8.3.0-RELEASE, CIFS, DDNS, SSH, Plugins (MiniDLNA).

Network:
CAT5e cables
Rosewill 8-port Gigabit switch (RC-410LX)

Upgraded Hardware:
Intel EXPI9301CTBLK PCI Network Card (two cards)
Corsair P120 SSD (three partitions, 8GB, 100GB, 20GB)

Test 1
The dd test was conducted to show there are no internal write/read speed problems within the FreeNAS computer. The results are consistent for my SATA II connections, no complaints at all.

Code:

dd if=/dev/zero of=tmp.dat bs=2048k count=50k
51200+0 records in
51200+0 records out
107374182400 bytes transferred in 336.745898 secs (318858175 bytes/sec)
 
dd of=/dev/zero if=tmp.dat bs=2048k count=50k
51200+0 records in
51200+0 records out
107374182400 bytes transferred in 287.611204 secs (373331014 bytes/sec)

Test 2
Intel NAS Performance Test Toolkit
I selected all testing cases to be performed. This does take a rather long time to run the testing but because I plan to also include a ZIL and L2ARC, it was just smart to see where these will shine, or not.
The Rosewill Gigabit Switch is connected between the two computers.

Code:

Testname                Run1    Run2    Run3    Run4    Run5    Median
HD Video Playback      50.3    51.5    51.8    51.5    51.9    51.5MB/s
2x HD Playback          51.8    82.7    52.4    52.4    52.8    52.4MB/s
4x HD Playback          83.7    66.4    66.8    67.4    78.8    67.4MB/s
HD Video Record        203.7    175.9  182.7  176.6  191.2  182.7MB/s
HD Playback & Record    66.5    62.0    65.0    67.0    68.5    66.5MB/s
Content Creation        10.8    10.7    11.2    11.1    9.3    10.8MB/s
Office Productivity    49.2    47.8    49.6    49.0    49.1    49.1MB/s
File copy to NAS        72.7    77.5    72.4    76.5    73.3    73.3MB/s
File copy from NAS      46.1    45.2    46.8    44.5    45.5    45.5MB/s
Dir copy to NAS          4.9      4.8    4.9    5.0    4.8    4.9MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      19.1    16.8    17.7    18.0    18.2    18.0MB/s
Photo Album            18.9    18.2    18.2    18.1    18.1    18.2MB/s

Test 3
Intel NAS Performance Test Toolkit
Reboot both FreeNAS and main computer. Selected all testing cases to be performed.
The Rosewill Gigabit Switch is dis-connected and the computers are connected directly to each other.

Code:

Testname                Run1    Run2    Run3    Run4    Run5    Median
HD Video Playback      53.4    53.5    53.4    53.3    53.4    53.4MB/s
2x HD Playback          53.3    53.3    53.3    52.8    53.4    53.3MB/s
4x HD Playback          76.5    53.6    54.3    65.6    53.7    54.3MB/s
HD Video Record        194.1  195.8  189.7  185.3  184.3  189.7MB/s
HD Playback & Record    61.7    90.9    66.9    67.6    70.1    67.6MB/s
Content Creation        10.7    11.3    10.3    10.8    10.3    10.7MB/s
Office Productivity    50.6    49.0    49.6    49.2    49.0    49.2MB/s
File copy to NAS        76.9    78.7    78.3    79.2    76.0    78.3MB/s
File copy from NAS      47.7    77.5    43.8    78.7    47.3    47.7MB/s
Dir copy to NAS          4.8    4.6    3.1    4.9    4.8    4.8MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      17.8    17.5    18.0    17.9    17.9    17.9MB/s
Photo Album            17.1    17.1    17.1    17.2    17.2    17.1MB/s

*Based on the results from running Test 2 and Test 3 the Gigabit switch has some might have a minor influence to our testing so I will use a direct connection between the two devices for all future testing.

Test 4
Crystal DiskMark
I have setup the settings as indicated in the screen capture.
Number of test runs = 2, Test Size = 100MB, Target = Mapped FreeNAS dataset.

Code:

      Read          Write
  Seq: 56.79    Seq: 102.4
  512K: 56.98  512K: 98.31
    4K:  9.504        10.23
4KQD32: 67.56        64.76

Test 5
Copy a large video file from FreeNAS. Since I’m using SSD’s on my main computer, there should be negligible impact cause by my computer. During the large file copy tests each file is a different 3.x GB .vob video file and are not used more than one after a reboot unless specified so they are not cached which would affect the testing.

NOTE: All Copy Video Files are using Windoze 7 to cut and paste the files.

84.0 MB/sec

Test 6
Copy a second large video file from FreeNAS.
82.7 MB/sec

Test 7
Copy a third video to FreeNAS.
94.1 MB/sec

Test 8
Copy a fourth video to FreeNAS.
106 MB/sec

Testing is complete using the original NIC equipment. At this point we will install the Intel NIC into the main computer and then repeat the testing we previously performed.

Test 9
Intel NAS Performance Test Toolkit
Selected all testing cases to be performed.

Code:

Testname              Run1    Run2    Run3    Run4    Run5    Median
HD Video Playback      51.6    60.5    60.3    60.2    60.4    60.3MB/s
2x HD Playback        50.9    59.3    59.9    59.6    60.1    59.6MB/s
4x HD Playback        97.2    61.6    73.2    70.1    85.7    73.2MB/s
HD Video Record      179.1  181.1  201.1  183.4  198.0  183.4MB/s
HD Playback & Record  72.1    74.0    75.8    76.5    74.2    74.2MB/s
Content Creation      12.2    10.6    9.1    10.2    10.6    10.6MB/s
Office Productivity    52.0    51.2    48.4    51.2    50.1    51.2MB/s
File copy to NAS      82.7    83.2    84.1    80.8    86.0    83.2MB/s
File copy from NAS    52.3    52.4    53.6    53.7    53.8    53.6MB/s
Dir copy to NAS        5.0    5.1    5.0    4.9    5.2    5.0MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      21.0    20.6    21.8    21.8    22.5    21.8MB/s
Photo Album            25.9    25.1    26.1    25.3    25.5    25.5MB/s

Test 10
Crystal DiskMark
I have setup the settings as indicated in the screen capture.
Number of test runs = 2, Test Size = 100MB, Target = Mapped FreeNAS dataset.
(Forgot to capture the image, sorry)

Test 11
Copy a large video file from FreeNAS.
96.2 MB/sec

Test 12
Copy a second large video file from FreeNAS.
82 .0 MB/sec

Test 13
Copy a third video to FreeNAS.
102 MB/sec

Test 14
Copy a fourth video to FreeNAS.
104 MB/sec

At this point we will install the Intel NIC into the FreeNAS computer and then repeat the testing we previously performed.

Test 15
Intel NAS Performance Test Toolkit
Selected all testing cases to be performed.

Code:

Testname              Run1    Run2    Run3    Run4    Run5    Median
HD Video Playback      51.8    65.6    66.4    66.4    66.3    66.3MB/s
2x HD Playback        55.2    64.3  100.1    99.1    66.1    66.1MB/s
4x HD Playback        104.9    80.6    81.6    66.8    67.1    80.6MB/s
HD Video Record      207.0  207.2  202.2  205.8  188.6  205.8MB/s
HD Playback & Record  70.6    79.2    78.1    74.1    79.1    78.1MB/s
Content Creation        9.7    11.7    12.0    11.1    11.7    11.7MB/s
Office Productivity    48.6    50.8    51.4    51.2    51.4    51.2MB/s
File copy to NAS      85.1    81.9    80.9    80.3    78.4    80.9MB/s
File copy from NAS    54.1    54.3    55.0    54.9    54.9    54.9MB/s
Dir copy to NAS        4.8    5.0    4.9    4.8    5.0    4.9MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      20.5    21.3    20.7    21.3    20.9    20.9MB/s
Photo Album            23.4    23.7    23.6    23.5    23.6    23.6MB/s

Test 16
Crystal DiskMark
I have setup the settings as indicated in the screen capture.
Number of test runs = 2, Test Size = 100MB, Target = Mapped FreeNAS dataset.

Code:

      Read        Write
  Seq:  71.72  Seq: 109.1
  512K: 71.19  512K: 104.4
    4K: 12.76          10.27
4KQD32: 66.85          64.55

Test 17
Copy a large video file from FreeNAS.
98.8 MB/sec

Test 18
Copy a second large video file from FreeNAS.
100 MB/sec

Test 19
Copy a third video to FreeNAS.
93.7 MB/sec

Test 20
Copy a fourth video to FreeNAS.
110 MB/sec

Results of adding the Intel NIC’s
Installing the Intel NIC’s did increase throughput but it wasn’t that significant in my opinion. Here are the differences of Test 2 to Test 15:

Code:

Testname              Test 2  Test 15  Diff
HD Video Playback      53.4    66.3    12.9MB/s
2x HD Playback        53.3    66.1    12.8MB/s
4x HD Playback        54.3    80.6    26.3MB/s
HD Video Record      189.7    205.8    16.1MB/s
HD Playback & Record  67.6    78.1    10.5MB/s
Content Creation      10.7    11.7    1.0MB/s
Office Productivity    49.2    51.2    2.0MB/s
File copy to NAS      78.3    80.9    2.6MB/s
File copy from NAS    47.7    54.9    7.2MB/s
Dir copy to NAS        4.8      4.9    0.1MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      17.9    20.9    3.0MB/s
Photo Album            17.1    23.6    6.5MB/s

Adding the ZIL
I am adding an 8GB ZIL to this already speedy setup for home use. The ZIL hopefully will increase the writing speed of the FreeNAS computer.

Test 21
Intel NAS Performance Test Toolkit
Selected all testing cases to be performed.

Code:

Testname              Run1    Run2    Run3    Run4    Run5    Median
HD Video Playback      52.8    65.3    65.0    64.2    65.1    65.0MB/s
2x HD Playback        93.3    98.9    64.1    64.5    64.6    64.6MB/s
4x HD Playback        110.2    79.9    79.4    78.5    66.0    79.4MB/s
HD Video Record      185.1  195.7  153.1  194.5  203.4  194.5MB/s
HD Playback & Record  79.6    69.2    77.9    70.9    79.2    77.9MB/s
Content Creation      12.1    9.4    12.1    11.8    9.7    11.8MB/s
Office Productivity    51.3    49.6    50.9    48.7    50.4    50.4MB/s
File copy to NAS      77.4    83.5    81.1    75.4    78.8    78.8MB/s
File copy from NAS    55.8    55.5    52.6    55.1    54.8    55.1MB/s
Dir copy to NAS        11.4    12.8    10.5    12.2    12.8    12.2MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      19.9    20.8    20.1    20.0    20.3    20.1MB/s
Photo Album            22.2    22.7    22.2    22.4    22.6    22.4MB/s

Test 22
Copy a video to FreeNAS.
109 MB/sec

Test 23
Copy another video to FreeNAS.
105 MB/sec


Adding the L2ARC
In a home environment I do not see the L2ARC being a huge benefit but since I have so much unused SSD space I will be giving 100GB to this test and this gives me ~20GB of SSD space to use as I will, likely for my plugins and scripts.

Test 24
Intel NAS Performance Test Toolkit
Selected all testing cases to be performed.

Code:

Testname              Run1    Run2    Run3    Run4    Run5    Median
HD Video Playback      55.5    65.6    65.5    65.5    65.2    65.5MB/s
2x HD Playback        55.8    63.1    63.7    65.4    64.4    63.7MB/s
4x HD Playback        80.1    64.7    66.0    66.7    78.5    66.7MB/s
HD Video Record      190.0  183.9  185.5  135.2  182.8  183.9MB/s
HD Playback & Record  90.8    75.7    70.1    80.8    75.6    75.7MB/s
Content Creation      11.3    9.9    12.2    11.6    11.9    11.6MB/s
Office Productivity    48.7    48.3    48.1    49.5    48.1    48.3MB/s
File copy to NAS      80.1    81.2    73.9    67.6    79.3    79.3MB/s
File copy from NAS    51.5    51.8    54.3    54.3    53.9    53.9MB/s
Dir copy to NAS        11.4    11.2    13.1    10.5    11.9    11.4MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      19.0    17.7    16.8    20.9    20.4    19.0MB/s
Photo Album            22.2    22.6    22.4    22.0    22.8    22.4MB/s

Test 25
Crystal DiskMark
I have setup the settings as indicated in the screen capture.
Number of test runs = 2, Test Size = 100MB, Target = Mapped FreeNAS dataset.

Code:

    Read        Write
  Seq: 70.45    Seq: 108.5
  512K: 70.00  512K: 103.6
    4K: 12.29          9.990
4KQD32: 69.50          64.67

Test 26
Copy the first large video file from FreeNAS.
96.3 MB/sec

Test 26
Copy the first large video file from FreeNAS again, second time to see if the L2ARC cached anything.
116 MB/sec

Test 27
Copy the second large video file from FreeNAS again.
97.3 MB/sec

Test 28
Reboot both computers and copy the second large video file from FreeNAS again.
69.7 MB/sec

Overall Results
Here are the results of the Intel NAS Performance Test Toolkit listing the highlight of each test.

The addition of a ZIL made a significant change only to the “Dir copy to NAS” test and nothing else. I honestly didn’t expect much from a ZIL using CIFS.

The addition of the L2ARC made no changes either and again I believe it’s due to the use of CIFS or my ARC was large enough for these tests.

Code:

Testname              Start  NICs  ZIL    L2ARC
HD Video Playback      53.4    66.3  65.0  65.5MB/s
2x HD Playback        53.3    66.1  64.6  63.7MB/s
4x HD Playback        54.3    80.6  79.4  66.7MB/s
HD Video Record      189.7  205.8  194.5  183.9MB/s
HD Playback & Record  67.6    78.1  77.9  75.7MB/s
Content Creation      10.7    11.7  11.8  11.6MB/s
Office Productivity    49.2    51.2  50.4  48.3MB/s
File copy to NAS      78.3    80.9  78.8  79.3MB/s
File copy from NAS    47.7    54.9  55.1  53.9MB/s
Dir copy to NAS        4.8    4.9  12.2  11.4MB/s
Dir copy from NAS      17.9    20.9  20.1  19.0MB/s
Photo Album            17.1    23.6  22.4  22.4MB/s

Conclusion
My system does not benefit much from the addition of the Intel NIC’s over the internal RealTek NIC’s and was not worth the additional cost of $60.00 for two NICs. Maybe it’s because my CPUs are fast, I’m not sure but these are the facts of my system. Also I was unable to do any testing using NFS becasuse Windoze 7 Professional and below does not have NFS client included and I didn't find a free NSF client to add to Windoze 7 that wasn't just terribly slow, I mean crawling slow.

If NFS protocol could be used, I understand it would be faster and the ZIL and L2ARC might actually do some remarkable improvements.

And I did do another test with my network switch installed at the end of this and it has no real impact on the testing so I guess it's a good switch for home use.

 

[cyberjock]

WOW. You spent alot of time on this thread. Great work!

I was thinking about this yesterday before I saw your thread...If there are inefficiencies in how Realtek drivers work, they may be able to be powered through with a sufficiently fast CPU. It may be possible that your systems are powerful enough that the performance issues you and I have discussed are not an issue because your hardware is somewhat recent. I'd really be curious to see what happens with FreeNAS being on an Atom or otherwise underpowered CPU.

You never responded to my PM about NFS for Windows...

 

[joeschmuck]

Thanks and yes, it took a bit of time to do the work. I too would like to see what happens on a lower powered system, anything where a user is getting these 60MB/sec or lower speeds and I'd say they likely only need to put the Intel card in the FreeNAS computer.

As for getting back to you, I was testing out some NFS add-ons in a VM to see if they worked properly (auto-mount the shares and actually transferred the data). I don't expect a high throughput but I was getting very low speeds, nothing above 17MB/sec and I'd expect better even in a VM. So I have not found a good add-on yet that doesn't cost a huge amount of money. I'll PM you.

 

[ProtoSD]

As you know, having done some of my own monster tutorials/posts, I understand the amount of time and effort you must have put into this. Very nice!

Since most people don't have NFS for Windoze, what about doing a NFS test with a live Linux distro?

I'd do some testing with my Atom system, but since I'm using the sub-optimal 5 disk raid-z2 and I have dual onboard Intel NICs, I'm not seeing these speeds. Of course accessing my NAS from cheap hotel wifi doesn't help much either! ;)

Hope everything turned out alright with your daughters hospital visit.

 

[joeschmuck]

Oh yes, I've seen many of your postings and they are very good. I hate short posts that just give the end result without some meat. I tried to include tests which I thought would capture useful data and others could use to replicate the testing to see what they get. I think they way I write is somewhat due to having been a technical writer at a few points in my career. I would personally like to see people use the Intel NAS testing I used as anyone can get it and it's the same suite that many company's use to benchmark NAS equipment. You know, bet my speeds would go up a bit if I rolled back to ZFS V15, but I cannot unless I recreate my pool and I'm not up for that.

I'm not sure about doing a Linux test, it would have to be a bootable DVD that includes some sort of test suite. I think I found a proper NFS Client to load, a little more reading is needed before I attempt it and if it works correctly then I'll publish the results. With the holidays (more appropriately my vacation trip) approaching this week, I doubt I'll have time to test this out, no sense on breaking my computer just as I'm leaving town. This will also keep all my testing on a level playing field in general, same hardware.

Also, like the fact that you used "Windoze". I've been spelling it that way for years because it can put me to sleep while waiting on it.

Daughter is doing just fine now but it was a long night in the ER, thanks for the comment.

 

[joeschmuck]

Update to this thread. I increased my NAS RAM from 8GB to 16GB, all other things being equal and there was a minor improvement in writing large files to the NAS. The NAS only used 10.6GB of the RAM during the testing.

I have not been able to test NFS but that is fine. If I am ever able to do it then I will post the results.

My conclusion remains the same as in my first posting.

Cheers!

 

[freenasrast]

Thank you for this thread.
Appreciated.

 

[AlainD]

Hi thanks for the extensive tests.

 

[joeschmuck]

I appreciate the comment. I think if everyone used the same standardized test then we could compare systems and parts to see what gets you the most bang for your money.

 

[AlainD]

Thanks and yes, it took a bit of time to do the work. I too would like to see what happens on a lower powered system, anything where a user is getting these 60MB/sec or lower speeds and I'd say they likely only need to put the Intel card in the FreeNAS computer.

...

Hi

Is it sufficient to add a intel NIC to the FreeNAS computer or does the client need an intel NIC too? I've read that you added the intel NIC to the client first in you're tests.

my FreeNAS : AMD Athlon II X2 250, 8GB ECC, onboard realtek NIC, 6drive RAIDZ2
my Client : I2500K, 8GB, onboard realtek NIC, SSD

Alain

BTW. Intel test did had some problems on my system.

 

[joeschmuck]

I bought a pair of NICs so I could test it because both of my MB NICs are Realtek. If I had to install a single NIC it would be on my FreeNAS machine to offload some of the network overhead processing. I guess before you do anything you should see how fast your transfer speeds are. If you can't get the Intel NAS tests to run then copy a large (1GB or better) file in one direction, rename it and copy it in the other direction. What are your MB/sec results halfway into the transfer?

 

[cyberjock]

Ideally, Intel NICs on both sides are best. I had performance problems(only 50-60MB/sec) from a server that should be able to max out 4 Gb links simultaneously, but didn't. After lots of attempts to tweak my LAN settings I broke down and bought an Intel NIC for my main desktop. Poof, instant 100MB/sec+. Disabled the onboard Realtek and never looked back. Then bought Intel NICs for the rest of the computers in the house.

 

[AlainD]

I bought a pair of NICs so I could test it because both of my MB NICs are Realtek. If I had to install a single NIC it would be on my FreeNAS machine to offload some of the network overhead processing. I guess before you do anything you should see how fast your transfer speeds are. If you can't get the Intel NAS tests to run then copy a large (1GB or better) file in one direction, rename it and copy it in the other direction. What are your MB/sec results halfway into the transfer?

I get the typical "realtek" speeds : 60MB/sec and iperf about 600Mb/sec (depending on window size).
But to be honest I'm more interested in keeping smaller file copy's fast.

I have also have some computers with a wifi G connection with about 2MB/s. Wiring them (quite some work) or placing a wifi N router will have a big impact on those.

 

[cyberjock]

Small file copy(and moves) are not overly network heavy load. The issue with small file copies is the overhead from reading the file system data, then the file data, along with chatty communications between server and workstation. It is not uncommon for each file copied across the network to require 2+ disk seeks. At 5-10ms per seek, you can see how fast performance can drop to just a few MB/sec. If small files are too slow for you the only recommendation I can make is to use SSDs. They don't have the penalty with the seeks, but you will still be limited to file system overhead.

As for wifi, wifi will always have extremely poor performance. The only solution is to get better wifi hardware(both for the hotspot and the workstation), but getting anything better than 5MB/sec is only achievable if you are very very lucky. There's a reason why the FreeNAS manual recommends against using wifi for moving files, it sucks.

 

[AlainD]

Small file copy(and moves) are not overly network heavy load. The issue with small file copies is the overhead from reading the file system data, then the file data, along with chatty communications between server and workstation. It is not uncommon for each file copied across the network to require 2+ disk seeks. At 5-10ms per seek, you can see how fast performance can drop to just a few MB/sec. If small files are too slow for you the only recommendation I can make is to use SSDs. They don't have the penalty with the seeks, but you will still be limited to file system overhead.

As for wifi, wifi will always have extremely poor performance. The only solution is to get better wifi hardware(both for the hotspot and the workstation), but getting anything better than 5MB/sec is only achievable if you are very very lucky. There's a reason why the FreeNAS manual recommends against using wifi for moving files, it sucks.

I don't need SSD speeds, nor can I afford these for a multi TB setting.

I'm aware that wifi sucks for file transfer, I think I will pull cable when time permits.

 

[cbraafhart]

Nice post man really, I've also got a 60MBps speeds but it's because i have very old laptops in my hands right now. Thumbs up:)

 

[joeschmuck]

Nice post man really, I've also got a 60MBps speeds but it's because i have very old laptops in my hands right now. Thumbs up:)

Thanks, appreciate that.

 

[adb76]

Very good Performance test! Thank you!

Because I want to compare your results to my almost similar setup, I would be additionaly interested if you set up some special parameters on FreeNAS side (e.g. "Autotune", special NIC oder SAMBA parameters, ...) or on Windows 7 side (NIC paramters, registry changes,....)

Thanks in advance!

 

[joeschmuck]

Thank You. As for special setups, no nothing special. I did not setup autotune or anything else. My FreeNAS installation was basically stock, same with Windows 7, nothing in particular. The main goal of the test was to see if the Intel NICs out performed the RealTek NICs, in my system yes but not by much. I believe in lower powered system someone would see a greater difference so I'd like to see comparable testing to see if that is true.

I have enabled autotune since my last test which did give me 15GB of RAM to use but this was all cache RAM, it didn't improve throughput performance for the testing I have run. I have no complaints on what I have achieved for performance with my NAS and if I could get Windows 7 with built in NFS, I'd like to test that out for speed as I expect it to improve quite a bit. But it's not worth the cost of another upgrade in the OS just to test something out for a home user.

 

[Yatti420]

How were the windows speed tests gathered?? I was thinking about using teracopy.. Test #5/6/7/8 etc... Aslo when booting Intel NAS speed test kit it indicates computers with greater then 2GB can skew results (by caching files?)