Is Intel Atom 270 really so slow?

[MK]

Hi

thank you for an answer. I repeated test according suggestion but still I 
think that my system is a slower than it should be.

hw.model=Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU N270 @ 1.60GHz ("GenuineIntel" 686-class)
aes-128-cbc       9499.85k    11388.44k    12803.13k    13166.69k 
13337.53k
aes-256-cbc       7272.49k     8811.23k     9233.04k     9444.48k 
9507.48k

CPU specifications for Atom 230 and 270 are very similar so I expected to 
see more or less same numbers in the test but it showed it's much more 
slower.
I run GENERIC.MP kernel but I tried also GENERIC with no improvement.

Any idea?

MK

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Stuart Henderson" <stu at spacehopper.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 2:26 PM
To: <openbsd-newbies at sfobug.org>
Subject: Re: Is Intel Atom 270 really so slow?

> On 2009-10-02, MK <public at kubikcz.net> wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> I've just installed OpenBSD 4.5 on Intel Atom 270 1.6GHz mini ITX board 
>> and
>> made some tests.
>> CPU speed does not look very good, in fact I was comparing OpenSSL tests
>> with my old Pentium III 500MHz and it's in many cases faster.
>> (in ubench Pentium III is just about 1200 points lower than 1.6Ghz Atom)
>>
>> e.g.
>>
>> openssl speed aes
>>
>> Intel Atom
>>
>> The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
>> type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192
>> bytes
>> aes-128 cbc      10396.85k    12298.42k    12928.09k    13091.55k
>> 13142.58k
>> aes-192 cbc       9116.41k    10525.00k    10981.04k    11102.07k
>> 11139.49k
>> aes-256 cbc       8068.51k     9088.34k     9410.93k     9491.90k
>> 9520.14k
>>
>> Pentium III
>>
>> The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
>> type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192
>> bytes
>> aes-128 cbc      14980.42k    15963.78k    16222.05k    16329.53k
>> 16919.33k
>> aes-192 cbc      13102.40k    14225.10k    14473.31k    14457.72k
>> 14487.41k
>> aes-256 cbc      11976.37k    12662.91k    12850.40k    12842.31k
>> 12945.35k
>>
>> Is that an expected result, or is it caused by some wrong configuration 
>> on
>> my system?
>
> They are not fast CPUs. The PIII/Pentium M derived CPUs are much
> faster clock-for-clock. Don't expect anything like the performance of
> a 1.4GHz Pentium M from an Atom system.
>
> But you are also not using the recommended way to get accurate speed
> test results.
>
> e.g. openssl speed -evp aes256 -elapsed, openssl speed -evp 
> aes128 -elapsed
> http://markmail.org/message/27kslswk4zahitit?q=thread:ngdhgyjfi2bgx3mb
>
> Here are examples from some of my systems.
>
> type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 
> bytes
>
> hw.model=Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU 230 @ 1.60GHz ("GenuineIntel" 686-class)
> aes-128-cbc      19038.03k    22711.28k    25477.35k    26380.26k 
> 26533.04k
> aes-256-cbc      12845.55k    17726.87k    18514.90k    18995.34k 
> 19078.13k
>
> hw.model=Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.80GHz ("GenuineIntel" 
> 686-class)
> *throttled to 600MHz*
> aes-128-cbc       9899.51k    24677.09k    27413.80k    28302.58k 
> 28499.52k
> aes-256-cbc      14628.60k    18896.27k    19306.85k    20853.67k 
> 20903.13k
>
> hw.model=Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1.80GHz ("GenuineIntel" 
> 686-class)
> aes-128-cbc      29764.09k    58372.77k    76936.57k    84923.22k 
> 85870.56k
> aes-256-cbc      43417.90k    56709.43k    61328.90k    62481.61k 
> 62912.43k
>
> hw.model=Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU T7200 @ 2.00GHz
> aes-128-cbc      91020.19k    99403.47k   101908.04k   102832.04k 
> 102777.22k
> aes-256-cbc      72070.90k    76275.03k    77913.78k    78081.53k 
> 80180.70k
>
> hw.model=AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 252
> aes-128-cbc     103124.01k   113282.39k   117289.34k   118376.37k 
> 118693.44k
> aes-256-cbc      83422.11k    91675.96k    94265.24k    94990.56k 
> 95180.43k
>
> You'll see interesting results on the Geode LX in the soekris 5501/Alix
> systems. They have hardware acceleration for aes-128-cbc but not 
> aes-256-cbc.
> There are setup overheads which aren't related to how much data is 
> encrypted
> at once, so large block sizes produce much higher rates than small ones 
> (and
> software does better than hardware for small block sizes).
>
> hw.model=Geode(TM) Integrated Processor by AMD PCS ("AuthenticAMD" 
> 586-class)
>
> sysctl kern.usercrypto=1 (the default):
> aes-128-cbc [1]    706.55k     2639.08k     8397.03k    18902.58k 
> 28729.13k
> aes-256-cbc [1]    619.83k     1694.13k     2956.24k     3628.23k 
> 3943.12k
>
> sysctl kern.usercrypto=0:
> aes-128-cbc [2]   5808.83k     7405.93k     7868.92k     8148.31k 
> 8241.87k
> aes-256-cbc [2]   3990.27k     5351.07k     5948.26k     6035.84k 
> 6048.84k
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openbsd-newbies mailing list
> Openbsd-newbies at sfobug.org
> http://mailman.theapt.org/listinfo/openbsd-newbies