Quiet computer

[Bucky Jordan]

> > also, try to test the speed of the true random number generator
> > (I don't know how to access it; maybe just dd /dev/urandom?)
> 
> Here's one:
> 
> ~% time dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1024 count=10240 of=/dev/null
> 10240+0 records in
> 10240+0 records out
> 10485760 bytes transferred in 15.957354 secs (657111 bytes/sec)
> dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1024 count=10240 of=/dev/null  0.00s user
> 15.85s system 99% cpu 15.970 total
> 
> ~% time dd if=/dev/random bs=1024 count=10240 of=/dev/null
> 10240+0 records in
> 10240+0 records out
> 10485760 bytes transferred in 15.967514 secs (656693 bytes/sec)
> dd if=/dev/random bs=1024 count=10240 of=/dev/null  0.01s user 15.85s
> system 99% cpu 15.976 total
> 

I'm also going to be doing a lot of SSL on a Poweredge 2950. So the
above is purely a memory/cpu test correct? (not like doing IO tests
where you want the size of the test data to be at least twice physical
ram). Here's results for the Woodcrest- I assume this is only on a
single core. Yes, I realize that the woodcrest is faster than above
mentioned cpu, but a 100x speed difference? That doesn't seem realistic
to me (although if those are valid results, I'd be pretty happy with
that)...

bash-2.05b$ time dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1024 count=10240 of=/dev/null
10240+0 records in
10240+0 records out
10485760 bytes transferred in 0.154649 secs (67803598 bytes/sec)

bash-2.05b$ time dd if=/dev/urandom bs=8k count=10240 of=/dev/null
10240+0 records in
10240+0 records out
83886080 bytes transferred in 1.165706 secs (71961615 bytes/sec)

Thanks,
Bucky