Packet sent number 0 (network test)

[jimchen328]

How can I configure Passmark to show packet sent/received number when performing network test?

[David (PassMark)]

PerformanceTest displays the amount of data sent / received in bytes. So you could just divide this number by the packet size to get the number of packets.

Another alternative would be to use the Windows task manager. You can select additional columns of information to display on the network tab. I think you can see packet counts.

A third alternative would be to wait a couple of days for the official beta release of our WirelessMon software. It can be used to count packets as well. It will be available on our web site in a couple of days.

------
David

[jimchen328]

Thanks, but below are test reports generated by Networking test, one is mine (v5.0), the other one from my customer(v4.0). There is one column shows Packets Sent, should it be gererated automatically?


My report-----------------------------------
This Computer
Ave. KBits/Sec.: 529088.4
KBits Recv.: 10638846
Packets Recv.: 0
CPU Type: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz

MilliSecs. Bytes Sent Packets Sent
198 13255465 0
402 26871400 0
605 40438180 0
.....
.....
-------------------------------------

My customer's report----------------
This Computer
Ave. KBits/Sec.: 94539.4
KBits Sent: 1900511
Packets Sent: 57999
Block Size: 4096
CPU Type: AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 4000+


MilliSecs. Bytes Sent Packets Sent
187 2211840 540
390 4616192 1127
594 7016448 1713
.....
.....
------------------------------------------------------------

[Ian (PassMark)]

We found that the Network performance measurement mechanism that we used in V4.0 of PerformanceTest created a CPU bottleneck when measuring the performance of Gigabit networks (for example, above about 400Mb/s on a 2.4GHz P4). To support Gigabit network performance measurement together with variable length packets, the test mechanism was changed and the number of packets sent and received was removed from PerformanceTest in V5.0.1010 on 17/Feb/2004. In error, we have not removed these fields from the exported result log and will do so in the next release.

Best regards,
Ian