BigFoot Networks Killer NIC: Killer Marketing or Killer Product?
by Gary Key on October 31, 2006 2:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Networking
Killer NIC Technology
Hopefully you are still with us after the previous segment as writing it was better than taking a dose of Lunesta. In all seriousness, the technology of offloading network transactions to a dedicated processor has proven to be very beneficial in the corporate server environment. The typical TNIC is designed to handle data payloads that are larger than 8KB and in certain instances will have reduced performance (lower throughput and higher latencies) with smaller and more frequent data payloads in the 1KB to 4KB range. This range is what most messaging traffic, web services, and real-time data applications such as games utilize at this time. TNICs are generally optimized for TCP (transmission control protocol) packets where the vast majority of games today utilize UDP (user datagram protocol) packets for data transmission.
The differences between the two protocols are numerous but we will hit the highlights. TCP has a standard header length of twenty bytes versus eight for UDP. The normal TCP header will contain metric information such as sequence and acknowledgement numbers along with a requirement for a checksum number. UDP packets do not include metrics and the checksum information is optional. In other words, UDP does not provide the reliability, security, or ordering (queue) guarantees that TCP can deliver. The datagrams in the UDP packet may arrive out order or not at all and your system or application may never notice. Unlike TCP, UDP provides no guarantees for delivery or proper queuing, so why use it? The answer is simple: UDP is faster and far more efficient for time sensitive applications such as gaming, and you don't need every data packet to game properly. (I.e., if you miss one packet that says player X is at coordinates (10,10,15) but you get the next packet that shows X at (12,11,15), the missing packet will not seriously impact the overall experience unless of course you missed a shot or took one.) With this simple premise in mind BigFoot Networks decided to take TOE technology and design a TNIC that focused on UDP protocols and latency reduction.
The main technology focus of BigFoot Networks is centered on their LLR technology. LLR (Lag and Latency Reduction) technology that implements a 1-packet 1-interrupt model to eliminate the entire queuing and buffering operations standard NICs do during the packet receipt and transmission process. When in game mode, the Killer NIC will also completely bypass the Windows networking stack which contributes to further latency or lag reductions depending upon the application. When BigFoot Networks discusses ping improvements in games they are not talking about reducing ping through your network or at the server. This is completely out of their control and although their marketing information is not clear about it the reduction in ping comes on the host machine. These reductions come from bypassing the Windows Network Stack while in Game mode. Depending upon the application and packet size there is generally a 1~3ms delay due to system buffering and another 3~10ms delay in the queuing and processing of data packets in the current Windows Network Stack.
What makes LLR work is the NPU (network processing unit) on the card. This processor powers both the Windows Network Stack bypass engine and the 1-packet 1-interrupt model. In short, this NPU gets the normal network transactions out of the graphics path in games. This can result in improvements in FPS (frames per second) and reduced lag. With a standard network card, before nearly every graphics frame is drawn, there is first a check to the server to see if a new data packet has arrived or if one needs to be sent. Checking the server for new data packets can use up processor clock cycles whether or not data is there. Instead of a multitude of interrupts as we discussed earlier, the Killer NIC will receive or send those data packets in a single instruction. The Killer NIC has the further ability of interrupting the game directly when new data arrives. The Killer NIC is designed around reducing latencies and not throughput.
While LLR technology is impressive to some degree we have to temper any enthusiasm with the fact that most games are designed very differently in their handling of network tasks. Some games do not check for new network data on every graphics frame so any FPS improvements will be minimal at best or completely nonexistent the majority of time. Several older games do not use UDP packets so performance could suffer as the Network Stack bypass model is not used and the card must act as standard NIC. The one thing that we have learned during testing is that many games do not report accurate latency (ping rates) so any improvements are not as measurable but at times can be felt do to smoother game play. The basic TOE and TNIC technology still applies to this card and has been proven over the past few years in the corporate server environment. Converting this technology to the desktop with the added spin of improving gaming is certainly an admirable feat but how well does it work? We will answer that question in a few pages but first let's take a look at the obligatory marketing information.
Hopefully you are still with us after the previous segment as writing it was better than taking a dose of Lunesta. In all seriousness, the technology of offloading network transactions to a dedicated processor has proven to be very beneficial in the corporate server environment. The typical TNIC is designed to handle data payloads that are larger than 8KB and in certain instances will have reduced performance (lower throughput and higher latencies) with smaller and more frequent data payloads in the 1KB to 4KB range. This range is what most messaging traffic, web services, and real-time data applications such as games utilize at this time. TNICs are generally optimized for TCP (transmission control protocol) packets where the vast majority of games today utilize UDP (user datagram protocol) packets for data transmission.
The differences between the two protocols are numerous but we will hit the highlights. TCP has a standard header length of twenty bytes versus eight for UDP. The normal TCP header will contain metric information such as sequence and acknowledgement numbers along with a requirement for a checksum number. UDP packets do not include metrics and the checksum information is optional. In other words, UDP does not provide the reliability, security, or ordering (queue) guarantees that TCP can deliver. The datagrams in the UDP packet may arrive out order or not at all and your system or application may never notice. Unlike TCP, UDP provides no guarantees for delivery or proper queuing, so why use it? The answer is simple: UDP is faster and far more efficient for time sensitive applications such as gaming, and you don't need every data packet to game properly. (I.e., if you miss one packet that says player X is at coordinates (10,10,15) but you get the next packet that shows X at (12,11,15), the missing packet will not seriously impact the overall experience unless of course you missed a shot or took one.) With this simple premise in mind BigFoot Networks decided to take TOE technology and design a TNIC that focused on UDP protocols and latency reduction.
The main technology focus of BigFoot Networks is centered on their LLR technology. LLR (Lag and Latency Reduction) technology that implements a 1-packet 1-interrupt model to eliminate the entire queuing and buffering operations standard NICs do during the packet receipt and transmission process. When in game mode, the Killer NIC will also completely bypass the Windows networking stack which contributes to further latency or lag reductions depending upon the application. When BigFoot Networks discusses ping improvements in games they are not talking about reducing ping through your network or at the server. This is completely out of their control and although their marketing information is not clear about it the reduction in ping comes on the host machine. These reductions come from bypassing the Windows Network Stack while in Game mode. Depending upon the application and packet size there is generally a 1~3ms delay due to system buffering and another 3~10ms delay in the queuing and processing of data packets in the current Windows Network Stack.
What makes LLR work is the NPU (network processing unit) on the card. This processor powers both the Windows Network Stack bypass engine and the 1-packet 1-interrupt model. In short, this NPU gets the normal network transactions out of the graphics path in games. This can result in improvements in FPS (frames per second) and reduced lag. With a standard network card, before nearly every graphics frame is drawn, there is first a check to the server to see if a new data packet has arrived or if one needs to be sent. Checking the server for new data packets can use up processor clock cycles whether or not data is there. Instead of a multitude of interrupts as we discussed earlier, the Killer NIC will receive or send those data packets in a single instruction. The Killer NIC has the further ability of interrupting the game directly when new data arrives. The Killer NIC is designed around reducing latencies and not throughput.
While LLR technology is impressive to some degree we have to temper any enthusiasm with the fact that most games are designed very differently in their handling of network tasks. Some games do not check for new network data on every graphics frame so any FPS improvements will be minimal at best or completely nonexistent the majority of time. Several older games do not use UDP packets so performance could suffer as the Network Stack bypass model is not used and the card must act as standard NIC. The one thing that we have learned during testing is that many games do not report accurate latency (ping rates) so any improvements are not as measurable but at times can be felt do to smoother game play. The basic TOE and TNIC technology still applies to this card and has been proven over the past few years in the corporate server environment. Converting this technology to the desktop with the added spin of improving gaming is certainly an admirable feat but how well does it work? We will answer that question in a few pages but first let's take a look at the obligatory marketing information.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
87 Comments
View All Comments
rqle - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
I never like to bash a company product because always believed there a niche market, but at its very best, this product doesnt seem to justified the $300 price cost. I do believe many would buy it at a lower price.My current broadband is 3.0mbps/512kb, i can pay $5 more a month more for Verizon Fiop 15mbps/2mbp, i would rather go that route for my improve network + other capibilities. As for the side processing function, a cheap $200 (Athlon64 3200+ computer system) can do a whole lot more. Am not saying it a bad product, it just price way to high for me.
cornfedone - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
SOS, DD.Just as we've seen with Asian mobos in the last few years, this NIC card is an over-hyped, under-performing POS. Just as mobos from Asus, DFI, Sapphire, Abit, and more have suffered from vcore, BIOS, memory, PCI slot and many other issues, the BigJoke NIC card is more defective goods with zero customer support. I'm sure everyone looks forward to a wiped hard drive image... due to a poorly designed NIC card.
Sooner or later consumers are gonna wise up and stop buying these defective products. Until they vote with their wallet instead of their penis, unscrupulous companies will continue to ship half baked POS products and fail to provide proper customer support. If consumers stop buying these defective goods, then the company will either correct their problems or go tits up.
autoboy - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
I didn't buy a NIC to make up for my small penis, I bought a Porsche. Chicks don't notice my NIC.The K does look pretty cool. Maybe it will fit on my Porsche.
Frumious1 - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
I dare say few if any people have purchased AGEIA or Killer NIC cards. As for your whining about ASUS, DFI, etc. I guess you're one of the people running a budget $50 mobo that can't understand what it's like to really push a system? Or are you the other extreme: you overclocked by 50% or more and are pissed that the system wasn't fully stable?slashbinslashbash - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
You talk a lot about how it's virtually impossible to test something whose entire performance is based almost entirely on an Internet connection which is inherently variable. That's why you need some more control over the variables in your test. Namely, a LAN.For example... have 4 computers, each with exactly the same configs except for the network cards. One of them has the KillerNIC, the rest have different NICs. They are all running Unreal Tournament. You also have one computer set up as the server, on the same Gigabit Ethernet switch as the 4 "player" machines. The level is a small plain square room with no doors, trenches, or any other features. Each of the "players" is running the same script where they have unlimited ammo and a machine gun, running circles around and around, shooting constantly from the minute they respawn. Let the scripts run for 100 hours and capture the framerate and pings on each machine.
So you have 4 computer players running around in circles in a small square room, shooting each other for 100 hours. Yes, there will still be randomness, but over the course of 100 hours it should cancel out, and this test should be replicable. Any real differences between the NICs would come out over time. Run it again to make sure.
Or maybe that's not the best way of doing it. I don't even play UT2003 so I don't know what's really possible and what's not, but I've heard of people doing scripts and stuff. Maybe there are better ways of doing it, but you can eliminate the variable of the Internet connection by limiting your testing to a LAN.
Gary Key - Wednesday, November 1, 2006 - link
We tested over a LAN, the results were not that different, in fact the NVIDIA NIC and Intel PRO/1000 PT cards had better throughput and latencies the majority of the time. We did not show these results as the card is marketed to improve your Online Gaming experience. If the card had been marketed as a must have product to improve your gaming capability on a LAN then it would have been reviewed as such.
When we tested on the LAN the steps you outlined were basically followed from a script viewpoint in order to ensure the variables were kept to a minimum. We did not provide these results, maybe we should have in hindsight. Our final opinion of the card would not have changed.
Thanks for the comments. :)
Frumious1 - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
The product is targeted at gamers. Look at the marketing material. now, while a LAN party goer might get some advantage out of it, there are FAR more people playing games from home using broadband connections. If this only improves performance in a LAN environment (clearly NOT what is being advertised), then it's already a failure. I like what Gary did here: look at real world testing and let us know how it turned out. Who gives a rip about controlled environments and theoretical performance increases if the reality is that the product basically doesn't help much? What's really funny is that they even show a ping "advantage" in FEAR of maximum 0.40ms and average 0.13ms. WTF!? Like anyone can notice a .13ms improvement in ping times! The frame rate improvements might be good (if they were available in many games)... still not $270+ good, though.Bladen - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
Or as you touched on, do the test for a long time, or many many repeats, and let the averages soeak for themselves.shoRunner - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
You pay almost $300 for the ultimate NIC card, and its PCI so it can't even get anywhere near gigbit throughput. AND the CPU utilization isn't even better than an onboard solution. PLEASE. If anyone is truely thinking about buying this, send me a PM I've got some beautiful ocean front property in Montanta to sell you for pennies on the dollar.mlau - Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - link
You underestimate this card greatly. This is the ultimate network card for linux:it could theoretically offload almost all of linux' network stack (including linux'
advanced filtering/routing capabilites and protocols). It's a firewall-router on a
card. IMHO the card is targeted for the wrong crowd (although I understand it somewhat,
since gamers are usually stupid enough to buy 2 video cards and other completely
unnecessary stuff [ageia comes to mind])