@stephenw10 Thank you very much for the fast answer then i will buy it and test it.

Done. Continue in the other thread.

Yup, those things ^ But most important is the expected throughput. So what is you current/future WAN bandwidth? Do you need high throughput between internal interfaces? At the same time? Steve

@stephenw10 Will do, appreciate it. I will get it uploaded and send you the link.

DMZ2 Layer2 Switch ------ Server 2 | | pfSense-------LAN----Layer3 Switch-------VLANs | | DMZ1 Layer2 Switch ----- Server1 pfSense-------LAN----Layer3 Switch-------VLANs | | DMZ Layer2 Switch -------- 2 Servers For big concerns (large files) and routing much traffic and on top what installed packets will be there in game too! Do you plan using IDS or IPS (inline mode) and if so where you are want to use it. Is there one or more radius servers in game too? Is there another ids instance inside this setup, like OSSec or so?

Something that is using the igb or em driver might be the best option to build your own rig. If TurboBoost, Hypertrading, AES-NI and/or QAT is offered this days it would be nice. Supermicro X12STL-IF is using something to 95 TDP watt and that is much electric power to pay for and no Intel QAT SuperServer E300-9A-16CN8TP ~35W TDP Intel QAT, 10GBe, AES-NI SuperServer E300-9D-8CN8TP ~80W TDP, Intel QAT, 10 GBe, AES-NI, HT, TurboBoost

Note to everyone reading this: The problem was indeed caused by the crappy Realtek driver in FreeBSD. Loading in the realtek-re-kmod driver fixed the issue. Sadly, once I upgraded my box to pfSense 2.6.0 the drivers where gone and I had to re-load these - this time directly from pkg.freebsd.org as instructed in this tutorial: https://www.reddit.com/r/PFSENSE/comments/t872mx/fix_issues_with_realtek_nic_on_pfsense_260

So I finally tested the qnap card on another machine and it is detected and properly working. Googling around I found another user who had no luck with this card on an Asus J serie mobo with Celeron CPU, so I can only think about some kind of conflict or incompatibility. Just my two cents to avoid someone else to loose time.

@stephenw10 thanks I'll give that a try when I get off work.

should not be an issue. that is massive overkill for pfsense. you can vm it and run a few other things on that (adguard home, etc)

Yeah, it would be very unlikely to consume 400W most of the time. A system like that would be close to idle a lot of the time. The 6100 doesn't actually use 30W either. More like 15W unless you have everything connected and drawing power. Steve

The T15 does not use an X86 CPU, it has a POWER architecture processor. As such it cannot run pfSense. You may be able to run OpenWRT but it would likely require some development work. Steve

@alex-atkin-uk said in i5-8250U stuck at base clock: I presume I'm better off using the i350 ports as they have 4x4 queues vs the i211 2x2 queues? Yup. Better load spreading. Disabling hyper-threading doesn't really make much difference these days. I was a much bigger issue way back when it was introduced. (Pentium 4?). But 8 cores over 4 also doesn't give you much when the NICs have 4 queues so... try it and see! Steve

Right but unless it's a layer 3 switch traffic between different VLANs would still need to be routed/filtered by pfSense and that could be up to 1G. Steve

In the main filesystem the config is /conf/config/xml. There are also backup files in /conf/backup. The recovered config is not retained beyond the install. I always thought that would be a nice feature to have though. Steve

@stephenw10 it worked, thank you so much for your help. Now I just gotta get fully acquainted with all the features of pfSense.

Those hardware specs badly need updating. They probably date back to pentium 4! The NICs used here are key. If they are igb I expect to see at least 2 queues per NIC so loading across multiptle CPU cores if it;s working correctly. If they are em NICs they are single queue and you are limited by the individual core speeds. Steve

@lamer01 @dobby_ I already have a bunch small nuc-style hardware ( i have 4 of them ). Than it makes more sense to prepare an image to install it on all devices that is matching and/or fitting your needs for sure. I want only to tell you that this is only a situation where this drivers will be "discard" and they will be later for sure inside of pfSense again. So nothing really wrong with pfSense itselfs.

@stephenw10 most probably. I booted a windows 11 instance and benchmarked the cpu, It went easily over 3 Ghz mark. On idle went below 1.4Ghz. So there it is. I saw on some thread I lost, there are some amd specific modules, I need to look into it.