Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    New install VERY slow speeds

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    4 Posts 2 Posters 357 Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • G
      gtapro151
      last edited by

      I am new to Pf, so if this is in the wrong area or if my questions are noobie excuse me. But I have a 200/200 connection from the isp, regular router works just fine. I have PF installed on a machine now and I only get 150 down, and 10up! I have been at it for hours, reinstalled and factory reset a number of times. The download I could live with, but 10 up? Thats terrible. Hardware should not be the bottleneck, the machine has an i5 and 4 gigs of ram. The wan comes in the built in nic, and lan comes out a usb nic.The machine in question is an ibm thinkcentre M91p

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • DerelictD
        Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
        last edited by

        USB NIC should do better than that but, in general, they suck.

        I would start by looking for an ethernet duplex mismatch or something.

        Get real NICs.

        Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
        A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
        DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
        Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • G
          gtapro151
          last edited by

          Thank you for the reply. I considered that to be the issue as well, I was just unsure do to the download almost being full speed. Also, it is a mini case, so only room for one more nic. I had considered the built in one as being the issue as well. I'll replace one of the usb ones in the morning and see if anything changes. Everything says full-duplex so that would eliminate that cause right?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • DerelictD
            Derelict LAYER 8 Netgate
            last edited by

            Yeah if both sides say full-duplex that should not be an issue.

            What happens is the full-duplex side transmits and the half-duplex side logs an error because it can't receive while transmitting. You end up with very low throughput in one direction - from the full- to the half-duplex port. The other way generally works fine because the full-duplex side can always receive without issue. It's possible to drop ACKs but in general it appears to be a one-way problem.

            This is generally only an issue when one side is hard-set and the other side is set to autonegotiate.

            Chattanooga, Tennessee, USA
            A comprehensive network diagram is worth 10,000 words and 15 conference calls.
            DO NOT set a source address/port in a port forward or firewall rule unless you KNOW you need it!
            Do Not Chat For Help! NO_WAN_EGRESS(TM)

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • First post
              Last post
            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.