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

    Hardware purchase advice please

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    74 Posts 9 Posters 25.9k 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.
    • stephenw10S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      You can add a wifi card at any time. I would recommend starting with the simplest system you can. Adding and testing more interfaces or packages in stages will result in fewer problems.

      The biggest advantage of an Atom is that its peak power consumption is low. You can get a system that consumes a very small amount of power most of the time, my own Pentium-M setup is <25W, but because at peak load it consumes more you need much better cooling provision. The Atom can be passively cooled relatively easily for this reason.

      If you think that 30W is low, check this out: http://ssj3gohan.tweakblogs.net/blog/8217/fluffy2-59-watt-high-end-desktop-computer.html  :)

      Steve

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • R
        robi
        last edited by

        @stephenw10:

        I would think the 120W pico-psu will be over kill, I would not expect that box to use more than 30W at any time, mostly a lot less.

        Steve

        Steve, I think 120W is not an overkill. That daughterboard with 3 Intel NICs is getting pretty warm.
        We had originally set the box up with a 65W pico-psu - it died within 6 months of 24/7 usage. Switched to 120W, feels much better now. (can't state that the first psu died because of overload, it's just a guess, that peaks can occur).

        Just look at some specs.
        The Intel D 2700 MUD board eats about 35W when the more power-efficient cedar Atom runs at 100%.
        Jetway JNF99-525 uses an older an less power efficient CPU, and has lots (literally several times) more features than the former. It's normal, that it eats more power…

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • stephenw10S
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by

          Fair enough. Since you've actually used that board I'll definitely go by your judgement.  :)

          I don't think they make the 65W model any more, the 80W should be sufficient don't you think?

          Steve

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • R
            robi
            last edited by

            Yes, I guess.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • J
              jimmybob
              last edited by

              @stephenw10:

              You can add a wifi card at any time. I would recommend starting with the simplest system you can. Adding and testing more interfaces or packages in stages will result in fewer problems.

              The biggest advantage of an Atom is that its peak power consumption is low. You can get a system that consumes a very small amount of power most of the time, my own Pentium-M setup is <25W, but because at peak load it consumes more you need much better cooling provision. The Atom can be passively cooled relatively easily for this reason.

              If you think that 30W is low, check this out: http://ssj3gohan.tweakblogs.net/blog/8217/fluffy2-59-watt-high-end-desktop-computer.html  :)

              Steve

              Hi Steve,

              Thanks for your advice.

              I will not be adding the Wifi card right away but I'm curious to which would be the best for general connectivity and range coverage?
              I do want the fastest speed possible for wifi.
              So I'm looking for the "best" option on what is avail from the shop I will be using below…
              Also taking into consideration pfsense support.

              Here are what I was looking at. At this store....

              http://www.mini-itx.com/store/?c=17

              I was considering this since it seems to be the better one....
              Intel Ultimate-N 633AN Half-Mini PCIe Wireless Card - up to 450 Mbps
              I know you'd need all 3 antennas to achieve this.
              Which is where perhaps I'd need to drill a few more holes in the case ;)

              would it be of benefit and most of all is it fully supported by pfsense?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stephenw10S
                stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                last edited by

                Wifi hardware support in pfSense is… limited.  ;) Especially under 2.0.X. It's built on FreeBSD 8.1 which was released in July 2010. Anything newer than that is unlikely to be supported. There is no support for 802.11N outside of the specific drivers so although some hardware will work it will only be at 'G' speeds.
                There is better support in 2.1 since it's built on FreeBSD 8.3 and some drivers from 9 have been back ported. The best supported cards are those based on Atheros chips-sets.

                The best source of information is JimP's spreadsheet:
                https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AojFUXcbH0ROdHgwYkFHbkRUdV9hVWljVWl5SXkxbFE&hl=en

                Steve

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • J
                  jimmybob
                  last edited by

                  @stephenw10:

                  Wifi hardware support in pfSense is… limited.  ;) Especially under 2.0.X. It's built on FreeBSD 8.1 which was released in July 2010. Anything newer than that is unlikely to be supported. There is no support for 802.11N outside of the specific drivers so although some hardware will work it will only be at 'G' speeds.
                  There is better support in 2.1 since it's built on FreeBSD 8.3 and some drivers from 9 have been back ported. The best supported cards are those based on Atheros chips-sets.

                  The best source of information is JimP's spreadsheet:
                  http://www.draisberghof.de/usb_modeswitch/bb/viewtopic.php?t=983

                  Steve

                  Hi,

                  I don't see any spreadsheet.. Am I missing something on the link you provided.

                  So is there danger of newer cards not been supported at all or just at slower speeds?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • stephenw10S
                    stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                    last edited by

                    Nooo, copy and paste fail!  :-[
                    See corrected link above.

                    There is a danger of no support at all. FreeBSD hardware support lags behind other OSs anyway and pfSense lags that by a bit.

                    Steve

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • R
                      robi
                      last edited by

                      I would strongly advise to use a dedicated, separate AP for wifi. pfSense is not really meant to be a wifi router.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • J
                        jimmybob
                        last edited by

                        @robi:

                        I would strongly advise to use a dedicated, separate AP for wifi. pfSense is not really meant to be a wifi router.

                        OK, I think I will skip it anyhow.
                        Maybe look at it at a later date.

                        thanks

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • P
                          pvoigt
                          last edited by

                          @stephenw10:

                          I would think the 120W pico-psu will be over kill, I would not expect that box to use more than 30W at any time, mostly a lot less.

                          Steve

                          I'm using the Jetway NF99FL-525 with 3 Intel NIC Daughterboard, 1 Compex abg WLAN card and 1 CF attached to SATA via SATA2CF converter. With a standard 300 W ATX power supply it's consuming ~33 W - measured with a power meter. With a picoPSU you will probably reduce power consumption below 30 W. That's why I go along with Steve's opinion: 120 W picoPSU will be overkill :) Of course, my 300 W ATX PSU is overkill as well, but it's currently impossible to get a smaller standard ATX PSU.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • H
                            hackin8
                            last edited by

                            pvoigt - would this be any better for you?

                            http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HIPRO-100W-ATX-PSU-Power-Supply-Unit-HP-A1463F5-/230822905477

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • J
                              jimmybob
                              last edited by

                              With the Sata to CF converter. Should I select IDE or SATA mode in BIOS?
                              Assuming the bios on this motherboard will offer that choice?

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • P
                                pvoigt
                                last edited by

                                @jimmybob:

                                With the Sata to CF converter. Should I select IDE or SATA mode in BIOS?
                                Assuming the bios on this motherboard will offer that choice?

                                Tested so far following CF converters:
                                http://www.delock.de/produkte/F_283_2-5_91697/merkmale.html?setLanguage=en
                                http://www.delock.de/produkte/F_283_2-5_91661/merkmale.html?setLanguage=en

                                Using BIOS IDE mode.

                                Peter

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • P
                                  pvoigt
                                  last edited by

                                  @hackin8:

                                  pvoigt - would this be any better for you?

                                  http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HIPRO-100W-ATX-PSU-Power-Supply-Unit-HP-A1463F5-/230822905477

                                  You may be right because its power data seems more appropriate. One the other hand I am using a 80+ PSU (Enermax). Only if I can directly compare both PSU I will become more wise :)

                                  I suppose most effective would be using a picoPSU. I once decided to go with the ATX PSU because I wanted to use a standard miniITX case which could be re-used by another machine in the future.

                                  Peter

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • J
                                    jimmybob
                                    last edited by

                                    The CF card I have is a 16GB… do I just use the 4GB image with that?
                                    pfSense-2.0.3-RELEASE-4g-i386-nanobsd_vga-20130412-1022.img.gz
                                    Is this the correct image?

                                    This will be going on an Atom 1.8 with VGA output only.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • P
                                      pvoigt
                                      last edited by

                                      @jimmybob:

                                      The CF card I have is a 16GB… do I just use the 4GB image with that?
                                      pfSense-2.0.3-RELEASE-4g-i386-nanobsd_vga-20130412-1022.img.gz
                                      Is this the correct image?

                                      This will be going on an Atom 1.8 with VGA output only.

                                      This will work without problems. With this image you will have a VGA console. Mostly, a 4 GB CF will be sufficient for the 4 GB image. However, some CF seem to not provide full capacity so e.g a 4 GB image cannot be successfully written to a 4 GB CF. I've read somewhere in the pfSense forum about it but cannot remember the threads - sorry.

                                      I am mostly using 4 GB CF and write a 2 GB image to it - just to be one the safe side :).

                                      Peter

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • J
                                        jimmybob
                                        last edited by

                                        pfSense-2.0.3-RELEASE-4g-i386-nanobsd_vga-20130412-1022.img.gz

                                        With the above image I read about serial port and that I won't see a console?

                                        Will I deffo get a cmd promp with the above image?
                                        And will the CF boot up once I install the image to it using  Manuel Kasper's phydiskwrite ?

                                        thanks

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • P
                                          pvoigt
                                          last edited by

                                          @jimmybob:

                                          pfSense-2.0.3-RELEASE-4g-i386-nanobsd_vga-20130412-1022.img.gz

                                          With the above image I read about serial port and that I won't see a console?

                                          Will I deffo get a cmd promp with the above image?
                                          And will the CF boot up once I install the image to it using  Manuel Kasper's phydiskwrite ?

                                          thanks

                                          Well, the above image will provide a vga console. If you want a serial console only, you should use
                                          pfSense-2.0.3-RELEASE-4g-i386-nanobsd-20130412-1022.img.gz - without "vga" in its name. A "cmd prompt" will be provided by both images.

                                          I had issues using physdiskwrite and was more successful with "win32diskimager". I used version 0.6 a while ago. Latest version is 0.7:
                                          http://sourceforge.net/projects/win32diskimager/. Alternatively, you can use "dd" under Linux (or Unix).

                                          EDIT: We are slowly driving off-topic. If you are still having general installation questions I propose to open a new thread in the corresponding pfSense forum :).

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • J
                                            jimmybob
                                            last edited by

                                            So if I have a CMD prompt which I've seen where you pick WAN, LAN etc.

                                            What is the difference between VGA and non-VGA versions specifically?
                                            I thought CMD prompt was what VGA was?

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