Intel NUC (4x4 motherboard)
-
there is dual intel nic avaliable in a full size mini pcie card here
http://www.globalamericaninc.com/commell-mpx-574d2.html
would give thiss unit a lot more expandability -
That's an interesting product, it appears to be Intel 82574L based as well which is a bonus.
However if you check the manufacturers (Commell) page, here they say:
Note : MPX-574D2 is compatible with COMMELL boards ONLY and only compatible with boards shown below!
So possibly some compatibility issues, non standard use of the socket?
Steve
-
What's nice about the Intel DC3217IYE is that it uses the QS77 chipset. There is more than enough bandwidth on this chipset to run multiple devices without bogging it down. It would make an awesome pfSense SOHO pfSense devices if they removed one of the HDMI ports and added another NIC.
It's low-power and high on features. NewEgg has them listed for $299 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856102002&Tpk=DC3217IYE), and if it had a second NIC, I'd be buying one right now (not that I need one, but I could easily "find" someone who needs one).
-
NewEgg has them listed for $299 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856102002&Tpk=DC3217IYE)
- $10 off w/ promo code 72SALE1, ends 1/31 (today)
-
What about adding an Ethernet port or two on the mini PCIe, there are two of them on the NUC.
http://www.bvm-store.com/ProductDetail.asp?fdProductId=547
http://www.bvm-store.com/ProductDetail.asp?fdProductId=548%29
-
Like it says on that page, and the page I linked to three posts up, these cards are not compatible with all boards that have a minipci-e slot. It makes me wonder why not. There are some posts about using this card in a macmini where it works OK once you have the drivers in place, so it's not an exclusive to Commell pin-use for example.
I think I'm saying that there are no guarantees this will work. ;)Steve
-
There are other mini pcie ethernet options. Last time i looked jetway had a couple of intel models and there was one on ebay. Chipset cant remember.
-
Has anyone considered using one of these in conjunction with a Thunderbolt to Ethernet adapter like the one Apple sells:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD463ZM/A/thunderbolt-to-gigabit-ethernet-adapter
I understand that these adapters use a Broadcom BCM5701 which is supported via the bge driver in FreeBSD.
-
Problem is that the nuc with thunderbolt dosn't has a seperate rj45 interface. I would also like to use a nuc as fw (vlan workaround is not an option for me)
-
15W Haswell-based NUC
dual mPCIe/SATA slots
HD 5000 graphics
Source: vr-zone -
Hi major thread bump
But did anyone in the end ever manage to build a successful Intel Nuc with pfsense ?
I see lots of links and interest on this thread and was considering doing the same thing myself, I like the idea of the dual nic cards which I had no idea existed even…
It is such a shame the usb to ethernet dongles are said to be unstable and require high cpu usage....
-
I haven't yet used the NUC, but I am ordering for use as both an Access Point and Firewall/Router. I have extra 204pin DDR3 RAM and a 24GB mSATA, and mPCIe WiFi card so I can't gauge the cost for the average person. The only thing I have to buy is a second NIC which I'm buying the Rosewill RNG-406U, USB3.0 to gigabit ethernet. Which I don't understand why people think they can't use USB, I've been running an Atom N270 2GB 666MHz RAM based pfsense box at my mom's, with a USB2.0 gigabit adapter, all you do is use it on the WAN side, my Internet would never even get close to topping out USB2.0 480Mbit rate, and the CPU rarely runs above 10%. I'm also connecting a SMA connector to the top outside of the box, and connecting them to the antenna ports on the WIfi Card, allowing me to mount the antennas -which I have 3x 12dbm- on top and modular adaptation. Off the LAN side will go into my 8 port with 4 ports PoE D-Link switch. So it should do everything I want it to do and more. I'll let you know.
-
I have pFsense v2.1 running on the NUC. Using VLANS through a Netgear GS116E.
Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-3217U CPU @ 1.80GHz
Current: 1700 MHz, Max: 1800 MHz
4 CPUs: 1 package(s) x 2 core(s) x 2 SMT threads -
This really is the right solution for the NUC. (Though I use a somewhat larger fanless HP switch at home, and the similar D-Link switches have a CLI, so you don't have to run the Windows utility to program them.)
I'm trying to get AES-NI fixed in FreeBSD, so IPSEC and OpenVPN will be (much) faster. Won't help you on your i3-3217U,
but the i5 3rd gen, and both i3 and i5 Haswell-based NUCs will all support AES-NI.A better setup might be to load bhyve or VMwear on the NUC, and put pfSense in a VM. It only needs a few (1-2GB at most) GB for
most home setups. You can put 16GB and a 240GB 'SDD' in the current NUCs, and there is one coming that will allow a 2.5" SATA SSD inside the case.The alternative is the new 8-core (out of order execution) Atom.
-
I might also add that the whole setup uses less that 30 Watts as measured by the UPS and is
totallynear silent.This is what is on the UPS:
1xNUC (120GB mSate, 16GB 1333 MHz DDR3)
1xGS116E Switch
1xGS108PEv2 POE Switch (load: 2xPolycom IP 335 VOIP phones, 1xAXIS M3007 Camera, 1xEnGenius EAP350 WiFI AP)
1xLinksys PAP2-T VOIP ATA. -
I might also add that the whole setup uses less that 30 Watts as measured by the UPS and is
totallynear silent.Technically, the NUC has a fan, so it's making some noise. Not a lot, but a little bit.
-
I have managed to get pfSense up and running on a new Haswell i5 NUC (D54250WYK).
I installed Ubuntu 13.10 (had to disable UEFI to get Ubuntu install to be recognized on boot).
I used VLAN's in Ubuntu and used a Netgear GS108E to trunk WAN/LAN/GUEST to the NUC.
I installed VirtualBox and bound the virtual NIC's (3 total) to each respective VLAN interface.
I installed pfSense with 2 processors, 4GB of space, and 1GB of RAM.I'm pushing something pretty close to the limit of the WAN for simple routing. Speedtest showed around 360 mbit/sec down and 460 mbit/sec up. Faster than I've ever seen on my connection so I'm pretty happy with that.
I only seem to be pushing about 100 mbit/sec of IPSec VPN traffic … I feel like it should be able to push more, but I'm not sure what bottleneck I'm running into. Could use some advice on that. Was not successful in establishing a local IPSec connection to the WAN side to do further testing.
-
I installed Ubuntu 13.10 (had to disable UEFI to get Ubuntu install to be recognized on boot).
I used VLAN's in Ubuntu and used a Netgear GS108E to trunk WAN/LAN/GUEST to the NUC.
I installed VirtualBox and bound the virtual NIC's (3 total) to each respective VLAN interface.
I installed pfSense with 2 processors, 4GB of space, and 1GB of RAM.curious, why not just install pfSense directly? why did you have to install Ubuntu first? VM purposes?
-
I might also add that the whole setup uses less that 30 Watts as measured by the UPS and is
totallynear silent.This is what is on the UPS:
1xNUC (120GB mSate, 16GB 1333 MHz DDR3)
1xGS116E Switch
1xGS108PEv2 POE Switch (load: 2xPolycom IP 335 VOIP phones, 1xAXIS M3007 Camera, 1xEnGenius EAP350 WiFI AP)
1xLinksys PAP2-T VOIP ATA.what kind of throughput are you getting? thinking of doing that for my home setup but not sure how it will handle torrenting
-
Nice to see others attempting to use these intel nucs as pfsense boxes :)
I always liked the nucs with their low energy, it is good to hear the core i5 nucs with AES pushing up to 100meg on VPNs also.
AES makes a nice difference and less energy being used.
Only factor I hate is having to add a vlan to the mix and even more cables/power requirements.
Surprised no one really tried an mini pcie network card to add dual networks…
Those core i3 or celerons should do well enough for most connections but I feel with guys with 100meg+ on VPNs an AES enabled cpu should do much better energy use wise and help increase speed.
Many of these core i3 haswell and low energy core i5s with 35 watts seem to have poor performance, seems a core i5 full desktop cpu with aes should do the trick, may need to stick with a regular desktop pfsense build.
I rechecked these new baytrail atoms, and could have sworn one or 2 had AES but checked again and cant see any otherwise they may have been ideal, another option I was toying with was mobile core i3/core i5 cpus however as I have noticed the lower energy cpus have often poorer performance in general compared to desktop cpus....