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

    Intel DN2800mt x64 2.0.3-2.1 bandwidth

    Hardware
    6
    81
    22.9k
    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.
    • K
      kejianshi
      last edited by

      haha…  Its as if people would think thats my first button I'd switch.
      I figure if you are about to wipe the box, may as well try everything first.
      What I have gotten so far is "Device polling needs to be removed from the GUI as an option because it only breaks things worse".

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • D
        doktornotor Banned
        last edited by

        @kejianshi:

        What I have gotten so far is "Device polling needs to be removed from the GUI as an option because it only breaks things worse".

        Yeah, good idea…

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • K
          kejianshi
          last edited by

          I'm feeling a little defensive right now.
          I'm going off to the corner to cry a while and drink coffee :P

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            doktornotor Banned
            last edited by

            Beer@kejianshi:

            I'm going off to the corner to cry a while and drink coffee :P

            Beer >> coffee  :P

            P.S. Started a new thread on the device polling "feature".

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • K
              kejianshi
              last edited by

              Its a little early for me in the day to start swilling beer.  I'm waiting till noon for that.
              I have been wondering this for a long while but never have gotten a clear answer.
              Does / can a HDD slow down the throughput of a build like this?
              Is there an advantage in throughput for SDD over HDD (not talking about caching or swapping)?

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • J
                Jbmeth007
                last edited by

                tried forwarding, gain minimal bandwidth.  32Mb exact.  so now were near 352Mbish..  still way below capability

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • J
                  Jbmeth007
                  last edited by

                  ive read on this forum in some post where a guy LOVES pfsense, but tried microtek.  and performed 800 something on his board.  I'm gonna try that real quick and see if its capable of routing on a different distro.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • K
                    kejianshi
                    last edited by

                    That will be interesting to see…

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • J
                      Jbmeth007
                      last edited by

                      still working on it.  tried monowall  Bandwidth was almost halfed at 199Mb/s  tried installing smoothwall but wouldn't boot the cd.  sat at grub.  tried mikrotik,  i can't figure out the goofy key system they want to use.  tried installing Untangle, sat at black screen during install.  and now retrying clearos but takes awhile to install from cd.

                      Could all this be that it is the new NM10 chipset on this generation of atoms?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • K
                        kejianshi
                        last edited by

                        "Could all this be that it is the new NM10 chipset on this generation of atoms?"

                        That would get back to my assertion to newer and better is only better if compatibility is there 100% and its usually not in the first couple years.

                        But, I don't know the answer to that question.  Do you have a old relic of a computer with a gigabit WAN port to try with?

                        If that blazes away, I'd maybe blame the new chipset.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • J
                          Jbmeth007
                          last edited by

                          @kejianshi:

                          "Could all this be that it is the new NM10 chipset on this generation of atoms?"

                          That would get back to my assertion to newer and better is only better if compatibility is there 100% and its usually not in the first couple years.

                          But, I don't know the answer to that question.  Do you have a old relic of a computer with a gigabit WAN port to try with?

                          If that blazes away, I'd maybe blame the new chipset.

                          Nothing that would be slower then this atom.

                          I can't get clearos to register,  im sure the firewall my district is using to block traffic has sniped my connection.  I can't get any other distro to work at the moment either.  not having any luck at all.  the best i can do is take the card out and put it in a core 2 duo 8400 but that wouldn't prove anything other then the card works….  Im doing it.

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

                            There are a lot of boards using that chipset now. If it alone was causing this I'd expect more questions on the forum.
                            As you have found in the thread linked it's often possible to get better throughput with a Linux based OS. An unfortunate fact. However it's normally not an issue, the limit you're seeing is something more. In my opinion.  ;)

                            Steve

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • J
                              Jbmeth007
                              last edited by

                              Same Nic in an optiplex 755,  109.8MB/s    equals to 878Mbps.    Had to use 2.0.3 on this one though, as 2.1 didnt give out an DHCP address.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • J
                                Jbmeth007
                                last edited by

                                Got my msata ssd in today so we will kill the HD theory in a bit

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • W
                                  wallabybob
                                  last edited by

                                  @Jbmeth007:

                                  @wallabybob:

                                  Do you have hardware flow control enabled on all the links?

                                  vlan side of subject pf, is direct to pc.  Flow control is enabled on rx/tx

                                  Last part of the answer is incomplete. Do you have hardware flow control enabled on the NICs sourcing and sinking the traffic AND on intermediate switch ports AND on relevant pfSense physical interfaces? If so, how did you do it on the pfSense interfaces?

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • J
                                    Jbmeth007
                                    last edited by

                                    @wallabybob:

                                    @Jbmeth007:

                                    @wallabybob:

                                    Do you have hardware flow control enabled on all the links?

                                    vlan side of subject pf, is direct to pc.  Flow control is enabled on rx/tx

                                    Last part of the answer is incomplete. Do you have hardware flow control enabled on the NICs sourcing and sinking the traffic AND on intermediate switch ports AND on relevant pfSense physical interfaces? If so, how did you do it on the pfSense interfaces?

                                    as for the source and client flow control is enabled.   on the pfsense interface I haven't even looked at.   I'll see what i can find..

                                    as for the Hard drive SSD didn't make one bit of difference. except drop wattage.  was at 20 with 3.5HDD now at 13~14 back and forth with ssd.

                                    As I was saying I installed fresh so i didn't change anything in /boot/loader.conf.local  at the moment im trying to figure out how to get into it and add things, change etc.  I'm not too familiar on how to do it.  Nvm, just found edit file

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • J
                                      Jbmeth007
                                      last edited by

                                      No change there either.. this is what my loader.conf.local file looks like now.

                                      kern.cam.boot_delay=10000
                                      kern.em.nmbclusters="131072"
                                      hw.em.num_queues=1
                                      hw.em.fc_setting=1

                                      does this look right or am i going to have to do one for each for example.
                                      *hw.em0.num_queues=1
                                      hw.em1.num_queues=1

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

                                        So is the box using vlans directly?

                                        Steve

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • J
                                          Jbmeth007
                                          last edited by

                                          correct.  one side of the current vlan to the wan on the second pfsense box to my computer directly…...

                                          I have one in place now thats a power hog so I dabbled in atom to save, Watt i don't know

                                          I found it i think.  I have to reinstall then change this setting to see if i have the same result.  right now as i type its transfering @ 602Mbit

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • K
                                            kejianshi
                                            last edited by

                                            Cool - So my current drive has about a MTTF of 1.5 million hours which is similar to a great SSD, so if there is no benefit other than wattage, I'll leave it be.  I usually do things for a particular reason, not just to be trendy, so if the SSD isn't going to bump my performance, I'll wait for a drive failure to replace.  With this drive its probably going be about 6 more years minimum.

                                            Still no luck tracking down the bandwidth killing culprit?

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