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

    Fanless gbit pfSense router?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    54 Posts 9 Posters 23.4k 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.
    • D
      Dr_Drache
      last edited by

      @asterix:

      I agree. I will never ever buy an Atom as it makes no real sense when it comes to $ v/s CPU power. Some folks who are using Atom are sorta die hard fans (even when they know within that they should had gone for a G530/i3  ;D ) and swear by it.

      Frankly, for a fully loaded UTM I cross out Atom immediately. Even if someone is trying to build even a basic pfSense firewall with no add-on packages, its just makes no sense by not going the G530/i3 route for a few extra bucks, unless you are extremely tight on budget and every dollar counts for your end decision.

      what about ram amounts? I'm thinking I want to build a nice(ish) UTM…

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

        Ram is cheap, get lots.  ;)
        If you have a new build with current technology RAM then just fill it. RAM in £/MB is more expensive in older modules.
        If you want to run Snort and Squid I would look at 4GB.

        This is getting a bit OT but there is still one area where the Atom is king; very low power consumption passively cooled setups.
        Yes the Akasa euler can do it for 35W 'real' CPUs but there's cost involved there. The Atom currently fills a niche between the Alix and significantly more expensive passive cooling solutions that can handle higher TDP. A niche that will hopefully be filled by the new Alix board.  ;)

        Steve

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • A
          asterix
          last edited by

          @Dr_Drache:

          @asterix:

          I agree. I will never ever buy an Atom as it makes no real sense when it comes to $ v/s CPU power. Some folks who are using Atom are sorta die hard fans (even when they know within that they should had gone for a G530/i3  ;D ) and swear by it.

          Frankly, for a fully loaded UTM I cross out Atom immediately. Even if someone is trying to build even a basic pfSense firewall with no add-on packages, its just makes no sense by not going the G530/i3 route for a few extra bucks, unless you are extremely tight on budget and every dollar counts for your end decision.

          what about ram amounts? I'm thinking I want to build a nice(ish) UTM…

          Start with 4GB. My sweet spot is 6GB ;D. Snort, Squid, dans with clamd, pfBlocker.. all run like smooth butter and memory usage sits between 40 to 43%. I have kept 8GB just because I have extra in my server and its a VM. RAM usage is between 30 to 33%. If needed I will pull it down to 6GB.

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

            Any idea what it peaks at?
            Unused RAM is doing no good to anyone. ;)

            Steve

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

              I think its wise to keep 25% in reserve to handle momentary spikes in memory usage.  Could be wrong.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • A
                asterix
                last edited by

                Here are the screenshots of my UTM. Network activity has gone down drastically this week due to schools re-opening. Last month was modest as well.. just shy of 350GB.. as we were on family vacations.

                1.jpg_thumb
                1.jpg

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • A
                  asterix
                  last edited by

                  2

                  2.jpg
                  2.jpg_thumb

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • A
                    asterix
                    last edited by

                    3

                    3.jpg
                    3.jpg_thumb

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

                      Yeah - Similar here.  I like to have a safety buffer also.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • A
                        asterix
                        last edited by

                        My memory consumption goes up and down depending on how much cache is in the RAM. Old data flushes out periodically and brings down the usage. Snort has come a really long way from its initial days where 2GB was just not enough to load it and would crash while turning on the service. It's not like that anymore since 2011.

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

                          Same same…  Goes up to 75% and then pops back down to 25% periodically.
                          Disk usage is slowly creeping up to 20%  (Its a newly installed SSD - Will take time.  I'm usually faster to adopt but SSD has been a bumpy ride)
                          My screaming processor is a dual core AMD, but you know what?  I like it.  Its impressively stable for garbage that costs abut the same as a couple cups of coffee.  And I'm passionately in love with Mushkin Server Ram.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • A
                            asterix
                            last edited by

                            At full WAN capacity. Keep in mind in fully loaded UTM with all resource hungry packages running. Maxed my WAN at 51.73 Mbps.

                            Hardware is begging for more WAN throughput :D

                            1.jpg
                            1.jpg_thumb

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

                              No doubt is working well  ;)

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • A
                                asterix
                                last edited by

                                If we do the math..

                                8% of CPU was able to do 50Mbps  of WAN throughput. So my UTM could do just about ….hmmm...

                                100/8=12.5 times 50Mbps .. that's 625Mbps before it runs out of CPU cycles. Keeping in mind that the Xeon is way more powerful than an i3 and i5, plus it's fully loaded with all resource hungry packages running at full power. I suspect it can reach 1Gbps if I let go of Snort and Dans with clamd.

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

                                  For sure, if I need to handle 625Mbps and every package in the repository, I'd go with modern dual xeons and more RAM and maybe faster/bigger SSDs also.  Its just a little businessy / industrial strength for my home.  Here my network will top at 150Mps at the WAN for sure.  No higher in the next foreseeable decade or so.  If google internet comes here, I'll need something faster.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • A
                                    asterix
                                    last edited by

                                    On second thoughts, I forgot I am on VM host. So it's shared CPU. If I load just pfSense with no VM host than the throughput would be better

                                    OR

                                    my strong belief is maybe its because the packages are single threaded and limiting the processing power.

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

                                      Yes - Its a monster build for sure, but…
                                      Is it fanless?    ;D

                                      I like this guys original specs for his purposes.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • A
                                        asterix
                                        last edited by

                                        Mine.. actually yes. Both physical CPU's are fanless with heatsinks. Except for the PSU ;)

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

                                          haha - you win…

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

                                            It's almost impossible to extrapolate accurately like that because, as you say, there are some single threaded processes. Particularly this is true of pf, as has been discussed before. In the worst case scenario you could have all that 8% on one core with the others idle (very unlikely I know). If your CPU appears as 8 cores (I have no idea how many you gave to the VM but this is worst case!) then that would be one core at 64% giving only 36% headroom or maximum throughput of 68Mbps!  :P
                                            Obviously that's not true but I hope it highlights how the calculation is not that simple.  ;)

                                            Steve

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