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

    Supermicro X10SBA

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    27 Posts 6 Posters 5.7k 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.
    • W
      wshyang
      last edited by

      Sure!

      Seems like my connection is nowhere near the 200mbps advertised too. Perhaps the Supermicro might suffice?

      http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3734847706

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

        Well - What kind of router are you using right now?

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

          Apologies, just discovered that the router has QoS turned on to a much lower traffic capacity.

          This result should be more sensible.

          http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3734854084

          At the moment we're using a ISP provided Asus RT-N56U.

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

            Yeah - Maybe you would be getting a much faster speed with a different router?  Not sure if your router is creating a bottle-neck.

            At 100 MB/s with you can still give that low power board a pretty good workout depending on what you do with it.

            If your line speed does actually get up to 200 MB/s, then definitely you want a board/processor with guts.

            And it probably will not be fanless either.

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

              Main reason why I'm eyeing that pfsense rig is to do traffic shaping and QoS prioritisation. Is that something that requires a lot of grunt? I won't be doing much of OpenVPN on this box, and even if I do, I don't require the box to give me a full 200mbps worth of VPN traffic anyway :)

              Snort on the other hand might be something that I'd try. But I'm not sure if we really need it.

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

                Snort?  Its a pig for processor.

                Get the Second board you listed that supports I7 and get a nice heatsink for it….

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

                  I prefer to have my pfsense have too much processor than not enough.

                  Then you know its going to be able to serve your needs for years.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • E
                    Escorpiom
                    last edited by

                    As a more powerful alternative you could look at the ASUS Q87T.
                    It has dual LAN (Intel / Realtek) and a lot of features.
                    You can stick an Intel socket 1150 processor on it.

                    So my guess is you will find a way to keep both cores maxed all the time.

                    That processor is a 4C.

                    Cheers.

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

                      haha.  Seems so.

                      Yep - 4 cores.

                      Still, I think he would work it to death.

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

                        Assuming we are talking 200Mbps (megabits per second) the j1900 would have no problems for straight firewall/NAT.
                        Once you start adding Snort or VPNs things get a lot tougher. I still think you'd be fine though. There are a number of threads here with numbers, for example:
                        https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=73518.msg443981#msg443981

                        Steve

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

                          Its a weak processor - Better safe than sorry.

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

                            I agree, finding out your CPU isn't up to the job after you've bought your board etc is bad. However it's all relative. In that same thread it's tested pushing >1Gbps of firewall/NAT. Next to my underclocked P4-M it looks pretty fast.  ;)

                            Steve

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

                              He could certainly try it and see how it goes.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • ?
                                Guest
                                last edited by

                                @kejianshi:

                                You should probably get yourself a nice power hungry I5 or I7 powered box because if you start running VPNs and using packages with that much bandwidth on tap, you will max out low power processors in a hurry.

                                I run several 1Gbps/1Gbps links (one at work, another at home) over C2758 SoCs.

                                not power hungry, at all.

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

                                  Use an Atom based board.  Makes no difference to me.  I'm not the one that will be looking for a new board six months later (-;

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • M
                                    Moosecall
                                    last edited by

                                    I think the old notions of atom processors need to re-evaluated or thrown out the window entirely with the silvermont architecture (avoton and rangeley).

                                    From everything that has been posted by ESF recently, I expect the C2758 to be a workhorse for pfsense users

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

                                      Indeed, it seems somewhat farcical that Intel desided to group them in the Atom family. These are far far away from an N270.  ;)

                                      Steve

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

                                        Heh, I've actually decided (in the end!) to go with the original Supermicro.

                                        Power here costs a bomb (about 25 cents per kwh). Hence, even if I throw boards away when newer more power efficient ones enter the market, it still isn't too bad a proposition to not "future proof" and just get the board that works for now while upgrading in the future as needs increase. Anything is an improvement over the current Asus elcheapo, and this will help me get my feet wet with pfsense first.

                                        If I feel the thirst for more power, then… someone will get to buy my Supermicro off fleabay :P

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • E
                                          Escorpiom
                                          last edited by

                                          I agree with wshyang.
                                          My monthly power bill is half a workers monthly wage. Yes it's that bad. And its just a small shop.
                                          LED lightning is extremely popular here, and people even turn off the fridge at night to save on electricity.
                                          So also a X10SBA for me. Perhaps even two boards.

                                          Atom syndrome is today like the Celeron syndrome from a few years ago (socket 370).
                                          A few weeks ago I build a Celeron based system for a friend. It had to be cheap.
                                          At first, he frowned upon the Celeron processor I used for the build.
                                          I explained that the Ivy Bridge Celeron today is already faster than the E8400 core2duo, consuming less power.

                                          So yes, I think it is time to review the Atom processor.

                                          Cheers.

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

                                            After you build it, tell us how it works.

                                            I'd be interested in CPU load when transferring files at gigabit speed from one VLAN to another or from LAN through WAN.

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