Supermicro X10SBA
-
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.
-
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.
-
haha. Seems so.
Yep - 4 cores.
Still, I think he would work it to death.
-
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#msg443981Steve
-
Its a weak processor - Better safe than sorry.
-
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
-
He could certainly try it and see how it goes.
-
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.
-
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 (-;
-
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
-
Indeed, it seems somewhat farcical that Intel desided to group them in the Atom family. These are far far away from an N270. ;)
Steve
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
I've got a C2758 board here with embedded Intel 10G. It's my new toy. With luck, I'll get things 'tuned' (likely: rewritten somewhat) to be able to packet filter and VPN at 10Gbps throughput.
