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

    Is this a good appliance for my setup?

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    15 Posts 7 Posters 2.8k 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.
    • T
      tgharold
      last edited by

      That was my guess as well, would probably work fine up until ~200-300Mbps or so.  I don't run Snort or HAVP, only Suricata so I don't know what impact HAVP has on CPU usage.

      I estimate that my Core2Duo 3GHz can handle about 1.2Gbps with Suricata running and a modest set of rules (pfBlockerNG).

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • E
        Evanc9126
        last edited by

        I see.  Ok thanks for the replies.  I couldn't find anything better around that price range so I went ahead with it.  It is replacing an RVS4000 which maxes out at 15 Mbps down with IPS on.  I won't have access to anything higher than 20 Mbps for another couple years but I was just trying to plan ahead.  By that time I can replace it with something better.

        I may just skip HAVP since it is a pain to setup anyways.  I haven't tried Snort yet but I expect similar difficulty.  I might even break the unit apart to add cooling and overclock it, hypothetically of course.

        I am interesting in looking into Suricata.  I'm curious how that stacks against Snort.  I do want at least IPS in this setup.

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

          @neo243:

          and its going up 80% CPU Usage.

          Did you enable PowerD (max.)?

          @Evancool
          Snort & HAVP perhaps on top Squid & SquidGuard would be causing more then the Atom 1,6 GHz is able to serve.
          So at this days it would be the best and also future proofed to go with an Intel Atom C2xxx board in my eyes.
          Supermicro is producing C23xx, 25xx and 27xx boards with 2, 4 and 8 core cpu´s and they are sufficient to
          manage all this options and features given by pfSense. Mini ITX cases that will fitting perfect are also in the
          run from Supermicro, if this would be to high pricing you should go by a Jetaway board with 2 core and 3,0
          GHz or narrow down the entire features you will be using.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • E
            Evanc9126
            last edited by

            Thanks.  Yes I did study the C2xxx Atoms from Supermicro.  I really wanted a C2758 but was just too expensive.  The lesser supermicros were still in the $300+ range.  My max would be $200 for now.  I do realize the 1.6 atom on the ebay item is only single core but I am hoping the hyperthreading and leaving PowerD off can make up for it a little.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • S
              SisterOfMercy
              last edited by

              @Evancool:

              The lesser supermicros were still in the $300+ range.  My max would be $200 for now.  I do realize the 1.6 atom on the ebay item is only single core but I am hoping the hyperthreading and leaving PowerD off can make up for it a little.

              Don't forget those 'older' atoms are 32-bit only. I think it would be wise to get a platform that runs 64-bit. Maybe you can find a different board based on a C2358 within your budget? I would rather have had a C2758 myself, but when I look at the CPU load with my C2558, it's just not needed for semi-professional use.

              Of course I would really like this board: http://www.supermicro.nl/products/motherboard/Xeon/D/X10SDV-8C-TLN4F.cfm
              As long as I'm not paying for it myself!  :o

              Hi, I'm Lance Boyle, and people often wonder if I'm real.

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

                PowerD off can make up for it a little.

                Please don´t do so, this can be also running in the total other direction as you imagine or expect it!
                Alix APU:

                • ~400 - 450 MBit/s throughout with PowerD off
                • ~680 - 750 MBit/s throughput with PowerD on
                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • R
                  robi
                  last edited by

                  And which option do you recommend with PowerD?

                  • Hidaptive
                  • Adaptive
                  • Minimum
                  • Maximum

                  Which option gives the best performance, and which the poorest?

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

                    @robi

                    as I am right informed you will be able to set it up as you or your hardware will be
                    need it or you want to save electric power.

                    And which option do you recommend with PowerD?

                    Even that one that matched your personal needs (this can be differ from user to user)
                    or what matches right your hardware, making pfSense runs smooth and liquid!

                    pfsense > System > Advanced > Miscellaneous

                    • Hidaptive

                    PowerD is only using the maximum of the CPU clock frequency

                    • Adaptive

                    PowerD is using from the minimum to the maximum of the CPU clock frequency

                    • Minimum

                    PowerD is only using the minimum of the CPU clock frequency

                    • Maximum

                    PowerD is only using form the minimum to the maximum of the CPU clock frequency (recommended)

                    From the pfSense Doc`s:
                    To force it to use EST rather than throttling or p4tcc add the following lines to loader.conf.local

                    hint.p4tcc.0.disabled=1
                    hint.acpi_throttle.0.disabled=1
                    

                    ACPI throttling and p4tcc do not provide any measurable power saving.

                    If I am wrong, please correct me.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      SisterOfMercy
                      last edited by

                      Read this:
                      https://www.ateamsystems.com/tech-blog/increase-freebsd-performance-with-powerd/

                      So if these guys are correct you need to enable PowerD if you want to use speedstep and/or turbo boost.

                      Hi, I'm Lance Boyle, and people often wonder if I'm real.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • R
                        robi
                        last edited by

                        I've played around with PowerD on Supermicro A1SRi-2758f. When enabled and set to Hidaptive, preformance decreases dramatically at start. After about 5 to 10 seconds, it wakes up fine.
                        So  I have about 80-85Mbit/sec for the first 5 to 10 seconds, which afterwards jumps to the expected gigabit-close value.
                        Not good.
                        Without PowerD enabled, it runs properly at max throughput.

                        That motherboard has so little power usage even when maxed out, that it's simply not worth the trouble of fooling around with jumping CPU speeds.

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

                          Atom N270 - ancient.  Don't buy it.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • R
                            robi
                            last edited by

                            Supermicro A1SRi-2758f is not based on Atom N270.

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

                              I just answered the first original question only…

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