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

    Need help gigabit performance

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    19 Posts 7 Posters 1.7k 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.
    • stephenw10S
      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
      last edited by

      @Pitbully:

      When you say baremetal I assume you are talking build out of the box…

      I mean install and run pfSense on the hardware directly rather than in VMware as a test. You could potentially do that running from a USB stick for example. That would prove the hardware compatibility.

      I would expect to get 800Mbps through that box easily. It looks like some VMware issue you're hitting there. Even with the overhead introduced running virtually you should see more than 300Mbps.

      Do you have open-vm-tools installed? https://doc.pfsense.org/index.php/Open_VM_Tools_package

      Steve

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P
        Pitbully
        last edited by

        Thanks for taking the time out to help.  I just put my modem back into gateway mode and here are the results. I wasnt connected directly to it but through a nortel 4548 1gig switch.  I will try to run from usb give me a few to set it up.  The only tools I installed was the open-vm-tools.

        performance.jpg
        performance.jpg_thumb

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P
          Pitbully
          last edited by

          Well its something within the VM that I am doing wrong.  USB pfsense speeds below, should I bother running it in a VM?

          performance2.jpg
          performance2.jpg_thumb

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • SammyWooS
            SammyWoo
            last edited by

            To me VM should only for testing, once you are in production, should run on a dedicated, or "bare metal" as he says.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • P
              Pitbully
              last edited by

              Thanks, I thought I would be able to run this box in a VM as its for home only not in production.

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

                I would not expect the hypervisor overhead to make that much difference normally. It looks like you could probably tune that better. You might want to ask in the virtualisation section.

                Steve

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • ?
                  A Former User
                  last edited by

                  What Ethernet cards are you using in your VM?
                  Are you using Virtualised ones? vmxnet3 in Vmware or VirtIO in KVM?
                  Have you turned off all hardware offload?

                  Tim

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • P
                    Pitbully
                    last edited by

                    I had the offload checked.  I was using the e1000 nics and the ethernet cards and its a C2000 SoC I354 Quad GbE Controller.  From the supermicro 5014 board from http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/atom/x10/a1sri-2758f.cfm

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • D
                      dmurphynj
                      last edited by

                      I have a similar setup and you should have no problem pushing that kind of traffic ….

                      WAN provider: Verizon FiOS (Gigabit symmetric)
                      System: Supermicro SYS-5018A-TN7B (A1SRM-LN7F-2758 system board)
                      Interfaces:
                        WAN - ix driver/ Port 1 on an Intel X520 (10gb) PCI3 board with 1gb SFP+ installed
                        LAN - ix driver/ Port 2 on the same Intel X520 (10gb) PCIe board with 1gb SFP+ installed
                        OPT1GUEST - igb driver/ gigabit port on the SuperMicro built-on i350-AM2 controller (guest VLAN)
                      Installation: Bare metal
                      System drives: Pair of SanDisk SSD Plus SDSSDA-120G drives; using a zpool mirror configuration.

                      The performance is excellent.  Absolutely excellent; zero concerns here.

                      I did add 3 system tunables for the X520 card:

                      kern.ipc.nmbclusters=9168192
                      kern.ipc.nmbjumbop=524288
                      hw.intr_storm_threshold=10000
                      
                      

                      But otherwise, things are running very well out of the box.  See attached speedtest.

                      pfsense.jpg
                      pfsense.jpg_thumb
                      ![Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 9.31.53 AM.png](/public/imported_attachments/1/Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 9.31.53 AM.png)
                      ![Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 9.31.53 AM.png_thumb](/public/imported_attachments/1/Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 9.31.53 AM.png_thumb)

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • P
                        Pitbully
                        last edited by

                        Baremetal
                        There is just too much overhead on the VM I assume.  Thats too bad, but glad I didnt have to buy another box.  Now I am going to install some packages on here.

                        Thanks everyone!

                        performance.jpg
                        performance.jpg_thumb

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • G
                          giagl011
                          last edited by

                          https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=145162.0

                          Is the above the same problem?  VM overhead?

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

                            No probably not. The overhead from running virtual should not be that large if the hypervisor is setup correctly. And on your hardware you shouldn't be getting even close to any limit at 180Mbps. Assuming you meant bps.

                            Steve

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