Parts for building router for Gbit speeds
-
This will be my first post in this forum. But i have been here for a while. And i have used pfsense Before, but that whas some years ago now.
Now, i search here and there but i dont find answers. I have uppgraded my speed at home to 1000/1000. So i will now build my own router again. But when i search for hardware options that are capable to deliver solid Gbit speeds, almost all threads move on features that i dont use.
To the Point then…
Will a motherboard with newer onboard Celerons or Pentiums be able to delivier solid 1Gbit both ways with NAT and some basic Firewall options that are found on standard routers? Or must i chose a standard motherboard and a Core i3/i5 to make this workable?
I have 3 PCs and some portables that uses internet if that is important. And i go to lanpartys, so it would be great if my build could handle up to 40 PCs on a 100/100 and above lines without hickups. -
I have seen talk on the DSLReports forum that to get gigabit speed one needs a four-core CPU having 3.5GHz. Of course its under debate there, and I have not had time to verify whether its true or not. One has added that for the motherboard, additional requirement is either onboard Intel dual-port, or dual-port Intel NIC on a x4 PCIe slot. Again I have not verified this, but you may want to look into it.
-
i5 @3.2ghz+ (the skylake non-k) cpus can be overclocked
16gb ddr4
120gb ssd
dual intel lan cards (single x2 or one dual)
-
I have seen talk on the DSLReports forum that to get gigabit speed one needs a four-core CPU having 3.5GHz. Of course its under debate there, and I have not had time to verify whether its true or not. One has added that for the motherboard, additional requirement is either onboard Intel dual-port, or dual-port Intel NIC on a x4 PCIe slot. Again I have not verified this, but you may want to look into it.
I will look into it. I suspected it would take i quite strong CPU, but i had hoped for it work with one in the middle.
i5 @3.2ghz+ (the skylake non-k) cpus can be overclocked
16gb ddr4
120gb ssd
dual intel lan cards (single x2 or one dual)
Well… no, not anymore! Intel fixed this in the microcode in early summer this year. I have an i5-6400 and a Z170 motherboard and i can not oc it. My PC resets the BC on boot. But when it did oc them, some features in them stopped working after your oc.
But back to the subject. Is 16GB realy required for those speeds? Or are the number of PCs that increases the amount of memory? -
If you use PPPoE you should be getting a Intel Core i3, i5 or i7 with >2,0GHz in normal mode,
but if you are not using PPPoE, you might be able to archive 1 GBit/s at the WAN with smaller
appliances likes the Jetway NF9HG-2930 + mSATA + 8 GB RAM + WiFi card!40 users with 100/100 should be able to archive with the APU2C4, APU3A2 or
Jetway NF9HG-2930 but this must be answered by yours first what kind of
Internet connection you are using.If you want to be on the sure and safe side go an buy a Intel Core I cpu with 3,0GHz and
four cpu cores to be able to route that 1 GBit/s surely. -
@BlueKobold:
If you use PPPoE you should be getting a Intel Core i3, i5 or i7 with >2,0GHz in normal mode,
but if you are not using PPPoE, you might be able to archive 1 GBit/s at the WAN with smaller
appliances likes the Jetway NF9HG-2930 + mSATA + 8 GB RAM + WiFi card!40 users with 100/100 should be able to archive with the APU2C4, APU3A2 or
Jetway NF9HG-2930 but this must be answered by yours first what kind of
Internet connection you are using.If you want to be on the sure and safe side go an buy a Intel Core I cpu with 3,0GHz and
four cpu cores to be able to route that 1 GBit/s surely.No, i dont use PPPoE.
I have looked at APU2C4 and APU3A2. But im not convinced that they will handle this. The motherboard from Jetway is interesting. Is there any tests on what it is capable of?
Both my home and the locals that we are using have fiber installed. So that means that the slowest internet this build will face is 100/100.
I could do that. But i am not after total overkill if a Celeron or Pentium makes it. And that is my big question that for some reason is so hard to answer. People just dont use pfsense machines as simple routers. Well, they dont write about it. -
But back to the subject. Is 16GB realy required for those speeds? Or are the number of PCs that increases the amount of memory?
No, 16GB is not required. 4GB will be way more than enough, even if you have a lot of client PCs (and by a lot, I mean hundreds). 2 Intel server class NICs are all you need for a simple single LAN single WAN firewall. That's one physical card with 2 ports or 2 ports on the motherboard, whatever. CPU should be multiple cores, as fast as you can get them, but no need to go overboard. I'd wager even the most meager Skylake Pentium will do for just NAT and firewall rules. More CPU horsepower comes into play with things like packet inspection and VPN.
-
No, i dont use PPPoE.
If so your WAN connection will be cpu single threaded and mostly slower, but if not you may be happy
with that Jetway NF9HG-2930 Board. It pulls for a forum user here, from HongKong nearly 1 GBit/s
at the WAN interface. -
I have seen talk on the DSLReports forum that to get gigabit speed one needs a four-core CPU having 3.5GHz. Of course its under debate there, and I have not had time to verify whether its true or not. One has added that for the motherboard, additional requirement is either onboard Intel dual-port, or dual-port Intel NIC on a x4 PCIe slot. Again I have not verified this, but you may want to look into it.
That's simply ridiculous.
-
If your're in the US newegg has a sale going right now on a HP server for $179 that would fit your needs perfectly. It's not a low power solution like some of the embedded options but it's complete and all you'd have to do is install pfsense and configure it. Better hurry though it's only on sale for 2 days.
-
But back to the subject. Is 16GB realy required for those speeds? Or are the number of PCs that increases the amount of memory?
No, 16GB is not required. 4GB will be way more than enough, even if you have a lot of client PCs (and by a lot, I mean hundreds). 2 Intel server class NICs are all you need for a simple single LAN single WAN firewall. That's one physical card with 2 ports or 2 ports on the motherboard, whatever. CPU should be multiple cores, as fast as you can get them, but no need to go overboard. I'd wager even the most meager Skylake Pentium will do for just NAT and firewall rules. More CPU horsepower comes into play with things like packet inspection and VPN.
4GB is nice. 16GB feels overkill.
That will be expensive cards if i would use dual port NICs that can handle those speeds. Most of the cards that i can buy are only in PCI-E 1x version 1, and that will bottleneck. Those card with 4x are way of my budget. So i would go for two single port cards, if the build wont have 2 NICs from Intel.@BlueKobold:
No, i dont use PPPoE.
If so your WAN connection will be cpu single threaded and mostly slower, but if not you may be happy
with that Jetway NF9HG-2930 Board. It pulls for a forum user here, from HongKong nearly 1 GBit/s
at the WAN interface.Nearly 1Gbit isnt quite good enough. Well, it depends on what nearly is in real world. My goal is rock solid 1Gbit up and down. I understand that some overhead can make this impossible. But i belive that if i use the right parts i would hit the sweatspot of a total 2Gbit throughput on wan - lan. I mean, it is possible to do 10Gbit on copper and i seen networks that works in 40Gbit…
I have seen talk on the DSLReports forum that to get gigabit speed one needs a four-core CPU having 3.5GHz. Of course its under debate there, and I have not had time to verify whether its true or not. One has added that for the motherboard, additional requirement is either onboard Intel dual-port, or dual-port Intel NIC on a x4 PCIe slot. Again I have not verified this, but you may want to look into it.
That's simply ridiculous.
Elaborate please.
If your're in the US newegg has a sale going right now on a HP server for $179 that would fit your needs perfectly. It's not a low power solution like some of the embedded options but it's complete and all you'd have to do is install pfsense and configure it. Better hurry though it's only on sale for 2 days.
Thats cheap. But no. I live in Sweden so newegg is a no go.
-
I have seen talk on the DSLReports forum that to get gigabit speed one needs a four-core CPU having 3.5GHz. Of course its under debate there, and I have not had time to verify whether its true or not. One has added that for the motherboard, additional requirement is either onboard Intel dual-port, or dual-port Intel NIC on a x4 PCIe slot. Again I have not verified this, but you may want to look into it.
That's simply ridiculous.
Elaborate please.
I don't care if someone said it on DSLReports, that's wildly excessive for routing a single gigabit–which isn't very much bandwidth these days. You also don't need a particularly fancy NIC, again, this isn't a hard requirement to meet in 2016.
The bigger issue is that if you actually are trying to sustain 1Gbps transfer rate that's almost impossible on a 1Gbps ethernet because you'll have a certain level of inefficiency when the medium saturates. If 900Mbps plus or minus isn't good enough then you need either a channel bonding solution or 10Gbps. You can also get a couple more percent utilization with jumbo frames, but that's not particularly useful for internet traffic.
-
I live in Sweden so newegg is a no go.
Then Tradera or ebay is your best bet. A dual port server NIC can usually be found for 200-300SEK.
-
Dual port Intel chipset NICs can be had for $20 or $30 USD used. I use an HP NC360T (dual 1Gbps Intel, PCIe x4) and it works perfectly.
-
The bigger issue is that if you actually are trying to sustain 1Gbps transfer rate that's almost impossible on a 1Gbps ethernet because you'll have a certain level of inefficiency when the medium saturates. If 900Mbps plus or minus isn't good enough then you need either a channel bonding solution or 10Gbps. You can also get a couple more percent utilization with jumbo frames, but that's not particularly useful for internet traffic.
I agree, but if the ISP is handing off the connection with a single 1Gbps ethernet port it doesn't matter what OP uses above and beyond that; the ISP port would be the bottleneck if link aggregation or a 10Gbps NIC is used.
I'd just try and match whatever the ISP is handing off to you with a quality NIC of the same speed.
-
Nearly 1Gbit isnt quite good enough. Well, it depends on what nearly is in real world.
936 MBit/s + TCP/IP overhead + time to proceed pf (firewall rules) is nearly 1 GBit/s
-
If you're just looking for a router then this may be a fun read:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/01/numbers-dont-lie-its-time-to-build-your-own-router/
If not, still a fun read.
-
Sorry for late answer.
I have seen talk on the DSLReports forum that to get gigabit speed one needs a four-core CPU having 3.5GHz. Of course its under debate there, and I have not had time to verify whether its true or not. One has added that for the motherboard, additional requirement is either onboard Intel dual-port, or dual-port Intel NIC on a x4 PCIe slot. Again I have not verified this, but you may want to look into it.
That's simply ridiculous.
Elaborate please.
I don't care if someone said it on DSLReports, that's wildly excessive for routing a single gigabit–which isn't very much bandwidth these days. You also don't need a particularly fancy NIC, again, this isn't a hard requirement to meet in 2016.
The bigger issue is that if you actually are trying to sustain 1Gbps transfer rate that's almost impossible on a 1Gbps ethernet because you'll have a certain level of inefficiency when the medium saturates. If 900Mbps plus or minus isn't good enough then you need either a channel bonding solution or 10Gbps. You can also get a couple more percent utilization with jumbo frames, but that's not particularly useful for internet traffic.
Many routers i could by will stop beetwen 750 and 900Mbps and that is not good in my Eyes. If it needs 10Gbit card to avoid as much overhead and other things as possible thats hit the performance, i could think of buying those. But it also depends on how much CPU perfomance i need. And still, this is not settled.
I live in Sweden so newegg is a no go.
Then Tradera or ebay is your best bet. A dual port server NIC can usually be found for 200-300SEK.
Checking in there time to time and hasnt find a great deal yet. But it could happen.
Dual port Intel chipset NICs can be had for $20 or $30 USD used. I use an HP NC360T (dual 1Gbps Intel, PCIe x4) and it works perfectly.
If i find one that are cheap i would do it. But i need te settle my hardware first so i dont buy something thats bottlenecks.
The bigger issue is that if you actually are trying to sustain 1Gbps transfer rate that's almost impossible on a 1Gbps ethernet because you'll have a certain level of inefficiency when the medium saturates. If 900Mbps plus or minus isn't good enough then you need either a channel bonding solution or 10Gbps. You can also get a couple more percent utilization with jumbo frames, but that's not particularly useful for internet traffic.
I agree, but if the ISP is handing off the connection with a single 1Gbps ethernet port it doesn't matter what OP uses above and beyond that; the ISP port would be the bottleneck if link aggregation or a 10Gbps NIC is used.
I'd just try and match whatever the ISP is handing off to you with a quality NIC of the same speed.
You mean that the ISP could bottleneck? Is it so that the mediaconverter it self could lower the speeds?
@BlueKobold:
Nearly 1Gbit isnt quite good enough. Well, it depends on what nearly is in real world.
936 MBit/s + TCP/IP overhead + time to proceed pf (firewall rules) is nearly 1 GBit/s
I could live with 950Mbps both ways, but i whas hoping to achive and get as close to 1Gbit as possible.
If you're just looking for a router then this may be a fun read:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/01/numbers-dont-lie-its-time-to-build-your-own-router/
If not, still a fun read.
I read this. But i still want to build my router :)
-
Many routers i could by will stop beetwen 750 and 900Mbps and that is not good in my Eyes.
Then you should be buying a router that is really capable to handle nearly 1 GBit/s.
- Intel Xeon E3 v3 (dual or quad core pending on the installed packets and running services)
- Intel Core i3, i5 or i7 (dual or quad core pending on the installed packets and running services)
- Intel Celeron G3260 (if it can handle all the installed packets it might be also running well for you)
If it needs 10Gbit card to avoid as much overhead and other things as possible thats hit the performance, i could think of buying those. But it also depends on how much CPU performance i need. And still, this is not settled.
XG-1541 or Supermicro Intel Xeon D-15x1 series will be coming with 1 GBit/s and 10 GbE Port
by default.I could live with 950Mbps both ways, but i was hoping to archive and get as close to 1Gbit as possible.
Don´t get me wrong please, but you will archive at a 1 GBit/s LAN port really 1 GBit/s + TCP/IP
overhead and time for working out the pf (packet filter)? How should this work? Then perhaps
you will buy a 10 GBit/s card for getting your straight 1 GBit/s? Perhaps you spend the money
for a nice appliance and all is right for you! -
You mean that the ISP could bottleneck? Is it so that the mediaconverter it self could lower the speeds?
It just depends on the media they hand off to you. All I'm saying is that if they give you a 1Gbps copper port, a 10Gbps port on your router won't make your connection any faster since it will only negotiate at 1Gbps.
