The one running pfSense still cannot necessarily pass 10Gbit/sec. That's why tnsr exists in the first place.

Why not put tnsr on both?

Unless you can pass traffic through tnsr instead the test still feels invalid to me since you are using it as a traffic processor (generator/receiver) and a router at the same time.

Yes i know, right now i am setting up new lab to test bandwidth through tnsr, i will re-inform in this thread when i have finished my test lab. Thanks you so much.

i use 2 boxes that are identical and have the same 10Gbps sfp+ module so the test suite is not slower than the device i am testing.

The one running pfSense still cannot necessarily pass 10Gbit/sec. That's why tnsr exists in the first place.

Why not put tnsr on both?

Unless you can pass traffic through tnsr instead the test still feels invalid to me since you are using it as a traffic processor (generator/receiver) and a router at the same time.

I know use 2 boxes to test is not the perfect way to test bandwidth but in my homelab condition, i dont have optical switch and i just have only 2 10Gbps sfp+ module to test Gigabits network performance, so it is the only way for me .

• "Also, please explain how you ensured iperf3 was running on the tnsr dataplane and not on its host interface."
  => i install iperf3 in TNSR device. In tnsr cli, i use the command "dataplane shell" to go shell, next i can see my NIC with ip address with ifconfig command
  
  and then i run iperf3 server from here

The hardware of my device is :

• Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU C3558 @ 2.20GHz 4 CPUs

• Ram 8 GB

• SSD 256Gb

And, as usual, when you are testing a router you should test through it not to/from it.

Also, please explain how you ensured iperf3 was running on the tnsr dataplane and not on its host interface.

You also didn't specify the capabilities of the hardware you were using, such as CPU.