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

    New Atom motherboard choice - Advantech

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    12 Posts 7 Posters 8.4k 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.
    • valnarV
      valnar
      last edited by

      As an alternate to the (older) Atom MSI IM-945GSE mini-ITX board, there is a new choice from Advantech.

      http://buy.advantech.com/MiniITX-6-7-x6-7-/MiniITX/model-AIMB-212N-S6A1E.htm
      http://buy.advantech.com/MiniITX-6-7-x6-7-/MiniITX/model-AIMB-212D-S6A1E.htm

      One has the new single core N450, the other the new dual core D510.  Both have dual gigabit Intel Ethernet ports.  I wouldn't have bothered to post if they didn't!

      There is nothing wrong with the MSI board, but it does use the older N270 CPU and separate north & southbridges.  The bigger question is does the N450 model use less power than the MSI board….

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • valnarV
        valnar
        last edited by

        Just a FYI.  If you don't need the D510 speed and a single core N270/N450 will work fine, then you may also be served well by the official pfSense Hacom offerings.  'Only posting it again here because I know not everyone checks out the home page.

        http://www.hacom.net/catalog/embedded/3i270d
        http://www.hacom.net//catalog/network-appliances/pfsense

        Their products are the best upgrade to an ALIX box if speed and low power are a priority (but cost isn't a factor).  Obviously, it's worth the extra $50 for Intel Ethernet.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • B
          bob76535
          last edited by

          Has anyone here actually tried one of the advantech boards? I am ready to replace my failing  DDRWT based router and I want to use one of these to run pfsense on. They have a built in CF slot to run pfsense on, dual Intel BG NICS, and the mini-PCIe for a wireless card to be an access point.

          If someone here can confirm that pfsense will run on it, I am going to order one next week.

          Thanks

          Bob

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • W
            wojtyk
            last edited by

            Any progress on people trying this out?
            It seems an ideal pick for pfSense, and I'm in the market as well.

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

              The N450/ 510 will consume less power than the Atoms except with those running the 945GSE where the difference is very little - 1W ~ 2W less for the former.  The Advantech looks good with the onboard DC/DC conversion.  Might save more power due to efficiency as compared to running ATX PSUs (not optimized for such low loads).

              The NM10 will work with pFsense 2.0 for sure and very possibly 1.2.3 as well since the NM10 effectively shows up as ICH7 which is the same as the 945G platforms.  Note that the Advantech boards pair the chip with ICH8M instead of the NM10.

              Since the NM10 does not have native IDE support so you guys might want to check on how the CF interface is being provided for those boards using the NM10.
              Some CF to SATA bridge chips are fussy with the CF cards used (usually to do with DMA support) whilst separate IDE controllers may not be supported by pFsense.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • W
                wojtyk
                last edited by

                So ultimately you see little reason to choose the 945GSE over the Advantec?
                I'm pretty much just looking for the "best that is out there now" for PfSense.
                All research I have done on the topic shows that dual Intel NICs is key.
                Beyond that, it's mostly a size/heat/compatibility tradeoff.
                As I'd like to go fanless, it's either the Advantec or the 945GSE – I'm not aware of anything else in the market that has two onboard Intel NICs, fanless-capable, and PfSense compatible.
                Seeing as how the Advantec is slightly newer technology, the only selling point the 945GSE has at this point is tried and true compatibility.

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

                  @wojtyk:

                  So ultimately you see little reason to choose the 945GSE over the Advantec?
                  I'm pretty much just looking for the "best that is out there now" for PfSense.
                  All research I have done on the topic shows that dual Intel NICs is key.
                  Beyond that, it's mostly a size/heat/compatibility tradeoff.
                  As I'd like to go fanless, it's either the Advantec or the 945GSE – I'm not aware of anything else in the market that has two onboard Intel NICs, fanless-capable, and PfSense compatible.
                  Seeing as how the Advantec is slightly newer technology, the only selling point the 945GSE has at this point is tried and true compatibility.

                  It depends on which 945GSE you're looking at.  The MSI with dual onboard Intel GBE and DC/ DC converter will give the Advantech a good fight.
                  If you're looking at others without onboard DC/DC converters, then the Advantech would be a better choice.

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

                    Also check out the Supermicro X7SPA boards. Dual Intel Gig-E and the -HF model has on board IPMI 2.0 for remote console/management.

                    Riley

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • W
                      wallabybob
                      last edited by

                      One issue that comes to mind (and is probably common with a number of Atom based boards): Is the data path to memory big enough to sustain the required NIC bandwidth? The Intel NICs named have PCI bus interface. Under optimum conditions a standard PCI bus MIGHT be able to SUSTAIN 1Gbps in ONE direction.

                      Are the Intel NICs on a shared PCI bus? (Probably, because that is cheaper. But you'll probably need to do some more extensive research because its not common to see this level of detail in web pages describing systems.)

                      I expect this system would be more than adequate for many applications but if you are looking for high sustained bit rates from the NICs it may not be the solution for you.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • valnarV
                        valnar
                        last edited by

                        I think if you actually intend to run gigabit speed through a firewall with Squid and Snort loaded (which they list), the Atom processor will conk out before the NIC.  At that point a C2D or better is recommended.

                        (In other words you are technically correct, but it probably doesn't matter.)  ;)

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • C
                          cmb
                          last edited by

                          @valnar:

                          (In other words you are technically correct, but it probably doesn't matter.)   ;)

                          Yep, an Atom isn't going to be fast enough to exhaust the PCI bus more than likely, unless you're strictly routing and have the filter disabled.

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

                            @wallabybob:

                            One issue that comes to mind (and is probably common with a number of Atom based boards): Is the data path to memory big enough to sustain the required NIC bandwidth? The Intel NICs named have PCI bus interface. Under optimum conditions a standard PCI bus MIGHT be able to SUSTAIN 1Gbps in ONE direction.

                            Are the Intel NICs on a shared PCI bus? (Probably, because that is cheaper. But you'll probably need to do some more extensive research because its not common to see this level of detail in web pages describing systems.)

                            I expect this system would be more than adequate for many applications but if you are looking for high sustained bit rates from the NICs it may not be the solution for you.

                            If you're looking at the Advantech or the MSI 945GSE, then the onboard NICs are PCI-e x1 based.  In which case, you get 250MB/s per direction (for a total of 500MB/s) per NIC since PCI-e is not a parallel type bus like with PCI or PCI-X.

                            That said, you'll  probably find that the ATOM/ Pineview will saturate before you can push 2Gbps even without any other services like Snort or Squid running.  Interrupts alone will soak up processing power at high throughput.

                            As it is, I get about 2 ~ 2.4Mbps of throughput per 1% of processor load on both my Atom 330 (D945GCLF2) and Conroe-L 220 (Intel D201GLY2) with both running Intel MT Dual port NICs.  The bulk of the loading comes from interrupts on the NICs.
                            Low throughput but large connection states/ PPS doesn't cause either processor to flinch though.  I've torrented in excess of 12,000 states and 4k pps but at 4Mbps of throughput on my D201GLY2 and saw only 2% of load - the same load as when I download at 4Mbps via 10 connections on HTTP.

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