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

    CPU grunt required to route WAN<->LAN… AND.... LAN<->LAN

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Hardware
    3 Posts 2 Posters 1.9k 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.
    • R
      rikar
      last edited by

      Hey there, lurker for years, used Smoothwall early last decade on some old gear. Now that I actually pay for my power bill, I want a new low power solution to assist moving away from DD-WRT which I love to death, so stable over 4 yrs.

      Environment:

      • 120Mbit/2.4Mbit connection
      • ESXi x 2
      • NAS's  X 2
      • Microsoft file server X 2
      • 3-5 wired clients (desktops, HTPC etc)
      •  Apps server (AirVideo, SAB, SQL etc)
      • Wifi devices, have a WRT400N with DD-WRT for N traffic that I can stick in AP mode on an adaptor I assume (3 tablets, 3  phones, 2 laptops)
      • HP Procurve GB 8 port and a 24 port switch.

      http://www.pfsense.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=49

      The page says "No less then 1.0Ghz CPU" to route 51-200 worth of traffic, which I thought I would be within, but does that include LAN to LAN traffic? I'm a little network green. If I'm moving traffic from a subnet (say my DMZ) through to my inside LAN, this routes through pFsense correct? What if I setup pFsense control VLAN's?

      From this thinking plus threads on the forum, I don’t need just  ~1Ghz, but enough grunt to move 1Gbps.
      I want to be able to run Snort, maybe cache and a few VPN connections.

      It "seems" that my Q is A here >>
      http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,45922.0.html

      "If you need Gbps transfer between internal subnets/interfaces then the G530 is the right choice.

      Steve"

      Actual Question: Would a intel BLKDH61WWB3 + G620 suffice? Ill being running either a dual port intel NIC or the single onboard one with VLAN.

      PS: Some sort of matrix that could answer my question would be well cool.
      A package in pFsense that pushed "benchmark type" results to a cloud, the data could be well useful to peeps I would have thought.

      Thanks sooo much!!!

      Michael

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

        Welcome, nice router! (Hitachi?)

        @rikar:

        The page says "No less then 1.0Ghz CPU" to route 51-200 worth of traffic, which I thought I would be within, but does that include LAN to LAN traffic? I'm a little network green. If I'm moving traffic from a subnet (say my DMZ) through to my inside LAN, this routes through pFsense correct? What if I setup pFsense control VLAN's?

        pfSense filters traffic between any of its interfaces. Therefore if you are moving files from a 'dmz' to a LAN you need pfSense hardware that can filter that traffic at the required speed, possibly up to gigabit.

        @rikar:

        Actual Question: Would a intel BLKDH61WWB3 + G620 suffice? Ill being running either a dual port Intel NIC or the single onboard one with VLAN.

        Yes. You will be able to route at gigabit wire speed with that board/cpu. If you use VLANs all your traffic has to use a single connection but that may not be such a problem. Since you already have a nice VLAN capable switch you can try it without any cost.

        I agree we need some more recent figures for the hardware page. The trouble is there are so many variables that hard figures can be misleading.

        Steve

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

          Thanks, its a FESTOOL Oberfräse OF 1010 EBQ-Plus :)

          Thanks so much for your reply Steve!

          Traffic going through interfaces requires CPU usage, gotcha.

          If i go VLAN, it would seem all traffic go through pfSense, as I would be firewalling various subnets., gotcha.

          The trouble is there are so many variables that hard figures can be misleading.

          There are a lot of variables but then there are a lot of pfSense users. Mashing a few 10,000 tables of data together would show some commonalities i would have thought. Shame I lack statistical analytic skills, would be fun and beneficial to the community.

          Thanks so much again, gunna go grab some hardware!

          Michael

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