APU1D4 OK for a 1 Gbps Fiber WAN connection?
-
I have purchased an APU1D4 and was wondering how well it will handle my network connection. I am moving to the Chattanooga area in 2 weeks, and my future ISP offers Fiber to the Home connectivity with speeds of 100 Mbps or 1 Gbps (www.epbfi.com). I do know my new house has fiber ran to the outside wall at the demarc, but I am not sure if they do the ethernet conversion there or in the house. Either way, I will be opting for the 1 Gbps since its only about 69.99 a month.
I am wanting to use PFsense as my router, and I have been looking at hardware appliances for a while now. I ended up buying an APU1D4 since its super low power, and seems to be a perfect fit. My only concern is that, after reading a bit, it will have enough power to handle the full 1 Gbps WAN connection that I will be getting.
I am also considering using it as my main WIFI access point, and ordered a wle200nx wireless card with it as well. How many wireless devices can the wle200nx support without coming to a crawl?
Thanks in advance!
-
If you are concerned about Wi-Fi performance, get a purpose-built access point. pfSense 2.1.5 doesn't even do 802.11n. g-only.
As for gigabit, given the realtek NICs and the low-power CPU, I'd guess - guess, that you'll probably max out at about 300-400Mbps with the APU.
I just had one come through here but didn't do any anecdotal tests.
-
People really need to know what they want…
Extreme small size.
Extreme low power.
Extreme performance.I don't think the APU1D4 is the right box for you. You may decide to run packages and you may want to get all the bandwidth you are paying for while doing it.
With alllllllll the stuff in the house sucking power, I would not want to make my router so lean that it can't handle the throughput.Really, with that much bandwidth on tap, you should get the fastest pfsense appliance you can lay your hands on that is for sure tested to 1GB with packages you like.
-
To be honest, I am not worried about power consumption as long as I can keep it around 100 watts or below. I am very new when it comes to pfsense appliances. I have been using pfsense in a virtual machine for my home lab for a while now and love it.
I am open to suggestions as to what would be a good appliance. Here are my "requirements"
1. power consumption not above 100w at peak
2. size isn't a big deal. It would be nice to find a 1U or 2U chassis as I have a half height (20U) rack that I keep my equipment in. It would be great to find an appliance that fits in the rack.
3. Enough horsepower to support the full 1 Gbps bandwidth.
4. I want to run Snort and Squid on the box as well. -
Almost nothing will consume 100W, you'd have to get some huge multi processor server or a gaming rig! Even boxes that are considered relatively inefficient are in the 60-80W range.
One of the newer Rangely boxes will fit your requirements. They are <30W peak, I've not actually measured one myself to be more accurate. If size and, more importantly, noise is not a problem then you have many options. Are second hand boxes an option for you?Steve
-
Sure, I don't mind second hand machines. Or even "repurposed" machines. This is just going in my new house, so its not going to be running any production.
Noise wont be much of an issue, as the rack will be located in a mechanical room where the HVAC and water heater are located. Do you have any suggestions on the Rangelys?
-
Well you can support the project and get a pre-tuned install by buying from the pfSense store ;)
http://store.pfsense.org/c2758/That is a lot more expensive than the APU though. What's your budget?
The Rangley processors offer a lot of CPU power for not much electrical power which is great but there are many older second hand servers that would fit the bill.
Steve
-
HAH! I would LOVE to have the c2758, but its way beyond my budget for a home router. I would however be willing to spend around $300 to $500 on a box that fit all my needs.
You have my interest piqued on the Rangely's. Now if I can find a chassis that suits me, and a board that meets everything.
-
What about some of the Lanner units? I have seen this guy: http://www.lannerinc.com/products/x86-network-appliances/rackmount/fw-8760 available in a few formats.
It looks like it supports i3, i5 and even i7 processors and uses Intel 82574L NIC's.I am not sure what the power consumption would be, but I'd figure its above the 100w peak.
I would also consider one of these: http://store.netgate.com/ADI/RCC-VE-4860.aspx but they aren't in production yet. If they are as promising as they look, I may just ride on the APU until they hit the market.
-
Yes, just using the APU until you actually need to additional throughput is a wise choice. There will be more options available then. The Rangelys look great but are brand new and hence attract a premium. The actual CPU requirements for 1Gbps throughput of NAT/firewall are not that high, it can be done by a Celeron G530 for example.
That Lanner box uses the first gen iX processors unfortunately which are all ~75W TDP. It might top 100W peak but it's average consumption will be much, much lower than that.As another option, one user here got ~600Mbps throughput from his APU by using an Intel dual miniPCIe card and pfSense 2.2.
Steve
-
I had a gaming rig with a TDP of around 300watts between the GPU and CPU, but my power draw at the wall, including the CRT monitor and the CPU and GPU at 100% load, was about 150watts. Intel lists the absolute maximum for their TDPs, which is hard to hit even with synthetic benchmarks. The only real way to reach those TDPs is custom assembly code made specifically to run everything nearest 100% as possible. My brother was testing his computer and was only consuming about 40% of his Intel i7's TDP when running Prime95, loading his CPU to 100%.
AMD on the other hand, lists their TDPs as the average max based on "typical" work loads. You're very likely to reach or near the TDP if you're at 100% load.
