On Mon, September 19, 2011 17:05, David Burgess wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Steven Sherwood <[email protected]>
wrote:
> >> Hello list,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I’m considering a few different platforms for low powered but
> Gigabit
> >> capable firewall/routers, and have been looking at Mini-ITX systems
> >> based on
> >> Atom processors.
> >
> > I have a D510-based dual Intel NIC board that consumes around 19W
> idle
> > with a PicoPSU and will route around 350 Mbps using the default
> packet
> > size in iperf, or 600+ Mbps with net.inet.ip.fastforwarding enabled.
> >
> > I have also done a system based on an Intel DH57JG board + i3 560,
> > 2.5" hdd and PicoPSU that used 17-19W idle and would route wire speed
> > (950 Mbps steady, using a vlan switch) on iperf with ~60% idle CPU in
> > top.
> >
> > Lastly, I have an Intel DQ67EP board with i5 2500, SSD, and DC-DC PSU
> > (Antec) that uses ~19W idle. I haven't run pfsense on this one or
> > tested its routing capacity.
> >
> > I hope the extra data points will be useful to you.
> >
> > db
> 
> It really great to see these numbers, and all others that were said in
> here. But now, even more I'm curious about AMD brazos numbers.
> 
> I have an old Atom here, that I know is a great pfSense performer. But
> what would look like if I had an AMD small cpu (those brazos). I
> imagine
> this is also the wonder that the OP had. :)
> 
> matheus
> 

Yes - I have definitely been wondering that as well. :)
_______________________________________________
List mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list

Reply via email to