I have not had such an issue. Using 2.4.2 with System Information widget
saying "AES-NI CPU Crypto: No".

On 02/15/2018 11:55 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> Please note that next pfsense will not install hardware that is not
> supporting aes-ni?
>
> Eero
>
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 6:37 PM, Kyle Marek <pspps...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This board does round-up gigabit (something like 976 Mb/s) in both
>> directions on all 4 interfaces: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00XNR4HE2/
>>
>> The key for me here was the interrupt coalescence of these particular
>> Intel NICs. A very similar board with Broadcom NICs that lacked this
>> feature maxed out the interrupt handler's CPU usage on Linux when
>> surpassing the forwarding of a single 1 Gb/s stream (1 Gb/s in on one
>> interface; 1 Gb/s out on another).
>>
>> A potential downside is no AES-NI, which will affect any AES-utilizing
>> VPNs that you need to operate at gigabit speeds. I have no benchmarks at
>> the moment but can measure if this is necessary for you.
>>
>> On 02/15/2018 09:14 AM, Michael Munger wrote:
>>> TL; DR.
>>>
>>> On 1Gbps downloads, our pfSense firewalls are performing poorly with
>>> speed tests of ~400Mbps. It's either pfSense configs (not likely) or the
>>> hardware (more likely). I do not want to buy a commercial box. For our
>>> corporate network, we use HP DL360s, so zero problem there.I need
>>> something that is the size of a router, but can do 1Gbps with pfSense.
>>>
>>> Who's got working configs / hardware combos that do 1Gbps easily?
>>>
>>> Background.
>>>
>>> I've been using Alix boards (APU1D4 as of late). The problem is: these
>>> boards seem to top out at 400Mbps download. I have several clients who
>>> have gigabit fiber connections, and they have been complaining to the
>>> ISP that their service is slow. When they connect to the modem directly,
>>> they get 1G download. When they go through the pfSense firewall we put
>>> together using these Alix boards from PC engines, it drops to ~400Mbps.
>>>
>>> There are several competing "router boards" (Microtik and the like), but
>>> I have zero experience with them, I don't know if they will run pfSense
>>> or if they will do the speed. The Alix + pfSense combo has been GREAT
>>> for many years. If I change to something else, I don't want to go
>>> through growing pains since I figure this is a solved problem, and
>>> someone on this list knows / has a recommendation.
>> _______________________________________________
>> pfSense mailing list
>> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
>> Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
>>
> _______________________________________________
> pfSense mailing list
> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
> Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
_______________________________________________
pfSense mailing list
https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold

Reply via email to