Ok guys.  Great feedback on all of this, but back to my original question,
what's the max throughput I could expect from a RB532A? If there was an
answer my spam filter must have gotten it.  

NAT'ing going on with 3 desktop systems.  Other than that, no queueing, no
firewalling, no routing, etc etc.  Pretty basic setup.  And this is NOT
wireless - using it for my in-house router.  Sorry, should have clarified
that too. 

Thanks!
 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 6:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] RB532 and 40MBps

When it comes to comparing network/embedded CPUs, there is more than just
MHz that needs to be considered.  Some CPUs have multiple cores, hardware
accelerators, etc.  For example, we use a Gemini SL3512 CPU in some of our
products.  Here are some of the accelerators that it has:

-Layer2/3/4 hardware switching, routing and NAT with 4 transmit queues per
port for QoS support
        
-Layer2-7 packet classification into 16 receive queues 
        
-Transmit acceleration by TCP segmentation, IP fragmentation and TCP/IP/UDP
checksum calculation 
        
-Receive acceleration by TCP connection table lookup, assembly of multiple
packets belonging to the same TCP connection and TCP/IP/UDP
checksum verification   

-Hardware Security Acceleration Engine performs DES, 3DES, AES, CCMP and
RC4 encryption/decryption with CBC or ECB mode operation; authentication
with SHA1, MD5, HMAC-SHA1 and HMAC-MD5 hashing algorithm

All of these functions are then offloaded from the main CPU which can
perform other functions.  Just the first one (hardware NAT accelerator) can
increase NAT throughput by an order of magnitude.

-Hal
Ligowave

-----Original Message-----
From: Bo Ring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: WISPA General List <[email protected]>
To: WISPA General List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [WISPA] RB532 and 40MBps
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:54:00 -0500

> Question is.... Why does teh 600 series outperform them all, when it 
> has the slowest processor in MHZ?
>
> Are Mikrotik's 532a speeds test at 266 or 400Mhz? And the 600 series 
> at 200 or 400? They did specify on their report.
>
> Is the 600's Power PC's processor really that much better that it gets 
> so much better speed at slower Mhz?

While I can not speak of it in use between these two routers, there is a
reason why it was logical to move to RISC. They are more efficient chips and
tend to be even more so when they are used in specific environments. If
anyone is a Mac head from way back, you might remember the raw numbers
between the 40MHz 68030 and the 25MHz PowerPC when Apple first moved to
them.

Bo Ring
Account Manager
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cell: 630-743-1162 . office: 312-205-2515
16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 . tel: 773.667.4585
fax: 773.326.4641



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
 
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
 
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to