Forums

×

Warning

JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 26840
mihai
mihai
Offline
Resolved
0 votes
Hi all,

I intend to configure a small fw for home use.Have any of you tested this Mobo: GA-J1900N-D3V
http://www.gigabyte.com.ro/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4918#ov
+ 4 GB ram ddr3
+ 32 gb SSD
+ 1 more GBit eth to be used as WAN and the 2x LAN onbord agregated for LAN

Any estimations about performance?
Thursday, June 05 2014, 10:20 AM
Share this post:
Responses (26)
  • Accepted Answer

    Friday, August 01 2014, 11:31 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Nick Howitt wrote:
    If it helps, I've tried compiling the x86_64 alx driver here. It installs OK but I have nothing to test it on.


    I can verify that this works for the Gigabyte H97n-wifi mATX board with ClearOs 6.5 :woohoo:
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Thursday, July 03 2014, 06:46 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    after...some loong days...i finally made it :)
    here are some system detais:

    cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep "model name"
    model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU G3220 @ 3.00GHz
    model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU G3220 @ 3.00GHz

    [root@Bumblebee /]# lspci -nn | grep net
    00:19.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Intel Corporation Ethernet Connection I217-V [8086:153b] (rev 04)
    02:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Qualcomm Atheros AR8161 Gigabit Ethernet [1969:1091] (rev 10)

    [root@Bumblebee ~]# ethtool eth0 | grep -i speed
    Speed: 1000Mb/s
    [root@Bumblebee ~]# ethtool eth1 | grep -i speed
    Speed: 1000Mb/s

    Tansfer network speed:
    sending incremental file list
    file.txt
    3010756608 28% 88.13MB/s 0:01:33


    [root@Bumblebee /]# hdparm -tT /dev/sda

    /dev/sda:
    Timing cached reads: 17296 MB in 2.00 seconds = 8656.81 MB/sec
    Timing buffered disk reads: 666 MB in 3.01 seconds = 221.56 MB/sec

    [root@Bumblebee ~]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/output.img bs=8k count=256k
    262144+0 records in
    262144+0 records out
    2147483648 bytes (2.1 GB) copied, 2.50755 s, 856 MB/s

    [root@Bumblebee firewall]# dd if=/dev/zero of=/var/spool/squid/10GB bs=1024 count=10240000 && rm -rf /var/spool/squid/10GB
    10240000+0 records in
    10240000+0 records out
    10485760000 bytes (10 GB) copied, 19.5584 s, 536 MB/s
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Wednesday, July 02 2014, 09:46 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Nick Howitt wrote:
    It looks like you need the alx driver. You can compile your own kmod one from ElRepo. Are you running the 32-bit or 64-bit version of ClearOS?


    x64

    Nick Howitt wrote:
    If it helps, I've tried compiling the x86_64 alx driver here. It installs OK but I have nothing to test it on.


    Thx man.
    I'll try to do some performance tests tonight.
    will update asap
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Wednesday, July 02 2014, 08:56 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    If it helps, I've tried compiling the x86_64 alx driver here. It installs OK but I have nothing to test it on.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Wednesday, July 02 2014, 08:04 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    It looks like you need the alx driver. You can compile your own kmod one from ElRepo. Are you running the 32-bit or 64-bit version of ClearOS?
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Wednesday, July 02 2014, 07:39 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Topic Update :

    MOBO changed @ my local store with :
    - GA-H87N-WIFI + Intel celeron G3220 (soket 1150)
    Unfortunatelly was the only option they had...& no money back option :(
    Now the problem is another one:
    - One Gigabit adaptor is Intel...works fine the second one...not so well because...well it's an Atheros AR8161

    [root@megatron ~]# lspci -nn | grep -i net
    00:19.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Intel Corporation Ethernet Connection I217-V [8086:153b] (rev 04)
    02:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Qualcomm Atheros AR8161 Gigabit Ethernet [1969:1091] (rev 10)

    00:19.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation Ethernet Connection I217-V (rev 04)
    Subsystem: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd Device e000
    Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 31
    Memory at f7d00000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K]
    Memory at f7d3d000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
    I/O ports at f080 [size=32]
    Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 2
    Capabilities: [d0] MSI: Enable+ Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
    Capabilities: [e0] PCI Advanced Features
    Kernel driver in use: e1000e
    Kernel modules: e1000e


    02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR8161 Gigabit Ethernet (rev 10)
    Subsystem: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd Device e000
    Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 10
    Memory at f7c00000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256K]
    I/O ports at e000 [size=128]
    Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3
    Capabilities: [58] Express Endpoint, MSI 00
    Capabilities: [c0] MSI: Enable- Count=1/16 Maskable+ 64bit+
    Capabilities: [d8] MSI-X: Enable- Count=16 Masked-
    Capabilities: [100] Advanced Error Reporting
    Capabilities: [180] Device Serial Number ff-ae-ce-25-94-de-80-ff

    Tried to make it work...but still not able to up thisinerface.
    any clue?
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Wednesday, July 02 2014, 08:33 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Tony Ellis wrote:
    mihai - If you are still working with the Gigabyte CELERON J1900 MINI-ITX Motherboard GA-J1900N-D3V I cannot understand why you provided the link to http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/network-adapters/gigabit-network-adapters/ethernet-ef-et.html.


    My mistake on this :(
    Yeah still with the J1900 is still not starting ...I'll change it for an AM1 or 1150 we'll see.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Wednesday, July 02 2014, 08:30 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    mihai - If you are still working with the Gigabyte CELERON J1900 MINI-ITX Motherboard GA-J1900N-D3V I cannot understand why you provided the link to http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/network-adapters/gigabit-network-adapters/ethernet-ef-et.html.

    That link is for PCI express (PCIe) NICs - the J1900 mother-board only has the old style PCI slot for full-size cards - so those NICs will not fit... nor will they fit into the 1 x Mini PCI Express x1 slot. Here is something that may fit in that board ( http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/network-adapters/gigabit-network-adapters/pro-1000-mt-dp.html) - but read on below first...

    That J1900 PCI slot is only clocked at 33 MHz and is 32-bit. For a Dual-Port PCI NIC like the one I linked above (if you can still get one that is - probably try second-hand on eBay), it should preferably be installed in a 64-bit PCI-X slot clocked at 66 MHz or more, which you don't have. Using a PCI 32-bit slot at 66 MH it will almost keep up with both ports at full speed. In your situation with 33 MHz it will only support both ports at roughly half speed, or 1 port close to full-speed, at most. If you consider getting one, check first that the overhang of the extra connector on the PCI-X card doesn't foul anything on your motherboard.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Wednesday, July 02 2014, 06:46 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Theokrat wrote:
    mihai,

    So are you planning to get two seperate WAN 1 Gbps connections from your ISP? If so I'd be curious how you intend to bond them.

    I know that some routers (such as TP-LINK) will "bond" multiple WAN links and you can get some increase in performance. In particular for browsing a webpage. But if you have a single point to point application that needs a lot of bandwidth I couldn't find any way to bond two WAN links to function as one larger link.

    If you are getting two WAN links from your ISP I assume they'll have two IP addresses. I suppose if they are routable addresses (my ISP doesn't provide that) then perhaps you could use a virtual address on your ClearOS box as the end point for TCP connections. And that might allow you to aggregate the bandwidth? Although I'm not sure there is any practical way to get a far end TCP/IP stack to route packets such that they flow across (potentially) two different physical paths?

    But if you're only getting one 1 Gbps link from your ISP then I don't understand how providing two physical WAN NICs is going to help?

    The Intel NIC you mentioned is a server card. I've had some trouble with Intel when trying to use their hardware. I was running a Microsoft Server OS on an Intel desktop motherboard and some OS functions didn't work (such as Secure Boot). Intel refused to provide any support since I wasn't using a Server motherboard.

    I suspect you may find similar issues if you use an Intel Server NIC on a desktop motherboard (from any manufacturer)? There may be some things that don't quite work as you expected?

    If you use Intel Server grade equipment and anything else, CPU, memory, motherboard, etc., is not Server grade and if you have a problem I suspect Intel may not be much help in troubleshooting?

    If you can get this all to work I'd be interested in hearing about your performance.


    I'll let you know how it goes...if it goes :laugh:
    & thx for the reply
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Tuesday, July 01 2014, 05:12 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Theokrat wrote:
    The Intel NIC you mentioned is a server card. I've had some trouble with Intel when trying to use their hardware. I was running a Microsoft Server OS on an Intel desktop motherboard and some OS functions didn't work (such as Secure Boot). Intel refused to provide any support since I wasn't using a Server motherboard.

    I suspect you may find similar issues if you use an Intel Server NIC on a desktop motherboard (from any manufacturer)? There may be some things that don't quite work as you expected?

    If you use Intel Server grade equipment and anything else, CPU, memory, motherboard, etc., is not Server grade and if you have a problem I suspect Intel may not be much help in troubleshooting?
    I have an i210 single port adaptor and it works fine. I use the latest kmod-igb driver with it. Another poster recently used a quad-port card that would not be recognised out of the box, but again, the latest kmod-igb driver fixed it. You can get the latest x64 driver from here. You'll have to do your own 32 bit driver or ask Tim nicely if you need one compiled.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Tuesday, July 01 2014, 03:46 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    mihai,

    So are you planning to get two seperate WAN 1 Gbps connections from your ISP? If so I'd be curious how you intend to bond them.

    I know that some routers (such as TP-LINK) will "bond" multiple WAN links and you can get some increase in performance. In particular for browsing a webpage. But if you have a single point to point application that needs a lot of bandwidth I couldn't find any way to bond two WAN links to function as one larger link.

    If you are getting two WAN links from your ISP I assume they'll have two IP addresses. I suppose if they are routable addresses (my ISP doesn't provide that) then perhaps you could use a virtual address on your ClearOS box as the end point for TCP connections. And that might allow you to aggregate the bandwidth? Although I'm not sure there is any practical way to get a far end TCP/IP stack to route packets such that they flow across (potentially) two different physical paths?

    But if you're only getting one 1 Gbps link from your ISP then I don't understand how providing two physical WAN NICs is going to help?

    The Intel NIC you mentioned is a server card. I've had some trouble with Intel when trying to use their hardware. I was running a Microsoft Server OS on an Intel desktop motherboard and some OS functions didn't work (such as Secure Boot). Intel refused to provide any support since I wasn't using a Server motherboard.

    I suspect you may find similar issues if you use an Intel Server NIC on a desktop motherboard (from any manufacturer)? There may be some things that don't quite work as you expected?

    If you use Intel Server grade equipment and anything else, CPU, memory, motherboard, etc., is not Server grade and if you have a problem I suspect Intel may not be much help in troubleshooting?

    If you can get this all to work I'd be interested in hearing about your performance.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Tuesday, July 01 2014, 09:07 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    I'll do some performance tests after I'll get all the pices together :)

    mihai wrote:
    Hey Theokrat,

    It was my intention to bound 2 x gigabit interfaces for WAN in order to get the maximum from the incoming speed :) on the media-convertor.

    we'll see if this is a good option or not.we'll be a good choice if i manage to get a dual gigabit on pci
    http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/network-adapters/gigabit-network-adapters/ethernet-ef-et.html
    to avoid bottleneck on LAN
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Tuesday, July 01 2014, 08:42 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Hey Theokrat,

    It was my intention to bound 2 x gigabit interfaces for WAN in order to get the maximum from the incoming speed :) on the media-convertor.

    we'll see if this is a good option or not.we'll be a good choice if i manage to get a dual gigabit on pci
    http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/network-adapters/gigabit-network-adapters/ethernet-ef-et.html
    to avoid bottleneck on LAN
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Tuesday, July 01 2014, 05:02 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Theokrat - it is mihai who wants to do the bonding, not me - seems like he wants to bond them to his external Internet connection which is much faster then usual folks have, if I understand correctly...
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Monday, June 30 2014, 05:13 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Tony,

    Sounds like you're describing using multiple LAN ports and perhaps bonding them together? What is the advantage in doing that? Looks to me like his (mihai) WAN connection has a maximum of 1 Gbps.

    Are you simply suggesting multiple LAN interfaces so that a single download doesn't consume the whole 1 Gbps? And devices on a different LAN might get better performance?

    Just curious.

    Thanks.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Monday, June 23 2014, 10:37 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Thx Tony,

    My plan is to use only one SSD :)
    I'll let you know how it works and i'll upload some performance graphs
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Monday, June 23 2014, 09:41 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Good Luck! Let us know how you get on...

    Just be aware that the J1900 SoC (and J1800) has only one SATA controller behind the two SATA 2 (not SATA 3) ports. Consequently if you use two disks they have to share a common internal resource and will not be as fast as a board using a conventional CPU and chipset with SATA 3..
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Saturday, June 21 2014, 07:37 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Thx for the update Tony.

    I decided to use bonding because from my isp i have to options :
    - FC media convertor --> Catalyst 2950 --> gigabit (utp) at my door
    - FC link at my door --> FC media convertor with exact 2 UTP ports on my side --> UTP to clearOS

    As per the mini PCI-E card, i have an Intel 2.4 a/b/g. I'll update on this matter if i manage to make it work :)
    @ the moment i'm working on Kibana + Logstash integration with ClearOs.

    Have a great weekend I'all :)
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Saturday, June 21 2014, 02:42 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Why do you need bonding in a home situation? Unless you are connecting those two ports directly to another machine with bonded ports, you will need a managed switch that supports bonding. Typical SOHO switches will simply be confused with two ports sharing the same MAC address and not work.

    The mini PCI-E expansion slot does supports wireless networking cards. What you need to do is find one that has hardware driver support compatible with whatever version of ClearOS you are installing and software to support the WiFi use type. You don't say whether you want STA mode (client), AP mode (Master) or IBSS mode (ad-hoc). hint - investigate hostapd for Master or AP mode. What type of security WEP, WPA, WPA2-PSK etc. As I have only used USB WiFi adaptors in client mode on ClearOS using WEP (to support a Palm that only has WEP / 802.11b) I really cannot help more than the above. My AP is a D-Link DIR300 configured in AP rather than router mode.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Friday, June 20 2014, 07:00 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    in the end, i have ordered the J1900 mobo (because was chip & for home use)
    as hw I have 2 GHz quad core CPU + 4gb ddr3 (and another 2 gb founded in the office...i guess is no need for 6), 2x Gigabit LANs on bord (bonding) + 1 Intel PRO GT gigabit + 60 GB SSD drive.
    The only question i still have : can I use the Mini-PCI express slot with a wifi card?
    Can it be configured this way?
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Monday, June 09 2014, 01:52 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    thx for helping.
    Gigabyte Intel Avoton C2750 seems quite nice :) all in all i need to be aware that it's a home fw and I can deal with decent performance.no need for extra super fast fireball :)
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Friday, June 06 2014, 10:09 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    OK - if you are using fibre - how about a more powerful board and your choice of CPU to sustain full Gigabit on 3 ports... some suggestions - check features carefully as I might not have these absolutely correct eg
    a BIOS upgrade on older baords to support newer CPUs

    these are all Minit-ITX with dual Gigabit onboard NICs and a slot for adding another NIC

    ZOTAC Z68-ITX WiFi [Z68ITX-A-E] - - Intel LGA1150 CPU to 2rd Gen - rather old now

    GIGABYTE Z77N - Intel LGA1150 CPU to 3rd Gen - I have one of these with an IvyBridge i3 for my Linux Workstation

    Gigabyte GA-H87N - Intel LGA1150 CPU to 4th Gen (Teaming is not supported)

    ASUS P9D-I - even supports Intel® Xeon® E3-1200 v3 :-)

    MSI Z87I - - Intel LGA1150 CPU to 4th Gen (Teaming is not supported)

    or embedded processor - lower performance

    COMMELL LV-679

    Gigabyte GA-C1037UN

    Gigabyte Intel Avoton C2750 - 4 LAN ports :-)
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Friday, June 06 2014, 08:37 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Tony Ellis wrote:
    I suggest you read these first...

    http://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=67563
    https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=73518.30
    http://forums.untangle.com/hardware/34054-gigabyte-ga-j1900n-d3v-issues.html

    Initially I was considering this board but decided to keep my money in my wallet :-)

    Agree with Theokrat re. performance. My firewall is an old Atom D510 and is adequate for a home firewall.
    Disk usage currently here is 9 Gig, so your 32G SSD is big enough. However, a bigger one has more memory dies in parallel and provides better performance. Nevertheless, a 32G SSD is better than a spinning disk, and quieter...

    Being pedantic:-

    mATX is usually short for micro-ATX a board up to 244 × 244 mm that usually has provision for up to 4 adaptor or expansion slots
    Mini-ITX is a board 170 × 170 mm that has space for only 1 adaptor or expansion slot.

    the Gigabyte GA-J1900N-D3V is Mini-ITX


    Thanks alot :)
    B)
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    mihai
    mihai
    Offline
    Friday, June 06 2014, 08:36 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    Theokrat wrote:
    mihai,

    A few years ago I ran ClearOS 5.2 as a VM on an AMD Sempron that only had a single core (around 2.5 Ghz). There were also a couple other VMs running on this same server. I had ClearOS setup as a Firewall and used Dansguardian on my home network. I've got 5 PCs and various other devices.

    There was a slight delay loading webpages when a large download was simultaneously occurring, but in general a single core Sempron was adequate using ClearOS 5.2 as a Firewall.

    I am curious why you're focused upon the motherboard? I would think that any of the major brands should work well enough for your purpose and any difference in motherboard performance is likely to be so slight that you'd never notice it for practical use?

    I don't know how many CPU cores ClearOS might be limited to using, nor how many cores any process running on ClearOS might be able to use, but if you have at least 2 CPU cores and a relatively fast (Ghz) CPU I think you'd be fine. Four CPU cores might be better? Although it probably depends upon how many processes you have running simultaneously on ClearOS and how well each process is designed for multi-threading?

    The amount of RAM you have seems more than adequate for a Firewall and using an SSD drive will certainly help for any I/O.

    It sounds like you're intending to bond two physical NICs to increase your LAN performance? Unless you're using ClearOS to store a large amount of data I'm not sure that will help performance at all? The bottleneck is likely to be your ISP. A single Gigabit interface is faster than what most people can get for download speed (at least in the US) from the ISP and upload speeds are much slower than download speeds. So if you were considering bonding two physical Ethernet interfaces I'm not sure you'll get any practical benefit out of that?

    For most people the HDD would be the bottleneck and it is rare to get that read/write speed fast enough for the network to become the bottleneck. Since you're using SSD from your PC to ClearOS the network could be a bottleneck, but since it sounds like your primary use for ClearOS is to reach the Internet then your ISP link is likely to be your biggest performance bottleneck.

    Thus even if one motherboard were slightly faster than another I'd be surpised if you could see any actual difference in performance.

    P.S. I personally typically use Asus, MSI, or Intel motherboards, but I know Gigabyte is a good brand. Gigabyte didn't have some other features I need in a motherboard. But my impression is that if you were building a gaming PC then Gigabyte is often one to consider. But for a ClearOS firewall I don't think your choice is motherboard is likely to make any noticable difference.


    Thanks for your detailed answer.
    I asked about the MOBO because i had issues with new UEFI mobo's on different customers (pfsense for example) when i was not able to boot any linux/unix.
    On the network side, My ISP brings the fiberlink in your house (http://www.rcs-rds.ro/internet-digi-net/fiberlink?t=internet-fix&pachet=digi_net_fiberlink_1000). I planned to use an intel GT maybe for wan and agregate both LAN's onbord for LAN in order to have similar performance. I have chose this matx mobo in order to have a small box for this.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Friday, June 06 2014, 02:18 AM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    I suggest you read these first...

    http://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=67563
    https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=73518.30
    http://forums.untangle.com/hardware/34054-gigabyte-ga-j1900n-d3v-issues.html

    Initially I was considering this board but decided to keep my money in my wallet :-)

    Agree with Theokrat re. performance. My firewall is an old Atom D510 and is adequate for a home firewall.
    Disk usage currently here is 9 Gig, so your 32G SSD is big enough. However, a bigger one has more memory dies in parallel and provides better performance. Nevertheless, a 32G SSD is better than a spinning disk, and quieter...

    Being pedantic:-

    mATX is usually short for micro-ATX a board up to 244 × 244 mm that usually has provision for up to 4 adaptor or expansion slots
    Mini-ITX is a board 170 × 170 mm that has space for only 1 adaptor or expansion slot.

    the Gigabyte GA-J1900N-D3V is Mini-ITX
    The reply is currently minimized Show
  • Accepted Answer

    Thursday, June 05 2014, 06:17 PM - #Permalink
    Resolved
    0 votes
    mihai,

    A few years ago I ran ClearOS 5.2 as a VM on an AMD Sempron that only had a single core (around 2.5 Ghz). There were also a couple other VMs running on this same server. I had ClearOS setup as a Firewall and used Dansguardian on my home network. I've got 5 PCs and various other devices.

    There was a slight delay loading webpages when a large download was simultaneously occurring, but in general a single core Sempron was adequate using ClearOS 5.2 as a Firewall.

    I am curious why you're focused upon the motherboard? I would think that any of the major brands should work well enough for your purpose and any difference in motherboard performance is likely to be so slight that you'd never notice it for practical use?

    I don't know how many CPU cores ClearOS might be limited to using, nor how many cores any process running on ClearOS might be able to use, but if you have at least 2 CPU cores and a relatively fast (Ghz) CPU I think you'd be fine. Four CPU cores might be better? Although it probably depends upon how many processes you have running simultaneously on ClearOS and how well each process is designed for multi-threading?

    The amount of RAM you have seems more than adequate for a Firewall and using an SSD drive will certainly help for any I/O.

    It sounds like you're intending to bond two physical NICs to increase your LAN performance? Unless you're using ClearOS to store a large amount of data I'm not sure that will help performance at all? The bottleneck is likely to be your ISP. A single Gigabit interface is faster than what most people can get for download speed (at least in the US) from the ISP and upload speeds are much slower than download speeds. So if you were considering bonding two physical Ethernet interfaces I'm not sure you'll get any practical benefit out of that?

    For most people the HDD would be the bottleneck and it is rare to get that read/write speed fast enough for the network to become the bottleneck. Since you're using SSD from your PC to ClearOS the network could be a bottleneck, but since it sounds like your primary use for ClearOS is to reach the Internet then your ISP link is likely to be your biggest performance bottleneck.

    Thus even if one motherboard were slightly faster than another I'd be surpised if you could see any actual difference in performance.

    P.S. I personally typically use Asus, MSI, or Intel motherboards, but I know Gigabyte is a good brand. Gigabyte didn't have some other features I need in a motherboard. But my impression is that if you were building a gaming PC then Gigabyte is often one to consider. But for a ClearOS firewall I don't think your choice is motherboard is likely to make any noticable difference.
    The reply is currently minimized Show
Your Reply