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 <[email protected]> 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
