Buyer Beware: TP-Link Archer A5 speed claims misleading.

[CerealExperimentsLain]

10 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

That's the one drawback of me using an appliance, no upgrading the NICs.  But then I don't see needing more than Gigabit any time soon, though once I DO have Gigabit I will still have the 5G backup so its a shame to not do a test load balanced across both.

Will probably try either link aggregation or a USB 2.5Gbit adapter as I  THINK pfSense supports that as its driverless, I know it doesn't like my 5Gbit adapter though.

 

I'm not a fan of USB long term as it tends to have more latency and I believe more CPU overhead.

This is more future proofing.  Since the J4005 has more than enough power for what I'm doing, it'll last years and years and I'll just strap on a faster dualport NIC as needed.  Will be a while till I need to but at least it's an option.  Though with only an x2 PCIE 2.0 slot, that's 1000MB/s maximum, but that should go to a bit shy of 5gbps internet which probably ten years.

[Alex Atkin UK]

19 hours ago, CerealExperimentsLain said:

This is more future proofing.  Since the J4005 has more than enough power for what I'm doing, it'll last years and years and I'll just strap on a faster dualport NIC as needed.  Will be a while till I need to but at least it's an option.  Though with only an x2 PCIE 2.0 slot, that's 1000MB/s maximum, but that should go to a bit shy of 5gbps internet which probably ten years.

The J4005 is not going to handle 5Gbit though, my 7200U hits 50% load on a single core doing 500Mbit and once I get FTTP that will have PPPoE overhead on top.  I'm not entirely convinced it will handle Gigabit despite being the fastest appliance I could find at the time.

I do run several instances of OpenVPN on it too though, that pushes requirements up though in most cases its unlikely to go above 300Mbit on VPN due to the sheer horsepower needed at the OTHER end too.  Plus at least OpenVPN can run on a different core to PPP.

The biggest confusion with Gigabit for users is not understanding the huge requirements at the other end of the link.  Only really big CDN will deliver it and not necessarily during a big game launch for example.  The capacity at the other end vs our end is a much smaller ratio than it used to be, so always assume Gigabit is intended to be shared across multiple clients rather than actually hitting Gigabit for a single download.

[CerealExperimentsLain]

7 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

The J4005 is not going to handle 5Gbit though, my 7200U hits 50% load on a single core doing 500Mbit and once I get FTTP that will have PPPoE overhead on top.  I'm not entirely convinced it will handle Gigabit despite being the fastest appliance I could find at the time.

I do run several instances of OpenVPN on it too though, that pushes requirements up though in most cases its unlikely to go above 300Mbit on VPN due to the sheer horsepower needed at the OTHER end too.  Plus at least OpenVPN can run on a different core to PPP.

The biggest confusion with Gigabit for users is not understanding the huge requirements at the other end of the link.  Only really big CDN will deliver it and not necessarily during a big game launch for example.  The capacity at the other end vs our end is a much smaller ratio than it used to be, so always assume Gigabit is intended to be shared across multiple clients rather than actually hitting Gigabit for a single download.

My comment is less about absolute speed and more link speed.  For example, my ISP offers at max 1.5gbps, but the link for that is 2.5gbps, so you'll need 2.5gbps link speed to make that 'work' even if it's not about saturating 2.5gbps.  Same concern with a 5Gbps NIC but I imagine that with a 2.5gbps NIC, by the time faster than that is a concern, the hardware will have served for 10 years maybe and need to be retired anyway.

[Alex Atkin UK]

27 minutes ago, CerealExperimentsLain said:

My comment is less about absolute speed and more link speed.  For example, my ISP offers at max 1.5gbps, but the link for that is 2.5gbps, so you'll need 2.5gbps link speed to make that 'work' even if it's not about saturating 2.5gbps.  Same concern with a 5Gbps NIC but I imagine that with a 2.5gbps NIC, by the time faster than that is a concern, the hardware will have served for 10 years maybe and need to be retired anyway.

Would be fascinating to see pfSense running on an Apple M1 Mac Mini.

[helfisk]

On 9/11/2021 at 3:20 AM, Alex Atkin UK said:

The router market is a nightmare for people who ARE technically inclined, never mind those who aren't.

It is for everyone, IMO. I'm fairly technical, but never cared enough to learn much about networking (natting, submasking etc).

Primary issue is that the "extremely" low budget offerings, are muddying the waters, making it hard for someone who doesn't understand it, to justify purchasing a >$150 router paired with a >$100 switch instead of a $50 all-in-one that does nothing well

 

Personally, I run edgerouter with AP from ubiquity - but those are a nightmare to configure compared to a cheap plug-and-play mainstream router with built-in "gigabit" switch.
And I can damn well guarantee you that I won't be setting that stuff up for someone else - If I did, I'd be basically volunteering myself firmly as their personal IT guy, should any issues arise or changes needed

[Alex Atkin UK]

11 hours ago, helfisk said:

Personally, I run edgerouter with AP from ubiquity - but those are a nightmare to configure compared to a cheap plug-and-play mainstream router with built-in "gigabit" switch.

And I can damn well guarantee you that I won't be setting that stuff up for someone else - If I did, I'd be basically volunteering myself firmly as their personal IT guy, should any issues arise or changes needed

I've recently flashed my nanoHD with OpenWRT because frankly I despise Unifi Controller.  I get the principle of having one place to configure everything, but its hugely bloated if you DON'T have a whole network of Ubiquiti gear and their firmware updates can be so hit and miss I'd never do that.  Having a firmware that is long-term supported by the community is a whole lot better, it will likely be getting security updates years past the point where Ubiquiti stop supporting it.

 

When it comes to routers, honestly the waters got muddied the instant they advertised "Gigabit router" to merely identify they have Gigabit ethernet ports.  As now we have Gigabit broadband and 99% of Gigabit routers can't come close to handling it.

Then we have WiFi which further inflates the speed claims.   Even Ubiquiti are guilty of this, having Access Points that can achieve a 1.6Gbit link rate but only have Gigabit ports.  Theoretically the WiFi can go faster than the link back to the LAN which is utterly stupid.

[helfisk]

12 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

Access Points that can achieve a 1.6Gbit link rate but only have Gigabit ports.  Theoretically the WiFi can go faster than the link back to the LAN which is utterly stupid

Well, to some extend - but it also means 2 devices can communicate directly through the AP at higher speeds, so it can be an indicator of how multiple devices will perform 

[Alex Atkin UK]

On 9/15/2021 at 7:02 AM, helfisk said:

Well, to some extend - but it also means 2 devices can communicate directly through the AP at higher speeds, so it can be an indicator of how multiple devices will perform 

True, but I'd wager very few people do much WiFi to WiFi data transfer, its mostly WiFi to LAN.

Of course there could be an argument that it allows for more overheads so that with more clients you're hitting a higher speed, but I haven't really seen anyone testing that so can't be sure.