Don’t assume that this is upper bound, but I get 800 MB/s on my Myricom card
and 600MB/s on my chelsio card, both on standard ethernet frame size, so
dominantly 1500 byte packets. I’m using these for data transfer, so I’m
measuring in MB not Mb. The switch you’re connecting to also matters.
ED.
> On 2016, Feb 19, at 11:54 AM, Giles Davis <gi...@multiplay.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On 19/02/2016 16:19, ED Fochler wrote:
>> My experience has been that intel nics are bad in the 10G space, especially
>> under BSD. I’ve had good luck with Myricom and Chelsio on BSD, though I
>> haven’t used either specifically on PFSense.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Also, AFAIK, chelsio NICs are better in the 10G space.
>>>
>>> ESF uses them in some of their appliances (see the shop).
>>> Netflix uses them, too, in their FreeBSD cache-boxes.
>>>
>>> They aren’t really that much more expensive than Intel NICs.
>>>
>>> I have no experience using them myself.
>>>
>>>
>
> Interesting - thanks all. Netmap looks very interesting - i'll keep an
> eye on the development work with that one.
>
> Hadn't come across either Myricom or Chelsio NICs before - but am
> looking now. I'd heard from others in the past that Solarflare NICs also
> performed well, although they're a significantly higher price point than
> the Intels!
>
> Don't suppose anyone has any real-world performance indicators, even
> just anecdotal ones, on reasonable throughput levels that can be
> expected with any of these alternative NICs? I agree, the Intel cards
> don't seem to do massively well under BSD.
>
> Thanks again for the replies all - some good suggestions to go and look
> at there. :)
>
> Cheers,
> Giles.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
