Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
toh:recommended_routers [2023/06/20 11:43] – [Flow Offload (and OEM Throughput)] note that software flow offloading works with SQM tatamitoh:recommended_routers [2023/11/09 22:17] – move wsm20 to the correct place knarrff
Line 140: Line 140:
 This specialized hardware often requires closed-source drivers and/or proprietary information from the SoC manufacturer to utilize robustly. As a result, //hardware// offload to the switch, or to things like NSS cores in the IPQ806x devices, is generally not supported with open-source firmware. This is often the reason why //any// third-party firmware doesn't match the LAN <=> WAN, NAT-only throughput of OEM firmware. This specialized hardware often requires closed-source drivers and/or proprietary information from the SoC manufacturer to utilize robustly. As a result, //hardware// offload to the switch, or to things like NSS cores in the IPQ806x devices, is generally not supported with open-source firmware. This is often the reason why //any// third-party firmware doesn't match the LAN <=> WAN, NAT-only throughput of OEM firmware.
  
-However, if you use SQM (bandwidth shaping, "bufferbloat" mitigation) or similar functionality, you generally can't use hardware flow offloading, but software flow offloading [[https://forum.openwrt.org/t/software-flow-offloading-implications/90957|seems to work]]. Functions like SQM require each packet to be handled by the the CPU, so the various software or hardware "shortcuts" can't be used. Even with high-bandwidth connections, SQM can greatly reduce "lag", improve responsiveness of Internet browsing, and make VOIP and video calls smoother. OEM firmware generally doesn't support SQM, so no direct comparison is possible. +However, if you use SQM (bandwidth shaping, "bufferbloat" mitigation) or similar functionality, you generally can't use hardware flow offloading, but software flow offloading [[https://forum.openwrt.org/t/software-flow-offloading-implications/90957|seems to work]]. Functions like SQM require each packet to be handled by the the CPU, so the various hardware "shortcuts" can't be used. Even with high-bandwidth connections, SQM can greatly reduce "lag", improve responsiveness of Internet browsing, and make VOIP and video calls smoother. OEM firmware generally doesn't support SQM, so no direct comparison is possible. 
  
 Flow offload generally does not improve VPN performance significantly as the limitations there come primarily from the CPU and its ability to encrypt/decrypt the packets and move them between interfaces. Flow offload generally does not improve VPN performance significantly as the limitations there come primarily from the CPU and its ability to encrypt/decrypt the packets and move them between interfaces.
Line 226: Line 226:
  
 A quite well supported platform, it has 2 cores and 2 threads (somewhat similar to Hyperthreading on x86) along with a more powerful core (MIPS 1004Kc) which makes this SoC about about twice as fast as the AR934X-series (depending on application). These are typically shipped with 11ac hardware and the driver (mt76) works fairly well, it's still under development but is more open than the ath10k driver making it a more interesting choice for the Open Source community. Generic throughput numbers are about 400-500mbit/s (LAN-WAN without PPPoE) and ~45mbyte/s using the USB3 interface. It's also worth noting that products using this SoC are usually cheaper or priced about the same as the Atheros 11n and 11ac counterparts but might be hard to come by. \\ A quite well supported platform, it has 2 cores and 2 threads (somewhat similar to Hyperthreading on x86) along with a more powerful core (MIPS 1004Kc) which makes this SoC about about twice as fast as the AR934X-series (depending on application). These are typically shipped with 11ac hardware and the driver (mt76) works fairly well, it's still under development but is more open than the ath10k driver making it a more interesting choice for the Open Source community. Generic throughput numbers are about 400-500mbit/s (LAN-WAN without PPPoE) and ~45mbyte/s using the USB3 interface. It's also worth noting that products using this SoC are usually cheaper or priced about the same as the Atheros 11n and 11ac counterparts but might be hard to come by. \\
- 
-:!: As of writing there's **no working** VLAN support in the switch for this SoC. \\ 
-:!: Currently, it may have stability issues if you are using more than one wireless network (wifi-iface) for each radio (wifi-device) 
  
 ---- datatable ---- ---- datatable ----
-cols    : Brand, Model, Versions, Platform, CPU MHz, Flash MB_mbflashs, RAM MB_mbram, WLAN Hardware, WLAN 2.4Ghz, WLAN 5.0Ghz, Ethernet Gbit ports_, Modem, USB ports_, Device Page_page +cols    : Brand, Model, Versions, Supported Current Rel, CPU, CPU MHz, Flash MB_mbflashs, RAM MB_mbram, WLAN Hardware, WLAN 2.4Ghz, WLAN 5.0Ghz, Ethernet Gbit ports_, Modem, USB ports_, Device Page_page 
-header  : Brand, Model, Version,SoC,CPU MHz,Flash MB,RAM MB,WLAN Hardware,WLAN2.4,WLAN5.0,Gbit ports,Modem,USB, Device Page+header  : Brand, Model, Version, Current Release, SoC,CPU MHz,Flash MB,RAM MB,WLAN Hardware,WLAN2.4,WLAN5.0,Gbit ports,Modem,USB, Device Page
 align   : c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c align   : c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c
 filter  : Model=DIR-860L filter  : Model=DIR-860L
 ---- ----
 ---- datatable ---- ---- datatable ----
-cols    : Brand, Model, Versions, Platform, CPU MHz, Flash MB_mbflashs, RAM MB_mbram, WLAN Hardware, WLAN 2.4Ghz, WLAN 5.0Ghz, Ethernet Gbit ports_, Modem, USB ports_, Device Page_page +cols    : Brand, Model, Versions, Supported Current Rel, CPU, CPU MHz, Flash MB_mbflashs, RAM MB_mbram, WLAN Hardware, WLAN 2.4Ghz, WLAN 5.0Ghz, Ethernet Gbit ports_, Modem, USB ports_, Device Page_page 
-header  : Brand, Model, Version,SoC,CPU MHz,Flash MB,RAM MB,WLAN Hardware,WLAN2.4,WLAN5.0,Gbit ports,Modem,USB, Device Page+header  : Brand, Model, Version, Current Release, SoC,CPU MHz,Flash MB,RAM MB,WLAN Hardware,WLAN2.4,WLAN5.0,Gbit ports,Modem,USB, Device Page
 align   : c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c align   : c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c
-filter  : Model=WF-2881+filter  : Model=WF2881 
 +---- 
 +---- datatable ---- 
 +cols    : Brand, Model, Versions, Supported Current Rel, CPU, CPU MHz, Flash MB_mbflashs, RAM MB_mbram, WLAN Hardware, WLAN 2.4Ghz, WLAN 5.0Ghz, Ethernet 1Gbit ports_, Modem, USB ports_, Device Page_page 
 +headers : Brand, Model, Version, Current Release, SoC,CPU MHz,Flash MB,RAM MB,WLAN Hardware,WLAN2.4,WLAN5.0,Gbit ports,Modem,USB 
 +align   : c,c,c,c,c,c,
 +filter  : Brand=ZyXEL 
 +filter  : Model=WSM20
 ---- ----
  
Line 261: Line 265:
 Below are some models reported stable. Below are some models reported stable.
 ---- datatable ---- ---- datatable ----
-cols    : Brand, Model, Versions, Platform, CPU MHz, Flash MB_mbflashs, RAM MB_mbram, WLAN Hardware, WLAN 2.4Ghz, WLAN 5.0Ghz, Ethernet Gbit ports_, Modem, USB ports_, Device Page_page +cols    : Brand, Model, Versions, Supported Current Rel, CPU, CPU MHz, Flash MB_mbflashs, RAM MB_mbram, WLAN Hardware, WLAN 2.4Ghz, WLAN 5.0Ghz, Ethernet 1Gbit ports_, Modem, USB ports_, Device Page_page 
-header  : Brand, Model, Version,SoC,CPU MHz,Flash MB,RAM MB,WLAN Hardware,WLAN2.4,WLAN5.0,Gbit ports,Modem,USB, Device Page+header  : Brand, Model, Version,Current Release, SoC,CPU MHz,Flash MB,RAM MB,WLAN Hardware,WLAN2.4,WLAN5.0,Gbit ports,Modem,USB
 align   : c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c align   : c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c,c
 filter  : Brand=Lenovo filter  : Brand=Lenovo
 filter  : Model*~Y1 filter  : Model*~Y1
 ---- ----
 +
 **Needs confirmation:** Buffalo WHR-1166D seems to be suitable? **Needs confirmation:** Buffalo WHR-1166D seems to be suitable?
  
  • Last modified: 2024/02/11 21:58
  • by 127.0.0.1