Hi all, currently I’m using CCR 1009 7G 1S 1S+ as my PPPoE Server with 4 Firewall Nat rules & 15 PCQ’s. Total B/W 600Mbps, PPPoE client 400. CPU uses 40-45% all the time. I want to upgrade to New CCR 2004. Is it a good decision? Can I assume cpu load would be around 20% Max with CCR 2004? Please suggest me. Thanks in advance.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No! 1009 has 9 cores and 2004 just 4 Cores!
Yes, and those 4 cores are a LOT more powerful than the ones in the CCR1009. The CCR2004 has close to 3 times the forwarding performance of the 1009.
That may not entirely map into a 3 times lowering of the CPU load of the OP, but the CCR2004 will no doubt be a step up.
30% improvement, not 300%
When not limited by interface speeds, of course.
Yes but he is talking as PPPoE Server and not just NAT and Forwarding traffic!
I’m talking based on my experience!
On my clients I have in Production both types of them, with 300 PPPoE Active sessions and about 500Mbps of traffic, there are +/-30% of processing in 1009 and around +/-40% for 2004!
OK, I stand corrected, if that’s your experience. But just saying ‘no, it only has 4 cores’ isn’t very helpful…
Thank you all for your comment, if I buy CCR 1016 12s 1S+ instead of CCR 2004 will it be a better idea or not?
Regards
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
the 4 arm cores do a really good job in this device. we ran some performance tests on it - routing ipv4 and ipv6, bridging, l2tp - it performed very well. i’d take this over the ccr1016-12s.
also remember that the kernel in pre 7.x routerOS is still 32bit and a native 64bit kernel will surely have positive effect on the performance.
fewer cores and comparable performance means a single core can do a lot more, so will perform better in CPU intensive tasks such as BGP.
the AL SoC also excels at crypto, it does support accelerated AES-GCM so can deliver secure connections with a bit less tunnel overhead.
https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:IP/IPsec#Hardware_acceleration
all in all: impressive results at a sweet price point.
on the con, it’s a relatively new device and the only one with this SoC and this routerOS arch so far, so expect some issues to pop up as they are discovered. but on the long run this seems to be the way to go.