Sorry if this question has been answered before already, search didn't really help me in this case. We're about to install a new router at a customer's office next week. They have a 120 Mbps connection at the local cable company, and we're looking for recommendations on a specific routerboard model. Which one would handle this with about max. 10 users at that BW, a few wifi guests included sometimes? NATting, a few forwarding rules, separation of the wifi guest zone, a single public IP, nothing special. We don't need APs, they're already installed. Any recommendations are welcome.

Sorry if this question has been answered before already, search didn't really help me in this case. We're about to install a new router at a customer's office next week. They have a 120 Mbps connection at the local cable company, and we're looking for recommendations on a specific routerboard model. Which one would handle this with about max. 10 users at that BW, a few wifi guests included sometimes? NATting, a few forwarding rules, separation of the wifi guest zone, a single public IP, nothing special. We don't need APs, they're already installed. Any recommendations are welcome.

Given my experience I would be doubtfull of any Mikrotik product right now UNLESS the office has a cabinet and then you can go with a 1100 - which is LOUD, so it must go into a server room thingy.

Everything else seems not to have possibly power problems. I am currently maxing out a 450g with about 30mbit, although half goes towards PPTP encryption. Still, 120mbit is a LOT of stuff for an office (not rare these days, though).

There is a company selling Atom based routers with RouterOS installed on them - a lot more power than even a 1100x2 as it seems, and quiet as it is passively cooled. I think of replacing my 450G with one of those.

Otherwise you COULD try a 450G, just be prepared that - depending on exactly how much power you put into NAT, firewall rules etc. - it may not be good enough.

IMHO a weak point in Mikrotik... they are not hardware wise yet prepared to handle non-wisp higher end banwidths. 100+ mbit start being not so rare.

Hm, thank you for the insightful answer. So the theoretical/advertised routing performance of several hundred megabits of the most common MT routers won't suffice for such a connection? I'm rather surprised. We've measured a 4-5% CPU load on a 750G for a 10/10 Mbits connection saturated in one direction (nearly the same number of people and settings), so we estimated that if we use a connection with roughly 10 times of that BW, we'd be fine with either a 750G or a 450G without maxing out the CPU. VPN is not an issue, only a few adminstrative VPN connections to manage the servers in the LAN remotely. The 120 Mb isn't really made full use of, it was chosen because it was cheap in that area.

Hm, thank you for the insightful answer. So the theoretical/advertised routing performance of several hundred megabits of the most common MT routers won't suffice for such a connection? I'm rather surprised. We've measured a 4-5% CPU load on a 750G for a 10/10 Mbits connection saturated in one direction (nearly the same number of people and settings), so we estimated that if we use a connection with roughly 10 times of that BW, we'd be fine with either a 750G or a 450G without maxing out the CPU. VPN is not an issue, only a few adminstrative VPN connections to manage the servers in the LAN remotely. The 120 Mb isn't really made full use of, it was chosen because it was cheap in that area.

I t depends fully on what you do. THere are two problems with your statement.

* First, the 750G 5% cpu on a 10mbit would already be 60% on a 120mbit link.... fuly saturated in both directions you talk about 70%.
* Second, with this bandwidth you may see stuff like high traffic VPN etc. go in and THEN you are dead. If you can make without PPTP, simple firewall rules and no NAT then it is not a problem, possibly doable on a 750. If you need mroe complex firewalling, NAT and most brutally do something like high bandwidth VPN then the encryption says goodbye to your CPU.

So, it really depends how you use it. I am now getting 50% to 60% cpu on a 450G without overclocking (will change that next week) on two 6mbit / 0.5mbit links.... with full 10mbit in use downstream ,via two PPTP tunnels, with nth mangling on both sides. CPU usage is roughly one third on the firewall rules (complex queues to prioritize traffic in this situation, so voip, remote desktop are still usable) and two third going to encryption. I am upgrading the link soon (24 mbit down on 4 links, 12mbit up on 2 links - the tw0 0.5 mbit up will not be used for uplink anymore then, or I route infrastructure stuff over them (i.e dns, winbox etc.) and then I know I get a problem without overclocking The 1100AH on the other end (not overclocked at the moment) manages easily...

Your scenario may be doable on a 750. If you alerady have one try it out. A lot really depends on your needs and actual rules in use.

Alright, thanks. I have a 450G at hand to toy with so I'll do some testing. I'm hoping it might still be enough, altho the device should be chosen for the theoretical maximum load, with all possible circumstances taken into consideration.

Alright, thanks. I have a 450G at hand to toy with so I'll do some testing. I'm hoping it might still be enough, altho the device should be chosen for the theoretical maximum load, with all possible circumstances taken into consideration.

This is why I would recomment it to be "taxed". it is definitely good enough as a ROUTER for those speeds, if you consider it a CPE for a WISP. But house devices do / can do a LOT more.... I was very happy until I started taxing PPTP, but then... it makes sense. The encryption DOES take some time.

120mbit is a lot of bandwidth for an internet connection. Starts getting more common, but it still is on the higher end. I am looking forward to see the performance of the next generation Mikrotik equipment (their top line hom item coming this year). if this is planned as fiber endpoint it better has a LOT more bang. Heck, there are parts of the world people would laugh at you for a mikrotik... because you get internet via 1gbit connection as part of your appartement rent No joke A poor 450 would probably melt. Not literally.

Heck, there are parts of the world people would laugh at you for a mikrotik... because you get internet via 1gbit connection as part of your appartement rent No joke A poor 450 would probably melt. Not literally.

Well, Mikrotik routers are practically unbeatable in price/performance ratio. But I wonder what equipment one should consider when given this high bantwidth at home, but doesn't want to spend several thousand $$ on a gigabit router...

On another note, if connection speeds in the several tens of megabits or even 100+ megabits become common, Mikrotik will need to stop and think if they want to support that market segment, or keep focusing on cheap equipment to be sold in developing countries or in areas where fast internet connections are not so prevalent. Or they may start supporting x86 hardware as a standard (or maybe as a primary) offering besides their neat little boxes. Yes, they support it now and probably will on the long term, but it only seems like some side business they need to deal with to strenghten the appeal of their portfolio.

Heck, there are parts of the world people would laugh at you for a mikrotik... because you get internet via 1gbit connection as part of your appartement rent No joke A poor 450 would probably melt. Not literally.

Well, Mikrotik routers are practically unbeatable in price/performance ratio. But I wonder what equipment one should consider when given this high bantwidth at home, but doesn't want to spend several thousand $$ on a gigabit router...

On another note, if connection speeds in the several tens of megabits or even 100+ megabits become common, Mikrotik will need to stop and think if they want to support that market segment, or keep focusing on cheap equipment to be sold in developing countries or in areas where fast internet connections are not so prevalent. Or they may start supporting x86 hardware as a standard (or maybe as a primary) offering besides their neat little boxes. Yes, they support it now and probably will on the long term, but it only seems like some side business they need to deal with to strenghten the appeal of their portfolio.

it is actually easier for them. All they need to do is take the 1100 line, repackage it into non rack form factor and excahgne the turbine noise level fans with decent slow ones. Deal done. A 1100 / 1100 AH / 1100x2 can deal with 100+mbit, but it is TOO BIG (rack form factor) and loud. Not "loud like a server" but "i hear the wining fans in the middle of a hosting server room with 40 racks".

The main problem with this "higher end" stuff is simply that they are not targeting an environment where noise is relevant B esides that the 1100 is nice.

THAT SAID - there is a company making small nice atom based boards. Chinese. VERY nice little cases. We talk of 6 gigabit ports. Cost with level 4 RouterOS is 600 USD.

http://www.roc-noc.com/mikrotik/routerb ... -D510.html

Something like this "officially" would be pretty much a nice higher end item. You can add a wireless card (mPCI-E is there) as well as a 2.5" hard disc if you think that is needed. I would sort of bet it also slams the 1100 line straight onto the wall, performance wise. It is my "backup" in case the 450G crumbles to dust when I put the next upgrade on my internet connection.

Yeah, I've already checked out the r0c-n0c routers, but I think that compared to a ~$130 RB450G, a $600 appliance is a little more than an "upgrade" They don't really seem to be in the same league...

Yeah, I've already checked out the r0c-n0c routers, but I think that compared to a ~$130 RB450G, a $600 appliance is a little more than an "upgrade" They don't really seem to be in the same league...

The same I can say for a 120mbit home link and even a more traditionlal ADSL line of what - 20mbit top? a factor of 6 is not "the same league". This is pretty much waht it runs down. 120mbit is not "internet speed" it is a slower LAN (yes, 100mbit lans are stil laround). OBVIOUSLY this needs a router out of another league to handle it if you get a lot more hard on your requirements.

The 50G is a decent hom router for pretty much even ADSL. It may do it. But the moment you need compelx functions on that links.... you need quite some processing power Heck, my internet backbone in my hosting cluster has only a 100mbit link.

Yeah, I have to agree for the most part, but this customer gets his 120 Mb line for not significantly more than their old 16 Mb DSL line... I can hardly sell them a router costing around $600... I guess at the end they'll have tu put up with the simple CPE the ISP installed ATM. We'll see.