Gbps of GBps? There is a substantial difference.
Recommended PCI-E Network cards/routers beyond 1gbit ports
- Thread starter AssaTM
- Start date
With 80-100GB game downloads common place and even patches hitting silly levels some times, good old Steam will happily saturate your bandwidth, other users be damned
.I think like me he might have read your original post as you wouldn't get 1 gigabit when you meant gigabyte, you might be limited by the low end CPUs in the NAS devices or your transfer has blown out of the cache of your SSD, I see a bursty near 2 Gigabyte on transfers but it drops to about 1.4Gigabyte quite quickly.
If you use Crystal disk mark on your NAS share you can see what its burst rate is, you will probably see ~1000 Megabyte unless your SSDs are particularly slow.
Of course Raid 5 doesn't offer the performance benefits of say raid 0 or 10 so might just be that.
Example of 10Gb Crystal diskmark on my NAS share, this is two slow 4TB Samsung QVO drives in raid 0 Normal SATA SSDs like this top out at 550MB.
If you wanted to confirm your network has the performance or if it is the drives you can do some iperf tests between NAS and a client to see what your network performance is without drives.
Last edited:
Soldato
If I use crystelmark I only get (usingSEQ1M 5X 8Gib) 627 MB read and 922 MB write.
My QNAP TS-932 only has a Alpine AL324 ARM® Cortex-A57 quad-core 1.7GHz processor.
So it could be that?
I use it only for steam games.
Would it be faster going to Rain 0
My QNAP TS-932 only has a Alpine AL324 ARM® Cortex-A57 quad-core 1.7GHz processor.
So it could be that?
I use it only for steam games.
Would it be faster going to Rain 0
With 80-100GB game downloads common place and even patches hitting silly levels some times, good old Steam will happily saturate your bandwidth, other users be damned
I think like me he might have read your original post as you wouldn't get 1 gigabit when you meant gigabyte, you might be limited by the low end CPUs in the NAS devices or your transfer has blown out of the cache of your SSD, I see a bursty near 2 Gigabyte on transfers but it drops to about 1.4Gigabyte quite quickly.
If you use Crystal disk mark on y
our NAS share you can see what its burst rate is, you will probably see ~1000 Megabyte unless your SSDs are particularly slow.
Of course Raid 5 doesn't offer the performance benefits of say raid 0 or 10 so might just be that.
Example of 10Gb Crystal diskmark on my NAS share, this is two slow 4TB Samsung QVO drives in raid 0 Normal SATA SSDs like this top out at 550MB.
If you wanted to confirm your network has the performance or if it is the drives you can do some iperf tests between NAS and a client to see what your network performance is without drives.
Strange I would have expected reverse for write to be slower with Raid5, Raid 0 offers zero protection, so not ideal for NAS usage case, I only did that as its a spare scratch area, you still have decent performance if it is just steam games you won't really get much performance uplift in use anyway, games are lots of little files generally so would be reliant on random performance a lot more.
There might be some ways to optimize but I am not familiar with QNAPs, is this just a share or have you set up iSCSI here.
Last edited:
Soldato
This is my iperf3
0.00-1.00 sec 432 MBytes 3.62 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 397 MBytes 3.33 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 398 MBytes 3.34 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 382 MBytes 3.21 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 403 MBytes 3.38 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 431 MBytes 3.62 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 465 MBytes 3.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 450 MBytes 3.78 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 444 MBytes 3.73 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 436 MBytes 3.66 Gbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 4.14 GBytes 3.56 Gbits/sec sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 4.14 GBytes 3.56 Gbits/sec receiver
I have no idea what it means
Update in reverse
Reverse mode, remote host 169.254.5.245 is sending
[ 4] local 169.254.11.122 port 51929 connected to 169.254.5.245 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 699 MBytes 5.86 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 700 MBytes 5.87 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 704 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 702 MBytes 5.89 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 701 MBytes 5.88 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 703 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 704 MBytes 5.91 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 703 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 703 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 711 MBytes 5.96 Gbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 6.87 GBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec 0 sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 6.86 GBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec receiver
I think it could be my PIC-E slot on my motherboard being slow.
Last edited:
This is my iperf3
0.00-1.00 sec 432 MBytes 3.62 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 397 MBytes 3.33 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 398 MBytes 3.34 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 382 MBytes 3.21 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 403 MBytes 3.38 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 431 MBytes 3.62 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 465 MBytes 3.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 450 MBytes 3.78 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 444 MBytes 3.73 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 436 MBytes 3.66 Gbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 4.14 GBytes 3.56 Gbits/sec sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 4.14 GBytes 3.56 Gbits/sec receiver
I have no idea what it means
Update in reverse
Reverse mode, remote host 169.254.5.245 is sending
[ 4] local 169.254.11.122 port 51929 connected to 169.254.5.245 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 699 MBytes 5.86 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 700 MBytes 5.87 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 704 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 702 MBytes 5.89 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 701 MBytes 5.88 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 703 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 704 MBytes 5.91 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 703 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 703 MBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 711 MBytes 5.96 Gbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 6.87 GBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec 0 sender
[ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 6.86 GBytes 5.90 Gbits/sec receiver
It means your network isn't running at 10 Gbps for whatever reason. Check your cables etc. This is my NAS to one of my ESXi hosts going over a couple of switches (Mikrotik and UniFi)
Code:
Connecting to host 172.16.72.11, port 5201
[ 5] local 172.16.72.5 port 38764 connected to 172.16.72.11 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd
[ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.12 GBytes 9.58 Gbits/sec 0 778 KBytes
[ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.89 Gbits/sec 0 778 KBytes
[ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.87 Gbits/sec 0 865 KBytes
[ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 909 KBytes
[ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.88 Gbits/sec 0 961 KBytes
[ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.85 Gbits/sec 0 961 KBytes
[ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.89 Gbits/sec 0 961 KBytes
[ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.88 Gbits/sec 0 961 KBytes
[ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.90 Gbits/sec 0 961 KBytes
[ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.89 Gbits/sec 0 961 KBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr
[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 11.5 GBytes 9.85 Gbits/sec 0 sender
[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 11.5 GBytes 9.84 Gbits/sec receiverSoldato
God knows what I have to check.
I have jumbo at 9014
flow control disabled.
receive buffers 4096
transmit buffers to 16384
This is on my intel 10GB nic
Going to look at my PCI slot. I think it's a 4x
I'd be checking your cables. But something isn't right if it's meant to be 10 Gbps.
How exactly is your IP addressing set up? These are APIPA ranges.
Please, please, please stop confusing 10 Gb and 10 GB.
Soldato
Straight from the nas to the pc.
No internet. I let windows do it.
I have tried 2 other cables.
The nas ip is 169.254.5.245
First of I would set them both up on a /30 network if it's just point to point. So 172.16.0.1 and 172.16.0.2 with a 255.255.255.252 netmask so rule out any APIPA weirdness.
PC:
172.16.0.1/30
NAS:
172.16.0.2/30
No gateway. Then try it. What actual NICs are you using in both the PC and NAS? Are they both showing 10000 Mbps full duplex?
What OS is it on the PC and are the drivers up to date?
This is my QNAP:
PC:
172.16.0.1/30
NAS:
172.16.0.2/30
No gateway. Then try it. What actual NICs are you using in both the PC and NAS? Are they both showing 10000 Mbps full duplex?
What OS is it on the PC and are the drivers up to date?
This is my QNAP:
@Avalon Aren't SolarFlare and Mellanox the go-to 10Gb NIC for 'our sort' of hobbyist these days? Decent driver support and cheap 2nd hand, certainly for SolarFlares. The HotLava cards look phenomenal as well, but definitely on the pricier side with no eBay bargains to be had.
It depends on the usage and how you want to scale, in this scenario my sit back and wait approach to NBASE-T WAN now has an end point in sight, it's almost exactly 6 months from now and the only option I like technically is an Intel x7xx. The bare minimum would be an i225-2T, QNAP make a 2T and 4T, but we're talking used Intel x7xx territory and that brings 10Gb to the party along with well proven stability/drivers, the i225 really doesn't.
For general 10Gb on SFP+ Mellanox CX2's are (or were) the go-to, later cards run cooler and are less power hungry, chuck a £100 Mikrotik SFP+ switch in or an 8 port TP-Link for twice the price and it's great for a few workstations/NAS/Servers. Staying copper is another £100 on-top of the TP-Link for the switch, but lets you pick up the x540 or Supermicro cards and use 5e, but prices now are still generally higher than a few years back
ESXI has made a lot of decent hardware EoL and Proxmox support is variable for similar reasons. Hopefully 2022 is the year we get better hardware options along with better connectivity.It's a great value NAS but perhaps the CPU isn't strong, that said reviews do suggest it should be able to do 1,9GB read and 890MB with 2 sfp in action so sounds like there my be some asynchronous behaviour but doing 10Gb in one direction should at least be possible perhaps try iperf with extra threads?
Your PCI-e lanes should be fine I have run an x540 PCIe x8 gen 2 card in my motherboards x4 slot and still managed 10Gb
Soldato
First of I would set them both up on a /30 network if it's just point to point. So 172.16.0.1 and 172.16.0.2 with a 255.255.255.252 netmask so rule out any APIPA weirdness.
PC:
172.16.0.1/30
NAS:
172.16.0.2/30
No gateway. Then try it. What actual NICs are you using in both the PC and NAS? Are they both showing 10000 Mbps full duplex?
What OS is it on the PC and are the drivers up to date?
This is my QNAP:
I changed the IP to what you put and it's still the same.
Both PC and Qnap say 10Gb connection.
My qnap has a Annapurna SFP+ 10G Ethernet Adapter
My PC nic is a 10Gb 2-port 560SFP+
I will put a 1Gb cable in the other port and see if that helps.
Last edited:
Soldato
It's a Alpine AL324 ARM® Cortex-A57 quad-core 1.7GHz processor.
I will use iperf3 and watch the cpu.
Thanks
edit Cpu went to 21%
Do you get a graph of all 4 CPU cores? 21% is close to 25% and I'm wondering if whatever you're doing is single threaded and taking a single core up to 100%. The speeds posted on the QNAP page for the NAS are a bit weird in that they are quoted as being achieved by two 10Gb connections.
Soldato
No graph sorry.
But the cpu went to 3% for a while then ended at 21%
Using iperf3 it's still 3-5 Gb band width
I've changed the pci slot. Now the Nic is running at 8X speed.
Thinking of getting another nic card for the PC to rule that out.
I agree, however i'm only providing my router with 95% of total speed that can be dispersed and then saturated amongst devices, so i'm losing 5% of bandwith on nothing other than the limitation of a port which seems absurd to me
Don
So the supplied router doesn't have a port fast enough for the incoming service? Surely that's an issue for the ISP to deal with?
I'm assuming AssaTM has the SH in modem mode and is using their own router, with gigabit ports, like many of us. As such, the trunk between the modem and the LAN will only ever be 1Gb, no matter how many devices are connected behind it. Using the SuperHub as a router will obviously allow multiple devices to saturate the extra bandwidth, but the SH are all crap except for basic surfing.
The SH5 will help with this somewhat, thanks to its 2.5Gb WAN and LAN port (singular). Even then you're left only allowing one device full access to the speeds, or passing it through to a multi-gig switch. With VMO2 promising to rip out the old coax network and replace everything with FTTP this decade, hopefully 10Gb equipment will be the norm by 2030 at least.