Openwrt Router Firmware

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
Bro, I assume you are on OpenWRT 22.03? Can trouble you to test your 2.4GHz upload/download using speedtest?

My 2.4GHz results were dismal, not sure if the new MT76 drivers will make the 2.4GHz performance better?
  • Linksys-EA7500v2-OpenWRTv21 - 2.4Ghz 38+/56+ | 5Ghz 427+/575+

Your 2.4GHz performance is normal. In Singapore 2.4GHz is really conjested in most cases so you can not expect high 2.4GHz performance. It is not the fault of the OpenWRT wireless driver.
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
OpenWRT for EA7500v2

Previously 21.02.1

HostnameOpenWrt
ModelLinksys EA7500 v2
ArchitectureMediaTek MT7621 ver:1 eco:3
Firmware VersionOpenWrt 21.02.1 r16325-88151b8303 / LuCI openwrt-21.02 branch git-21.295.67054-13df80d
Kernel Version5.4.154
Local Time2022-09-10 03:49:50

3m away wireless speedtest results using Acer Laptop with Intel AX201 wiireless adapger.
5GHz

c590343d-272d-456c-9991-390fad019038.png


2.4GHz speed is not that consistent.
90.61 Down / 55.61 Up
28.96 Down / 61.62 Up
59.21 Down / 60.49 Up

5f08ce28-efc9-4137-96e7-9ef7b2cd6412.png
 
Last edited:

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
After the upgrade to 22.03, the EA7500v2 has similar performances as 21.02.

HostnameOpenWrt
ModelLinksys EA7500 v2
ArchitectureMediaTek MT7621 ver:1 eco:3
Target Platformramips/mt7621
Firmware VersionOpenWrt 22.03.0 r19685-512e76967f / LuCI openwrt-22.03 branch git-22.245.77528-487e58a
Kernel Version5.10.138

5GHz performance
65e53fe2-9d02-4cef-b6b8-9a50da0048c6.png


2.4GHz wireless performance is not that consistent.

66.46Mbps Down / 32.49 Mbps Up
77.85 Mbps Down / 50.48 Mbps Up
92.21 Mbps Down / 73.02 Mbps Up

660ebddf-1b5f-4aac-9b28-7d6064dba290.png
 
Last edited:

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
If you want to use adblock on the router, the adblock package is simple to use.
https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/services/ad-blocking
Testing: 80% by just adding Energized List Basic Selection and StevenBlack List Standard Selection. This will not tax the lower end CPU like the MT7621 dual core 880MHz MIPS CPU used in EA7500 v2 and EA8100 v1.
https://d3ward.github.io/toolz/adblock.html
More avdanced users can try Adguard Home or using an external Pi-hole installation. If you are using an mini PC or maybe some powerful router, then you can also explore Docker (where you can install Pi-hole and many other things).
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
OpenWRT 22.03 release note
https://openwrt.org/releases/22.03/notes-22.03.0> Firewall4 is used by default, superseding the iptables-based firewall3 implementation in the OpenWrt default images. Firewall4 uses nftables instead of iptables to configure the Linux netfilter ruleset.

> OpenWrt 22.03 supports more than 15 devices capable of Wifi 6 (IEEE 802.11ax) using the MediaTek MT7915 wifi chip.
https://openwrt.org/toh/views/toh_available_16128_ax-wifi
Not much changes in OpenWRT 22.03 Luci Web Gui.
 
Last edited:

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
OpenWRT 21.02 on my 8.5 year old Linksys WRT1900 AC V1.

HostnameOpenWrt
ModelLinksys WRT1900AC v1
ArchitectureARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v7l)
Firmware VersionOpenWrt 21.02.1 r16325-88151b8303 / LuCI openwrt-21.02 branch git-21.295.67054-13df80d
Kernel Version5.4.154

5GHz wireless performance

3a7d3b98-d4fd-4624-a86b-c2b62f4c1bc3.png


2.4GHz wireless performance is known to be not good for this router (even with stock firmware)

09cceb47-c8e4-4420-b68b-6e39c6059fd4.png
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
OpenWRT 22.03 on the old Linksys WRT1900AC

HostnameOpenWrt
ModelLinksys WRT1900AC v1
ArchitectureARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v7l)
Target Platformmvebu/cortexa9
Firmware VersionOpenWrt 22.03.0 r19685-512e76967f / LuCI openwrt-22.03 branch git-22.245.77528-487e58a
Kernel Version5.10.138

Interestingly I got lower 5GHz wireless perfromance (especially download).

f99efd67-e072-47ae-9d2a-99c207431c38.png


2.4GHz wireless performnce

85151797-e6e8-4c12-a9e6-b2e38414ac1b.png
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
OpenWRT 22.03 on the old Linksys WRT1900AC

HostnameOpenWrt
ModelLinksys WRT1900AC v1
ArchitectureARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v7l)
Target Platformmvebu/cortexa9
Firmware VersionOpenWrt 22.03.0 r19685-512e76967f / LuCI openwrt-22.03 branch git-22.245.77528-487e58a
Kernel Version5.10.138

Interestingly I got lower 5GHz wireless perfromance (especially download).

f99efd67-e072-47ae-9d2a-99c207431c38.png

I actually tested a few times to get this conclusion.

Just want to double confirm, I reboot the router to the old 21.02 firmware (special feature of some Linksys routers, which has two boot partitions). And then indeed I got better 5GHz wireless performance.

0d420541-f27c-4ab8-bcbb-18bce9ea05c8.png
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
> Step 5: setting up more advanced things like VPN and remore access
> Next step I will try to set up wireguard and OpenVPN. Not so sure if I want to try ZeroTier or TailScale or not.

SInce I have already an ZeroTier account so I just tried Zerotier.

Setup is quite simeple -- but you need to use command line.
https://www.zerotier.com/download/https://github.com/mwarning/zerotier-openwrt/wiki
Speedtest using iperf3 across two seperate home network (with different public IPv4 address): ZeroTier will make the two nodes look like inside single local internal network.
Server: openwrt Zerotier node
Client: Acer Windows 11 laptop with wireless connection to the Asus RT-AX82 router, Zerotier node

Code:
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 10.147.17.195
Connecting to host 10.147.17.195, port 5201
[  5] local 10.147.17.133 port 53217 connected to 10.147.17.195 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  32.1 MBytes   269 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  34.1 MBytes   286 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  34.4 MBytes   289 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  33.6 MBytes   283 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  34.0 MBytes   285 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  37.1 MBytes   311 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  36.5 MBytes   306 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  34.9 MBytes   293 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  39.8 MBytes   333 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  40.4 MBytes   339 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   357 MBytes   299 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   356 MBytes   299 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 10.147.17.195 -R
Connecting to host 10.147.17.195, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host 10.147.17.195 is sending
[  5] local 10.147.17.133 port 53237 connected to 10.147.17.195 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  40.1 MBytes   336 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  45.3 MBytes   380 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  47.3 MBytes   397 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.01   sec  44.4 MBytes   370 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.01-5.00   sec  49.7 MBytes   419 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  45.2 MBytes   379 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  45.4 MBytes   381 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  44.5 MBytes   373 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  45.2 MBytes   379 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  45.2 MBytes   379 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   455 MBytes   382 Mbits/sec  238             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   452 MBytes   379 Mbits/sec                  receiver

Just a comparion without going through Zerotier (port forward 5201 on the OpenWRT router).
Code:
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 219.75.xx.xxx (public IPv4 address)
Connecting to host 219.75.xx.xxx, port 5201
[  5] local 192.168.50.175 port 53934 connected to 219.75.xx.xxx port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  49.9 MBytes   418 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  74.0 MBytes   621 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  86.8 MBytes   728 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   103 MBytes   862 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  89.4 MBytes   749 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  89.9 MBytes   756 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  92.2 MBytes   772 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  88.2 MBytes   741 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  90.1 MBytes   757 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  95.1 MBytes   798 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   858 MBytes   720 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   858 MBytes   718 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 219.75.xx.xxx -R
Connecting to host 219.75.xx.xxx, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host 219.75.xx.xxx is sending
[  5] local 192.168.50.175 port 53955 connected to 219.75.xx.xxx port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  65.9 MBytes   552 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   107 MBytes   893 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  96.0 MBytes   806 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   109 MBytes   912 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  99.1 MBytes   831 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  77.1 MBytes   647 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  84.9 MBytes   712 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   104 MBytes   877 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   103 MBytes   859 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  98.9 MBytes   831 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   947 MBytes   794 Mbits/sec   78             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   944 MBytes   792 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
 
Last edited:

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
Setting up TailScale is also quite esay, install the Tailscale package and then run `tailscale up` to get the authorization link and then authroized the OpenWRT router as one node.

Same test as the ZeroTier test.
Server: openwrt Tailscale node
Client: Acer laptop with wireless connection to the Asus RT-AX82 router, Tailscale node

Code:
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 100.100.218.35
Connecting to host 100.100.218.35, port 5201
[  5] local 100.112.66.25 port 57557 connected to 100.100.218.35 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  21.2 MBytes   178 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  22.6 MBytes   190 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.01   sec  20.5 MBytes   171 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.01-4.00   sec  22.2 MBytes   187 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  20.9 MBytes   175 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  20.2 MBytes   170 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  21.4 MBytes   179 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.01   sec  21.8 MBytes   182 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.01-9.00   sec  23.0 MBytes   194 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  22.8 MBytes   190 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   217 MBytes   182 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   216 MBytes   181 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 100.100.218.35 -R
Connecting to host 100.100.218.35, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host 100.100.218.35 is sending
[  5] local 100.112.66.25 port 57584 connected to 100.100.218.35 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  21.7 MBytes   182 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  18.5 MBytes   155 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  21.3 MBytes   178 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  25.9 MBytes   217 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  19.4 MBytes   163 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  22.2 MBytes   186 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  19.7 MBytes   165 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  22.2 MBytes   186 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  21.7 MBytes   182 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  14.4 MBytes   121 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   208 MBytes   174 Mbits/sec  435             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   207 MBytes   174 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
Plain wireguard seems to be still faster.

Same test as the ZeroTier test.
iperf3 Server: openwrt with wireguard
Client: Acer laptop with wireless connection to the Asus RT-AX82 router, as wireguard peer

Code:
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 10.0.5.1
Connecting to host 10.0.5.1, port 5201
[  5] local 10.0.5.5 port 51606 connected to 10.0.5.1 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.01   sec  54.0 MBytes   450 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.01-2.00   sec  66.5 MBytes   560 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  69.9 MBytes   586 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  75.4 MBytes   633 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  65.9 MBytes   553 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  74.6 MBytes   625 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  80.1 MBytes   673 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  88.2 MBytes   740 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  82.6 MBytes   693 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  76.8 MBytes   643 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   734 MBytes   616 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   734 MBytes   615 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.

PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 10.0.5.1 -R
Connecting to host 10.0.5.1, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host 10.0.5.1 is sending
[  5] local 10.0.5.5 port 53156 connected to 10.0.5.1 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  30.8 MBytes   258 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  44.5 MBytes   373 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  48.1 MBytes   404 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  65.8 MBytes   552 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  74.1 MBytes   622 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  86.0 MBytes   721 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  81.1 MBytes   679 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  93.4 MBytes   783 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  88.3 MBytes   741 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  97.6 MBytes   819 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   712 MBytes   597 Mbits/sec   12             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   710 MBytes   595 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
Plain wireguard seems to be still faster.

Same test as the ZeroTier test.
iperf3 Server: openwrt with wireguard
Client: Acer laptop with wireless connection to the Asus RT-AX82 router, as wireguard peer

Another type of test using OOkla SpeedTest, this time I am using the laptop with wired connection to the Asus router.

Without wireguard VPN.
(client -- Asus RT-AX82U -- Singtel network -- Singtel SpeedTest server)
776e5069-2c03-48b5-a5a8-6c62d93904df.png


With wireguard VPN
(client -- Asus RT-AX82U -- Singtel network -- wireguard VPN peer (OpenWRT router) -- Singtel SpeedTest server)

01aa325d-bf9f-44f4-83f6-d1bf37fbd012.png



If using iperf3, without using Wireguard VPN, it can reach line speed (900Mbps+).

With the wireguard VPN, the speed drops but still much faster than the above OOkla SpeedTest. I am not so sure about the reason.

iperf3 Server: openwrt with wireguard
Client: Acer laptop with gigabit Ethernet connection to the Asus RT-AX82 router, as wireguard peer

Code:
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 10.0.5.1
Connecting to host 10.0.5.1, port 5201
[  5] local 10.0.5.3 port 55702 connected to 10.0.5.1 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  59.5 MBytes   499 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.01   sec  86.2 MBytes   715 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.01-3.00   sec  85.9 MBytes   728 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  85.9 MBytes   720 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  87.4 MBytes   732 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  74.2 MBytes   623 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  83.8 MBytes   703 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  91.2 MBytes   766 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  87.4 MBytes   733 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  87.8 MBytes   734 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   829 MBytes   695 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   828 MBytes   694 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
PS C:\work\speedtest\iperf3.10.1_64bit> .\iperf3 -c 10.0.5.1 -R
Connecting to host 10.0.5.1, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host 10.0.5.1 is sending
[  5] local 10.0.5.3 port 55720 connected to 10.0.5.1 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  78.8 MBytes   660 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  99.6 MBytes   837 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   101 MBytes   850 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  99.6 MBytes   836 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   104 MBytes   870 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec   101 MBytes   850 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  95.4 MBytes   801 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  92.5 MBytes   775 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  78.8 MBytes   661 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  99.5 MBytes   833 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec   954 MBytes   799 Mbits/sec   19             sender
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   951 MBytes   797 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.
 
Last edited:

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
NanoPi R5S: Quad Core Cortex A55 RK3568 CPU, 2GB or 4GB RAM, 8GB eMMC, with two 2.5Gbe ports and 1 Gbe Port, with HDMI, two USB 3.0 ports, M2 NVME slot.
Product info: https://www.friendlyelec.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=287

Product intro and OpenWRT initial setup


OpenWRT performance review: looks like the performance can be improved with new FW version
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
Another RK3568 based router oriented development port is R68S ( 2 x 2.5Gbe, 2 x Gbe, no HDMI, no M2 NVME).

Chinese Youtube comparison of the NanoPi R5S vs R68S.


There is also a cheaper RK3568 CPU based R66S (no EMMC, only 2 x 2.5Gbe).
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
Have anyone try irqbalance on EA8100? i was wondering does it help in performance

From what I read, it is not useful for the weak dual core MTK CPU used in Linksys EA7500v2 and EA8100.
https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/services/irqbalance
Irqbalance will result in performance benefits for multicore targets where there is enough CPU overhead to handle context switching. However on 2core targets, outside of benchmarking alone, there may be performance losses. This can happen if affinity selection is not done carefully (e.g. pinning ethernet to cpu0 and wireless to cpu1). This may result in increased latency or overhead such as with simultaneous users on LAN and WLAN. Irqbalance is more viable on 4core systems and up, however your mileage may vary.
 

kaicheng83

Master Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2002
Messages
2,648
Reaction score
5
From what I read, it is not useful for the weak dual core MTK CPU used in Linksys EA7500v2 and EA8100.
https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/services/irqbalance
Irqbalance will result in performance benefits for multicore targets where there is enough CPU overhead to handle context switching. However on 2core targets, outside of benchmarking alone, there may be performance losses. This can happen if affinity selection is not done carefully (e.g. pinning ethernet to cpu0 and wireless to cpu1). This may result in increased latency or overhead such as with simultaneous users on LAN and WLAN. Irqbalance is more viable on 4core systems and up, however your mileage may vary.

Yes i saw this but maybe got time i will try it to see if it stable since i disable wireless on my main EA8100.

Thanks Xiaofan
 

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
Last edited:

xiaofan

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2018
Messages
32,858
Reaction score
10,296
WAN to LAN throughput, OpenVPN, Wireguard and SQM performance test for Intel N5105 mini PC with Intel I225-V 2.5Gbe NICs. I have not seen such high OpenVPN speed. Interestingly he is kind of using the NanoPi R5S as a 2.5Gbe switch in the test setup.


 

fromnuaa

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
140
Reaction score
15
EA8100 openwrt wifi speed test is too slow and unstable: 100-200mbps. When I use linksys firmware, speed test can reach 300mbps (Singtel 500mbps network).

Any solution for this?

I enabled fast roaming in openwrt, it should not affect speed test result, right?

I have enabled Software flow offloading and hardware flow offloading in openwrt.

Status​

System​

HostnameOpenWrt-1
ModelLinksys EA8100
ArchitectureMediaTek MT7621 ver:1 eco:3
Target Platformramips/mt7621
Firmware VersionOpenWrt 22.03.0 r19685-512e76967f / LuCI openwrt-22.03 branch git-22.245.77528-487e58a
Kernel Version5.10.138
Local Time2022-09-23 20:32:57
Uptime0h 20m 5s
Load Average0.18, 0.13, 0.10

Memory​

Total Available
Used
Cached

Storage​

Disk space
Temp space

Network​

IPv4 Upstream
Protocol:
Static address
Address: 192.168.1.20/24
Gateway: 192.168.1.254
DNS 1: 192.168.1.254
DNS 2: 8.8.8.8
Connected: 0h 19m 44s
bridge.png
Device: Bridge: "br-lan"
MAC address: 24:F5:A2:90:AC:B2
Active Connections

 
Last edited:
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ Forums. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts. Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards and Terms and Conditions for more information.
Top