Jump to content


Photo

VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming

Started by dolphs, 27 Mar 2016 07:33

  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #41 Erik Slagter

  • PLi® Core member
  • 46,951 posts

+541
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 17:08

 

 

And now someone on a Solo4k  ;)

 

You're one of the few who has one. ;)

In a few hours again, if everything went well. I managed to break it...

Athoik beat me to it. Impressive figures!

 

My solo4k appears to be still underway, won't be today  :mellow:


* Wavefrontier T90 with 28E/23E/19E/13E via SCR switches 2 x 2 x 6 user bands
I don't read PM -> if you have something to ask or to report, do it in the forum so others can benefit. I don't take freelance jobs.
Ik lees geen PM -> als je iets te vragen of te melden hebt, doe het op het forum, zodat anderen er ook wat aan hebben.

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #42 athoik

  • PLi® Core member
  • 8,458 posts

+327
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 17:26

Actually ATM the Solo4k is the faster machine ;)

vusolo  |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:   610095 aes-128-cbc's in 2.72s
et5x00  |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:   740118 aes-128-cbc's in 2.97s
vuduo   |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:   750612 aes-128-cbc's in 2.93s
et6x00  |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:   759163 aes-128-cbc's in 2.99s      
vuzero  |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:  1280902 aes-128-cbc's in 2.94s
xpeedc  |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:  1354013 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
et7x00  |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:  1410363 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
osmini  |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:  1417513 aes-128-cbc's in 2.98s
et10k   |Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks:  3254497 aes-128-cbc's in 2.94s
vusolo4k|Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks: 11202284 aes-128-cbc's in 2.99s
And the winner is ... Solo4k.
Wavefield T90: 0.8W - 1.9E - 4.8E - 13E - 16E - 19.2E - 23.5E - 26E - 33E - 39E - 42E - 45E on EMP Centauri DiseqC 16/1
Unamed: 13E Quattro - 9E Quattro on IKUSI MS-0916

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #43 theparasol

  • Senior Member
  • 4,157 posts

+198
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 17:52

You missed the gigablue, its a great runner up, just behind de 4K ;)


@Camping: ZGemma H.2S, Technisat Multytenne 4-in-1 @Home: Edision Mini 4K, Wave Frontier T55, EMP Centauri EMP DiSEqC 8/1 switch, 4x Inverto Ultra Black single LNB

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #44 littlesat

  • PLi® Core member
  • 56,260 posts

+691
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 18:59

Bur I see one digit more for for the solo4k

Edited by littlesat, 1 April 2016 - 19:24.

WaveFrontier 28.2E | 23.5E | 19.2E | 16E | 13E | 10/9E | 7E | 5E | 1W | 4/5W | 15W

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #45 malakudi

  • Senior Member
  • 1,449 posts

+69
Good

Posted 1 April 2016 - 19:21 

Hardware	type		  16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytes
vusolo		aes-128-cbc       3588.79k     4173.91k     4331.52k     4364.21k     4398.43k
et5x00		aes-128-cbc       3987.17k     4735.01k     4948.96k     5011.07k     5011.09k
vuultimo	aes-128-cbc       4023.21k     4752.94k     5005.40k     5082.67k     5101.51k
et6x00		aes-128-cbc       4062.41k     4810.82k     5032.19k     5098.50k     5120.00k
vuduo		aes-128-cbc       4098.91k     4844.15k     5015.83k     5117.15k     5131.38k
vuzero		aes-128-cbc       6970.90k     8203.70k     8433.32k     8610.53k     8607.10k
xpeedc		aes-128-cbc       7221.40k     8643.96k     9039.02k     9184.49k     9169.58k
et8x00		aes-128-cbc       7521.94k     8905.47k     9316.78k     9439.91k     9472.68k
osmini		aes-128-cbc       7610.81k     8956.64k     9312.99k     9532.51k     9513.20k
gigabluequad	aes-128-cbc      16434.86k    19588.33k    20610.75k    20902.66k    20944.58k
et10000		aes-128-cbc      18283.89k    20361.19k    20967.85k    21166.42k    21195.43k
Atom D525	aes-128-cbc      24423.47k    27090.75k    27799.89k    28091.85k    28090.37k
vusolo4k	aes-128-cbc      59945.33k    68150.09k    71901.95k    72968.19k    73277.44k
Xeon E3-1275 v5	aes-128-cbc    1284881.69k  1410752.96k  1469046.15k  1480765.10k  1485348.86k

Atom D525 (my router) and Xeon E3-1275 v5 are for reference :)


Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #46 theparasol

  • Senior Member
  • 4,157 posts

+198
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 20:33

There is a fault in the table.... this is the correct list / ranking:

Hardware        type        16 bytes    64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes  8192 bytes
vusolo          aes-128-cbc 3588.79k    4173.91k    4331.52k    4364.21k    4398.43k
et5x00          aes-128-cbc 3987.17k    4735.01k    4948.96k    5011.07k    5011.09k
vuultimo        aes-128-cbc 4023.21k    4752.94k    5005.40k    5082.67k    5101.51k
et6x00          aes-128-cbc 4062.41k    4810.82k    5032.19k    5098.50k    5120.00k
vuduo           aes-128-cbc 4098.91k    4844.15k    5015.83k    5117.15k    5131.38k
vuzero          aes-128-cbc 6970.90k    8203.70k    8433.32k    8610.53k    8607.10k
xpeedc          aes-128-cbc 7221.40k    8643.96k    9039.02k    9184.49k    9169.58k
et8x00          aes-128-cbc 7521.94k    8905.47k    9316.78k    9439.91k    9472.68k
osmini          aes-128-cbc 7610.81k    8956.64k    9312.99k    9532.51k    9513.20k
et10000         aes-128-cbc 17711.55k   19074.57k   18874.11k   20828.84k   20785.83k
gigabluequad+   aes-128-cbc 16434.86k   19588.33k   20610.75k   20902.66k   20944.58k
Atom D525       aes-128-cbc 24423.47k   27090.75k   27799.89k   28091.85k   28090.37k
vusolo4k        aes-128-cbc 59945.33k   68150.09k   71901.95k   72968.19k   73277.44k
Xeon E3-1275 v5 aes-128-cbc 1284881.69k 1410752.96k 1469046.15k 1480765.10k 1485348.86k

@Camping: ZGemma H.2S, Technisat Multytenne 4-in-1 @Home: Edision Mini 4K, Wave Frontier T55, EMP Centauri EMP DiSEqC 8/1 switch, 4x Inverto Ultra Black single LNB

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #47 theparasol

  • Senior Member
  • 4,157 posts

+198
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 20:37

And even that is not correct.... I measured my boxes while they where in action.... this is with quad+ in init 4 mode, oscam killed:

aes-128-cbc      16496.25k    20222.17k    21363.80k    21673.98k    21738.84k

Edited by theparasol, 1 April 2016 - 20:38.

@Camping: ZGemma H.2S, Technisat Multytenne 4-in-1 @Home: Edision Mini 4K, Wave Frontier T55, EMP Centauri EMP DiSEqC 8/1 switch, 4x Inverto Ultra Black single LNB

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #48 40H3X

  • Forum Moderator
    PLi® Contributor
  • 5,790 posts

+186
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 21:22

Apart from the fact (you mentioned out correctly) that these speeds are not measured under the same conditions the 4k is way up ahead.

Edited by 40H3X, 1 April 2016 - 21:23.

Hardware: Vu+ Uno 4K SE - Vu+ Duo 4K  - Fuba 78 cm - Tripleblock LNB Quad 19.2/23.5/28.2 - DS918+
Software : OpenPLi - OSCam - Settings van Hans - Autotimer - EPGImport

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Remember: Upvote with the rep_up.png button for any user/post you find to be helpful, informative, or deserving of recognition!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many answers to your question can be found in our new and improved wiki

Note: I do not provide support via PM !.

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #49 theparasol

  • Senior Member
  • 4,157 posts

+198
Excellent

Posted 1 April 2016 - 21:28

Yes, sure thing... thanks to the arm cpu they implemented!

Hope other manufacturers will switch to arm too in the future.


@Camping: ZGemma H.2S, Technisat Multytenne 4-in-1 @Home: Edision Mini 4K, Wave Frontier T55, EMP Centauri EMP DiSEqC 8/1 switch, 4x Inverto Ultra Black single LNB

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #50 malakudi

  • Senior Member
  • 1,449 posts

+69
Good

Posted 2 April 2016 - 09:30

@theparasol: the results from et10k that I used are from post #26, as reported by user dolphs. Gigablue Quad Plus and ET10K seem to be on par anyway, and VU+ Duo2 is on the same level.

 

VU+ Duo2: aes-128-cbc      17750.87k    20271.39k    21105.78k    21440.69k    21246.79k

 

Speed of sha1 is also important, since usually aes-128-cbc is used together with sha1 in IPSEC. sha1 is used for integrity check. You can skip sha1 if using aes-128-gcm, which offers integrity check on its own.


Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #51 dolphs

  • Senior Member
  • 983 posts

+8
Neutral

Posted 4 April 2016 - 13:09

SHA-1 is deprecated anyway, so let's skip that one imho soon and go for aes-128-gcm.

Wonder when avm comes with an update in their IPSec LAN-to-LAN set up, probably in a new firmware in the next few months ...

 

@theparasol - bummer you did not include the et7000 ( et7x00 posted last week  ;)  ) in your rankings


Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #52 bleskone

  • Senior Member
  • 26 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 6 April 2016 - 11:41

just did the test for Xtrend ET8000 and results are quite different as in table ....

root@et8000:~# openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks: 3326838 aes-128-cbc's in 2.91s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 64 size blocks: 950226 aes-128-cbc's in 2.94s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 256 size blocks: 246004 aes-128-cbc's in 2.93s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 1024 size blocks: 61948 aes-128-cbc's in 2.94s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 8192 size blocks: 7813 aes-128-cbc's in 2.92s
OpenSSL 1.0.1j 15 Oct 2014
built on: Wed Feb  3 17:58:23 CET 2016
options:bn(64,32) rc4(idx,int) des(idx,risc2,16,long) aes(partial) idea(int) blowfish(idx)
compiler: mipsel-oe-linux-gcc  -mel -mabi=32 -mhard-float -march=mips32 --sysroot=/dreambox/oe.openpli-4/build/tmp/sysroots/hd1200 -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DL_ENDIAN     -DTERMIO  -Os -pipe -g -feliminate-unused-debug-types -Wall -Wa,--noexecstack -DHAVE_CRYPTODEV -DUSE_CRYPTODEV_DIGESTS
The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytes
aes-128-cbc      18291.89k    20685.19k    21493.86k    21576.45k    21919.21k
root@et8000:~#

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #53 bleskone

  • Senior Member
  • 26 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 6 April 2016 - 19:35

updated table (rough buyer's guide... :-) et7x00, et8000, formuler1

Hardware        type        16 bytes    64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes  8192 bytes
vusolo          aes-128-cbc 3588.79k    4173.91k    4331.52k    4364.21k    4398.43k
et5x00          aes-128-cbc 3987.17k    4735.01k    4948.96k    5011.07k    5011.09k
vuultimo        aes-128-cbc 4023.21k    4752.94k    5005.40k    5082.67k    5101.51k
et6x00          aes-128-cbc 4062.41k    4810.82k    5032.19k    5098.50k    5120.00k
vuduo           aes-128-cbc 4098.91k    4844.15k    5015.83k    5117.15k    5131.38k
vuzero          aes-128-cbc 6970.90k    8203.70k    8433.32k    8610.53k    8607.10k
xpeedc          aes-128-cbc 7221.40k    8643.96k    9039.02k    9184.49k    9169.58k
et7x00          aes-128-cbc 7520.95k    8890.74k    9364.03k    9437.35k    9466.31k
osmini          aes-128-cbc 7610.81k    8956.64k    9312.99k    9532.51k    9513.20k
formuler1       aes-128-cbc 15502.89k   17369.60k   17900.14k   18059.51k   18133.10k
et10000         aes-128-cbc 17711.55k   19074.57k   18874.11k   20828.84k   20785.83k
gigabluequad+   aes-128-cbc 16434.86k   19588.33k   20610.75k   20902.66k   20944.58k
et8000          aes-128-cbc 18291.89k   20685.19k   21493.86k   21576.45k   21919.21k
Atom D525       aes-128-cbc 24423.47k   27090.75k   27799.89k   28091.85k   28090.37k
vusolo4k        aes-128-cbc 59945.33k   68150.09k   71901.95k   72968.19k   73277.44k
Xeon E3-1275 v5 aes-128-cbc 1284881.69k 1410752.96k 1469046.15k 1480765.10k 1485348.86k

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #54 hyperonex

  • Senior Member
  • 82 posts

+7
Neutral

Posted 7 April 2016 - 11:27

Vu+ Solo SE V2:

root@vusolose:~# openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks: 3484002 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 64 size blocks: 985954 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 256 size blocks: 255550 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 1024 size blocks: 64483 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 8192 size blocks: 8075 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
OpenSSL 1.0.1j 15 Oct 2014
built on: Wed Feb  3 17:58:23 CET 2016
options:bn(64,32) rc4(idx,int) des(idx,risc2,16,long) aes(partial) idea(int) blowfish(idx)
compiler: mipsel-oe-linux-gcc  -mel -mabi=32 -mhard-float -march=mips32 --sysroot=/dreambox/oe.openpli-4/build/tmp/sysroots/hd1200 -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DL_ENDIAN     -DTERMIO  -Os -pipe -g -feliminate-unused-debug-types -Wall -Wa,--noexecstack -DHAVE_CRYPTODEV -DUSE_CRYPTODEV_DIGESTS
The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytes
aes-128-cbc      18581.34k    21033.69k    21806.93k    22010.20k    22050.13k

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #55 Jan Gruuthuse

  • Senior Member
  • 985 posts

+20
Neutral

Posted 9 April 2016 - 08:01

xp1000, running oscam watching vrt:

root@xp1000:~# openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks: 741234 aes-128-cbc's in 1.82s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 64 size blocks: 226830 aes-128-cbc's in 1.87s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 256 size blocks: 59206 aes-128-cbc's in 1.86s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 1024 size blocks: 14177 aes-128-cbc's in 1.75s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 8192 size blocks: 1827 aes-128-cbc's in 1.82s
OpenSSL 1.0.1j 15 Oct 2014
built on: Wed Feb  3 17:06:52 CET 2016
options:bn(64,32) rc4(idx,int) des(idx,risc2,16,long) aes(partial) idea(int) blowfish(idx) 
compiler: mipsel-oe-linux-gcc  -mel -mabi=32 -msoft-float -march=mips32 --sysroot=/dreambox/oe.openpli-4/build/tmp/sysroots/hd1100 -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DL_ENDIAN 	-DTERMIO  -Os -pipe -g -feliminate-unused-debug-types -Wall -Wa,--noexecstack -DHAVE_CRYPTODEV -DUSE_CRYPTODEV_DIGESTS
The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytes
aes-128-cbc       6516.34k     7763.17k     8148.78k     8295.57k     8223.51k

Edited by Jan Gruuthuse, 9 April 2016 - 08:04.

Sf8HD, sf8008, OpenPli 9.0, fixed lnb 28.2E, 19.2E

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #56 malakudi

  • Senior Member
  • 1,449 posts

+69
Good

Posted 26 September 2016 - 23:08

Mutant HD51 for the winner:

openssl speed -evp aes-128-cbc
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 16 size blocks: 12778928 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 64 size blocks: 3632875 aes-128-cbc's in 2.99s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 256 size blocks: 959150 aes-128-cbc's in 3.00s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 1024 size blocks: 242975 aes-128-cbc's in 2.99s
Doing aes-128-cbc for 3s on 8192 size blocks: 30520 aes-128-cbc's in 2.99s
OpenSSL 1.0.2h  3 May 2016
...

The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytes
aes-128-cbc      68154.28k    77760.54k    81847.47k    83212.84k    83618.68k

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #57 littlesat

  • PLi® Core member
  • 56,260 posts

+691
Excellent

Posted 26 September 2016 - 23:28

But can de HD51 do a transcoding??


WaveFrontier 28.2E | 23.5E | 19.2E | 16E | 13E | 10/9E | 7E | 5E | 1W | 4/5W | 15W

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #58 dax

  • Senior Member
  • 228 posts

0
Neutral

Posted 14 October 2016 - 10:39

Vu+solo2

type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192 bytes
aes-128-cbc      18013.38k    20436.20k    21098.41k    21375.83k    21402.30k

Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #59 dolphs

  • Senior Member
  • 983 posts

+8
Neutral

Posted 9 December 2016 - 20:36

Any results from Vu+ Uno 4k yet pls?


Re: VPN throughput not sufficient for HD streaming #60 Frenske

  • Forum Moderator
    PLi® Core member
  • 27,388 posts

+393
Excellent

Posted 9 December 2016 - 21:16

Any results from Vu+ Uno 4k yet pls?


No not yet. :)

Mijn schotel is een T90 met 10 LNB's. Daarnaast voor de fun nog een draaibaar systeem met een Triax TD 78.

Dreamboxen heb ik niet meer echt actief. Verder heb ik ook nog een een VU+ duo2 met 500Gb harddisk + een VU+ Uno, Zero, Solo 4K, Ultimo 4K, Zero 4K, Uno 4Kse. + ook nog een Xtrend ET7x00. Daarnaast heb ik ook nog diverse andere modellen w.o. een Formuler F4, ET8500, ET7500, Mut@nt 2400HD, Xsarius Fusion HD se en verder nog wel het e.e.a. waarmee op verzoek vanalles wordt getest. Iemand moet het tenslotte doen. ;) :)
Los van de eerder genoemde modellen heb ik nog wel een rits aan testsamples als Mut@nt 2400HD, HD60, GB UE4K, GB Trio4K, Maxitec Multibox combo en Twin, Octagon sf8008, sf8008 mini en last but nog least enkele modellen van het Grieks Duitse Edision.

Voor centrale opslag van media gebruik ik een Qnap 219P met tweemaal 2 Tb harddisks + een Synology DS414 met 12 Tb Totale opslag.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many answers to your question can be found in our wiki: Just one click away from this "solutioncentre".

Als ik alles al wist hoefde ik ook niets te vragen. If I had all the knowledge I had no questions at all.

Back to The Lounge

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

  1. Forums
  2. → General Discussion
  3. → The Lounge