Why are high-end consumer routers still using ARM CPUs, rather than Intel Atom-class x64 CPUs?

[VirtualLarry]

Curious. If tablet mfgs, can include a BayTrail quad-core Atom CPU, touchscreen, battery, and whatnot in a tablet, for less than $100 including Windows, then why can't they make a router that routes at Gigabit Ethernet line-speed, WITH FILTERING, using a quad-core Atom CPU, for under $200? Maybe $250-300 to account for the cost of the various support chips (wifi radios, switch chip) and antennas?


I mean, that's what the NAS vendors did, when they needed "more performance" - they went to Intel (Atom), rather than ARM, even for lower-powered devices like a NAS.

Yeah, I know, you can buy an Atom mini-PC with dual GigE ethernet ports for $200-250 from some Chinese importer, and then install pfSense, and then attach a switch and a Wifi AP, but why can't router mfgs do the same thing, but more integrated? Why do they cling to ARM? (Firmware development costs and inertia?)

 

[killster1]

you want them to make zero money and stay in business? obviously its cost, ARM cpu's are great tho i have many devices with 8 core s912 arm chips and they run very fast and silent.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Single software stack?

 

[ggadrian]

What would be the benefit of going with Intel? There are ARM CPUs in the market with better than Atom processing power and efficiency

I'd say that consumer router manufacturers tend to stay with low-end ARM CPUs sue to cost and because for most consumers and use cases there isn't a need for more computing power

 

[DrMrLordX]

Curious. If tablet mfgs, can include a BayTrail quad-core Atom CPU, touchscreen, battery, and whatnot in a tablet, for less than $100 including Windows, then why can't they make a router that routes at Gigabit Ethernet line-speed, WITH FILTERING, using a quad-core Atom CPU, for under $200? Maybe $250-300 to account for the cost of the various support chips (wifi radios, switch chip) and antennas?

Baytrail was subsidized. So was Cherry Trail to a lesser extent. I doubt that Intel would have provided the subsidy to people intending to put tablet-class Baytrail in a router, though. Intel would rather people put their higher-end Atom products in network equipment, wherever possible.

 

[mxnerd]

Cost & performance.

INTEL is losing ground.

Amazon just announced that it's offering services based on its own Graviton processor - also ARM based.

==

TP-Link does release an INTEL based AnyWAN SOC router Archer C2700 (AC-2600, that's confusing) for $170.

https://www.tp-link.com/us/news-details-18042.html

https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...uct-briefs/anywan-soc-grx350-grx550-brief.pdf (MIPS interAptiv 32bit)

https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...t-briefs/anywan-grx750-home-gateway-brief.pdf (2.5G Mhz x86 64bit Atom)

Don't know which processor the C2700 uses.

Seems not available yet.

 

[VirtualLarry]

TP-Link does release an INTEL based (but seems not x86) router Archer AC2700 for $170.

https://www.tp-link.com/us/news-details-18042.html

Hey, now that's interesting. Basically what I was asking for. Supposedly (hearing from the pfSense crowd), the "slowest" Atoms can route (in software) at Gigabit line rates, but most ARM routers (even the dual-core AC68U) can only do 300Mbit/sec WAN-to-LAN, software routing. What I want, is a router, that will do filtering as well as routing, at line rates. Why should I have to choose between one or the other?

 

[VirtualLarry]

(Or if I want to use QoS on a gigabit internet WAN connection?)

 

[Genx87]

Curious. If tablet mfgs, can include a BayTrail quad-core Atom CPU, touchscreen, battery, and whatnot in a tablet, for less than $100 including Windows, then why can't they make a router that routes at Gigabit Ethernet line-speed, WITH FILTERING, using a quad-core Atom CPU, for under $200? Maybe $250-300 to account for the cost of the various support chips (wifi radios, switch chip) and antennas?


I mean, that's what the NAS vendors did, when they needed "more performance" - they went to Intel (Atom), rather than ARM, even for lower-powered devices like a NAS.

Yeah, I know, you can buy an Atom mini-PC with dual GigE ethernet ports for $200-250 from some Chinese importer, and then install pfSense, and then attach a switch and a Wifi AP, but why can't router mfgs do the same thing, but more integrated? Why do they cling to ARM? (Firmware development costs and inertia?)

I'd guess the Atom is significantly more expensive than the ARM CPU. Low end Sophos devices use 2 core Atoms. They start in the 500 dollar range. SG 135 can probably push 300-500 mbps with everything turned on including HTTPs inspection. It runs around 2000 and has a quad core Atom processor. From there they get into celeron and i-series Intel processors.

 

[Genx87]

Hey, now that's interesting. Basically what I was asking for. Supposedly (hearing from the pfSense crowd), the "slowest" Atoms can route (in software) at Gigabit line rates, but most ARM routers (even the dual-core AC68U) can only do 300Mbit/sec WAN-to-LAN, software routing. What I want, is a router, that will do filtering as well as routing, at line rates. Why should I have to choose between one or the other?

Because filtering\inspection from layer 3-7 is resource intensive? Especially if adding in HTTPS inspection.

 

[Genx87]

(Or if I want to use QoS on a gigabit internet WAN connection?)

A FYI QoS dies at your WAN port unless you have a private line to wherever you are going.

 

[mxnerd]

(Or if I want to use QoS on a gigabit internet WAN connection?)

Why can't you QoS ingress traffic?

https://www.reddit.com/r/networking/comments/2ultq3/why_cant_you_qos_ingress_traffic/

 

[VirtualLarry]

N.B. I do know that you can't QoS ingress, I've explained it before in this very forum.

It was just a generic example.

Edit: A bad one, I admit. I was previously talking about WAN-to-LAN throughput with filtering, and then jumped to QoS. Which, of course, kind of implied that I wanted to QoS the WAN-to-LAN connection. Sorry. Bone-headed comment by me. What I really meant by that was, "using any router feature, that causes hardware NAT / CTF to be disabled". QoS is just one of those features, I was only using it as a stand-in example for that.

 

[JackMDS]

WAN to LAN Throughput

https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/old-tools/charts/router/bar/74-wan-to-lan

 

[Rifter]

The issue isnt that they are using ARM cpu's, top end ARM cpu's will keep up with or be better than low end x86 cpus. The issue is most of them are using total low end crap ARM cpu's.

 

[sdifox]

Hey, now that's interesting. Basically what I was asking for. Supposedly (hearing from the pfSense crowd), the "slowest" Atoms can route (in software) at Gigabit line rates, but most ARM routers (even the dual-core AC68U) can only do 300Mbit/sec WAN-to-LAN, software routing. What I want, is a router, that will do filtering as well as routing, at line rates. Why should I have to choose between one or the other?

So run pfsense? There is zero incentive for manufacturers to switch soc stack.

 

[freeskier93]

WAN to LAN Throughput

https://www.smallnetbuilder.com/old-tools/charts/router/bar/74-wan-to-lan

I'm guessing those numbers are with hardware offloading though. Sounds like the OP wants gigabit speeds with software. Turn on something that can't be offloaded (like QoS) and those speeds will plummet. My Edgerouter, for example, can only manage about 300mbps with QoS on.

https://help.ubnt.com/hc/en-us/articles/115006567467-EdgeRouter-Hardware-Offloading

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Are you really complaining because companies make consumer/home routers that are "only" a couple times more powerful than needed to handle like 99.5% of residential internet connections?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Are you really complaining because companies make consumer/home routers that are "only" a couple times more powerful than needed to handle like 99.5% of residential internet connections?

No, I'm complaining that they aren't powerful enough.

How would you feel about a vehicle, that had lights and wipers, and could do 70MPH on the highway... but only 55MPH when the lights and wipers were on?

That's the state that consumer routers are in today, and it's disgusting how they get away with their BS specs.

"Yes, our routers are "gigabit", and they support URL filtering / parental controls / QoS."

"Just not at the same time."

 

[sdifox]

No, I'm complaining that they aren't powerful enough.

How would you feel about a vehicle, that had lights and wipers, and could do 70MPH on the highway... but only 55MPH when the lights and wipers were on?

That's the state that consumer routers are in today, and it's disgusting how they get away with their BS specs.

"Yes, our routers are "gigabit", and they support URL filtering / parental controls / QoS."

"Just not at the same time."

And your average consumer knows this how? Why do you think vendors tried for ridiculous looks of routers? Form over function.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

No, I'm complaining that they aren't powerful enough.

How would you feel about a vehicle, that had lights and wipers, and could do 70MPH on the highway... but only 55MPH when the lights and wipers were on?

That's the state that consumer routers are in today, and it's disgusting how they get away with their BS specs.

"Yes, our routers are "gigabit", and they support URL filtering / parental controls / QoS."

"Just not at the same time."

In your car-metaphor based universe, it doesn't matter because a consortium of private and public agencies have cooperated to enforce a 25mph speed limit, and ensure that tires explode when driven over 40mph. There are a few companies selling 100mph tires, but they're expensive, nobody buys them, and you can only drive them on special roads. In order to take full advantage of these tires and roads, you need to buy (or build) a commercial grade car.

 

[VirtualLarry]

In your car-metaphor based universe, it doesn't matter because a consortium of private and public agencies have cooperated to enforce a 25mph speed limit, and ensure that tires explode when driven over 40mph. There are a few companies selling 100mph tires, but they're expensive, nobody buys them, and you can only drive them on special roads. In order to take full advantage of these tires and roads, you need to buy (or build) a commercial grade car.

Eh, I think that I like my analogy better, a bit shorter, straighter, and more to the point.

Though, yours could be more accurate.

I'm just saying, I'll be a lot happier, when they're selling 1Gbit/sec routers (WAN and LAN), that can use ALL of their features, at speed.

Edit: Interestingly enough, reading the data-sheets on the Synology AC2600 router, it supports hardware acceleration at both layer-4 AND layer-7.

Plus, it supports WPA3! One of the first. Have to wait for Windows 10 1903 for support on the client end, though, or get an Insider Preview Build.

 

[Rifter]

Eh, I think that I like my analogy better, a bit shorter, straighter, and more to the point.

Though, yours could be more accurate.

I'm just saying, I'll be a lot happier, when they're selling 1Gbit/sec routers (WAN and LAN), that can use ALL of their features, at speed.

Edit: Interestingly enough, reading the data-sheets on the Synology AC2600 router, it supports hardware acceleration at both layer-4 AND layer-7.

Plus, it supports WPA3! One of the first. Have to wait for Windows 10 1903 for support on the client end, though, or get an Insider Preview Build.

If you want the speed its doable now, just buy a cheap x86 box and run pfsense on it. I picked up a dualcore celeron system for under $300 that has no issues running anything ive thrown at it so far.

What you want is doable now for less than $300 just maybe not in super easy to use consumer form.

 

[mxnerd]

Guess layer 7 filters at this time requires x86

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L7-filter

==

Oops, just saw that VL said Synology RT2600ac (IPQ8065, 1.7G ARMv7 quad core) also support layer-7 filtering.

==

ASUS Blue Cave router uses INTEL's GRX350, but it's still a MIPS processor, not x86.

https://thetechrevolutionist.com/2018/07/asus-blue-cave-review.html

INTEL released GRX750 (X86 based) reference design 1.5 year ago , apparently no vendor is using it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QvLPNriuw0

==

INTEL's gross profit margin always hovers around 50% - 60%, I think INTEL just priced its x86 CPU out of the router market.

 

[Genx87]

In this space there is also the heat issue. Running a celeron or i series processor on a home router introduces the need for active cooling.