[c-nsp] ASR 1002 vs ISR 3945

[Brad Henshaw]

Clue Store wrote:

> Between the 2 sites will be a 200mb (1 Gigabit burstable) link.
> How far will the 3945 take me...
> 200mb non-encrypted traffic to start (possibly ramped up to 1gb over
the
> next 12 months) QoS BGP (Non internet tables) IGP

I'm not running any ASR's yet (but will be soon) however:

Raw PPS figures:
3945: 982kpps
ASR1002-F: 4.42Mpps

They're best case, with features off. It's incredibly easy to knock ISR
G1 performance down by 80-95% by turning on QoS, tunnelling and other
features. Not sure about the ISR G2's but I would guess it's the same
(anyone else care to comment?)

ASR should maintain performance with QoS and possibly other features on
(not crypto) as these are implemented in hardware.

Some imaginary figures:
3945 with features enabled, 80% [optimistic] performance hit, 200B paks:
314Mbps aggregate (or 157Mbps full duplex)
ASR1002-F with features enabled, 0% performance hit, 200B paks: 2.5Gbps
aggregate (limited by ESP bandwidth)

Adjust the sums as you see fit, but the ASR seems the better fit. If the
majority of traffic is based on large packets you might be able to get
away with the 3945 for a while, if you absolutely had to.

Regards,
Brad