[c-nsp] GigE Throughput on 3825

[Benjamin Lovell]

Seth is completely correct that it's all about CPU. Don't quote me but I think we rate the 3825 at about 300 kpps(number is out of date so newer IOS may not reach this number) . This is likely a 0 feature number so it could be much lower if QoS, GRE, uRPF, etc, etc, etc are used. 

-Ben

On Jul 29, 2010, at 10:10 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:

> On 7/29/2010 15:07, Paul Stewart wrote:
>> We have several in production but have never pushed them to their limits.
>> One that comes to mind is a 3825 with max memory/max flash - it's going DHCP
>> services to 1200 students in a university residence, handing off a few meg
>> of voice traffic to those students and running two full BGP tables providing
>> IP Transit at 100 meg peak to the university as well. Nothing really fancy
>> but the CPU never peaks above 9% on average.
>> 
>> Another 3825 is currently running as a POP router handling about 130Mb/s of
>> peak traffic, runs a good size OSPF table and has 16 port Gig card fully
>> populated with each port doing routing.  Peak CPU is 11% average on that
>> box.
>> 
>> I have seen some customers push them with 300-400Mb/s of traffic but am not
>> sure how they really handled at that point - whether or not the CPU is
>> pushing it or not.  Cisco 7206VXR with NPE-2G comes to mind if you don't
>> want any hassles with higher traffic levels - of course you're into higher
>> budget too ;)
>> 
> 
> 
> It's all CPU on an ISR or 7200. What matters is the packet size. It can
> handle flows with large packets beyond what Cisco would officially
> recommend them for (i.e. a file transfer), but throw a lot of tiny UDP
> at it you'll quickly run out of headroom far below what you would expect.
> 
> ~Seth
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/