USG200 speed tests #2 in ZyXEL http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22650233 en Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:24:34 EDT Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:24:34 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,23335998 Brano : Well, I have done only single session tests as per above and only on USG200. That said, AV speed seems to be the deal breaker for that test.

One would need additional tests, multi-session and single session tests each way to get the overall picture.

Solely based on ZyXel specs USG 200 should be able to handle 25/25 assuming they fix things in next firmware releases.
--
openSUSE 11.1, KDE 4.2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,23335998 Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:55:13 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,23335818 Anav : Hi Brano, based on your experience, if one has a 25/25 service and wanted to procure a USG router which one would you lean towards?
A. assume firewall plus AV plus IDP in use.

I did find some differences in available literature between US and UK sites both with 2009 data.

According to the spec sheet from zyxel USA for the USG200
Firewall / VPN / AV / IDP / AV + IDP + FIREWALL /
150 Mbps / 75 / 50 / 65 / 45 Mbps

and for the USG300
200 Mbps/ 100 / 70 / 75 / and 70 respectively.

I am assuming that those are all two way throughputs and for one-way we would have to divide all those numbers in half.

USG200 - 75 / 37.5 / 25 / 32.5 / 22.5
USG300 - 100 / 50 / 35 / 37.5 / 35

From the UK site a slightly different story ????»www.zyxel.co.uk/upload/doc/QSG_S···2009.pdf

There are no AV only or IDP only numbers for starters.
Firewall / VPN / AV + IDP + Firewall /
USG200 - 150 / 75 / 24
USG300 - 200 / 100 / 48

As you may surmise, it appears that the UK VPN and AV numbers are two way throughput and the combined AV + IDP + Firewall numbers are one way throughput. All very confusing????
--
Ain't nuthin but the blues! "Albert Collins".
Leave your troubles at the door! "Pepe Peregil" De Sevilla. Just Don't Wifi without WPA, "Yul Brenner"

LlamaWorks Equipment]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,23335818 Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:28:22 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,23025899 Brano : I've re-done the tests with the 2.12(AQU.1) firmware release.
...the results are not a bit better :huh:

[att=1]
[att=2]
--
openSUSE 11.1, KDE 4.2
Click for full size
Click for full size
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,23025899 Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:28:48 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22707052 Wintel : I have a 30Mbps Internet connection (PPPoE) and using the ZyWALL USG200, when downloading using FTP the USG200 CPU usage is quite high 60%~80%.

When downloading a 1300MB ISO file using FlashGet and set to 8 simultaneous connections in microsoft.com, the USG200 CPU usage is >85%, does the USG200 has a PPPoE or CPU usage high issue?

Testing ISO File:
»www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta···3d06d6cb]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22707052 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:10:28 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22684372 ba142 : Under the ftp test, does the USG200 has high CPU usage issue? What is the USG200 CPU usage when download the 330MB iso file?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22684372 Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:54:49 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22671732 Brano : See my #1 speed test with 2.11 firmware »USG200 speed tests
The performance then was mostly up to specs (excluding AppPatrol).
Something seems to be wrong in 2.12.
--
openSUSE 11.1, KDE 4.2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22671732 Wed, 08 Jul 2009 07:50:51 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22665976 dslpartner :
said by Brano See Profile :

It probably would, but that's not the point of my test.
DUT should perform to advertised specs for single session.
Grey area :)
--
"Perl is executable line noise, Python is executable pseudo-code."
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22665976 Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:18:08 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22665913 Brano : It probably would, but that's not the point of my test.
DUT should perform to advertised specs for single session.
--
openSUSE 11.1, KDE 4.2]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22665913 Tue, 07 Jul 2009 09:04:23 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22665287 anon : For IDP/AV performance, you can try to test it with multiple connections. The aggregate multiple session performance will be much better than single session performance.

BR,

style4me32]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22665287 Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:03:53 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22652494 Brano : I couldn't digest the results so I ran another test this time using ftp protocol. I was downloading exactly the same 330MB zipped iso as in my first 2.11 set of tests »USG200 speed tests

FTP server was vsftpd and I was downloading with wget redirecting output to /dev/null to get rid of possible disk write delays.

Here is an example from just the firewall test

with following results

[att=1]

Comments on results:
Tests on AppPatrol, AV, IDP, ADP should be valid as all these are scanning FTP protocol.
The AS test is invalid since AS looks at SMTP and POP3 only.

Interestingly the AV and IDP tests speeds were varying from 35KB/s to 8MB/s during the one file download. Now I'm convinced that AV and IDP have serious issues!
Overall the device seems to be not delivering to advertised specs with firmware 2.12(AQU.0) :(

--
openSUSE 11.1, KDE 4.2
Click for full size
USG200 2.12 ftp test
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22652494 Sat, 04 Jul 2009 00:35:15 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22650602 bbarrera :
said by ba142 See Profile :

BMW Throughput
on the autobahn? ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22650602 Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:34:18 EDT Re: USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22650575 ba142 : Well done.

Would you please test the BMW Throughput under AppPatrol?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22650575 Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:29:26 EDT USG200 speed tests #2 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22650233 Brano : With the release of 2.12 firmware and as follow-up to »USG200 speed tests I've done some additional tests.

[att=1]

Testing environment:
Server on LAN: openSUSE 11.1, gigabit NIC
Client on WAN2: openSUSE 11.1, gigabit NIC

All tests are done netperf TCP_STREAM as per below (default test):

Setup notes:
- BWM and CF was always Off
- There were some other firewall rules on the USG defined and active, but the Internet WAN link was Off
- AppPatrol all default, forward
- AV ZyXel engine, all protocols on
- IDP default, WAN to any
- ADP default, WAN to any
- AS default, WAN to any

Performed tests:
First I've done 3 subsequent 10 seconds tests. Then I've started over and done one 30 seconds test.

Notes on results:
Services such as AV, AS are supposed to be scanning only specific protocols i.e. HTTP FTP SMTP POP3 IMAP4 thus not sure how good are these tests since I was using netperf on some random port non-specific protocol. Interestingly AV was slowing down significantly!

AppPatrol speed is significantly improved from 2.11 firmware. Actually the results seem too high, I'm not sue if the packet inspection engine was kicking in since I was not using any specific messenger or other monitored app for testing.

IDP however seems to be corrupted in this version, speeds were constantly below the advertised! Additionally IDP speeds were significantly jumping up and down from test to test.

Firewall throughput is also below advertised.

Advertised speeds:
Firewall Throughput: 150 Mbps
UTM Throughput (AV+IDP+Firewall): 40 Mbps

Final thought
I'm quite confused about these results. Maybe every specific engine needs to be tested with specific protocol. Also the fact that AV/IDP results were up/down from test to test makes me feel uneasy about scanning engine(s) implementation.
I would definitely not make any decisions and/or conclusions based on these tests. Just FYI for those who are interested ;)

--
openSUSE 11.1, KDE 4.2
Click for full size
USG 200 2.12 netperf tests
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22650233 Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:05:37 EDT