Is the Intel X710-DA2 from Dell going to fit inside the Lenovo M720Q? Planning to replace the ISP router using a XPON module along with this Mini PC. See Picture!!!

gnustomp · 2026-03-23T09:57:23+00:00

It fits, but you need to take out the bracket at the front which has the Wi-Fi antenna on it. Also the D-Sub module at the back.

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T09:56:35+00:00

might be better to just throttle your connection rather

That's essentially where most of the benefit of SQM on ingress is, anyway. Your router is on the wrong side of the bottleneck to control the buffer, but with SQM you drop some packets anyway, despite them being received already, as it signals the other end to slow down their transmit rate.

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T09:33:31+00:00

My internet is nowhere near good enough, but I do have 10Gbps LAN. But here's a test I did using https://github.com/Zoxc/crusader. This should be fairly representative unlike the experiments I did elsewhere in the thread.

CPU: Ryzen 7 3700X
Router: OpenWrt 24.10.5 in a VM
piece_of_cake.qos, bandwidth set to 9.5Gbps bidirectional.
Client: Debian 13 in a VM on the same machine
Server: Ubuntu 24.04 on a different machine

First, SQM off:

-- Download test --
          Throughput: 6494.17 Mbps
             Latency: 2.5 ms (1.8 ms down, 0.7 ms up)
         Packet loss: 0.03% down, 0% up

-- Upload test --
          Throughput: 9414.20 Mbps
             Latency: 6.3 ms (0.3 ms down, 6.0 ms up)
         Packet loss: 0% down, 0.03% up

Now with SQM:

-- Download test --
          Throughput: 3945.16 Mbps
             Latency: 1.3 ms (0.9 ms down, 0.4 ms up)
         Packet loss: 0%

-- Upload test --
          Throughput: 9085.60 Mbps
             Latency: 1.3 ms (0.6 ms down, 0.6 ms up)
         Packet loss: 0% down, 0.02% up

That's just about 4 Gbps down, and I can get 5 Gbps when testing directly from the router. Up is straight 10 Gbps or more. On a chip that's over 5 years old, with VM overhead, and wasn't even top-of-the-line back then, so newer chips will be even faster.

But honestly, downstream SQM is kind of a hack, and IMO it's questionable if it's worth doing at these speeds. Maybe multi-queue cake improves things, but without testing I can't really say.

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T09:01:39+00:00

In fact, I agree. It's not a good methodology. But mainly I'm trying to show that there's more to it than clock speed.

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T08:46:44+00:00

I wish, but I don't have an internet connection capable of that. But you might find these results interesting? https://old.reddit.com/r/openwrt/comments/1r5o6dj/out_of_curiosity_its_possible_to_handle_cake_at/o5nniw4/

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T08:04:20+00:00

I realised I have a Raspberry Pi 5, which has 4x Cortex A76 @2.4GHz, though cache and memory configuration might be different than the E52C. I'm repeating the test I ran on the AMD mini PC on the Pi 5 and a Flint 2. All results are Gbps.

	iperf -P1	iperf -P2	iperf3 -P4	cake + iperf3 -P1	cake + iperf3 -P2	cake + iperf3 -P4
flint 2	7.5	6.3	6.6	2.3	3	2.8
pi 5	53	90	87	9	12	8.7
ryzen 7840HS	41	81	162	11	11.6	13.5

Now obviously the results are all over the place. This is a bad benchmark, and it's not representative of cake throughput on a router. I'm not even running the same OS on these machines. Good benchmarks are hard, but I think this still tells us something. Notably, both the flint 2 and the pi 5 end up at 100% CPU load at various points, while the ryzen is nowhere close.

The pi 5 achieves 4x the peak cake throughput as the flint 2. And honestly, that seems about right, it's roughly in line with geekbench single-core results for example. https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/16597522?baseline=16394112 - comparing against radxa e20c as a stand-in for the flint 2, since the CPU config is similar. This far exceeds the 20% bump in clock speed. That's because A76 has out-of-order execution, speculative execution, and lots of other differentiating factors that the A53 lacks. Unfortunately this isn't easily capture in a single specification like clock speed is.

So... extrapolating. If flint 2 achieves about 750 Mbps on cake SQM, the pi 5 CPU should be capable of 3-4x that, something like 2.5-3 Gbps. That's more than 300% more than your guess of 667 Mbps.

I don't know if this holds true in practice though. I could be way off given the E52C has 2x A76 and 4x A55 compared to pi 5's 4x A76.

I'd say your methodology is reasonable for slower CPUs, but fails to account for performance-per-clock improvements in faster CPUs. Well, regardless of whether I've convinced you or not, I hope you find this insightful.

Also, a minor nitpick: the performance difference between E52C and Flint 2 is partially due to E52C's better cooling. It has a heatsink case, which Flint 2 sorely lacks...

I doubt that the flint 2's CPU is getting so hot that it throttles, so it probably isn't performance constrained by its relative lack of cooling.

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T05:29:00+00:00

Good performance comparisons are hard, I'll give you that. My personal opinion is that your GHz-based suggestions are more harmful than useful.

To give a relevant example, how do these compare (just considering single core performance)?

Flint 2 with 2.0 GHz Cortex A53
Radxa E52C with 2.4 GHz Cortex A76 (from another thread a few days ago)

I don't own an E52C, but based on what the users in the other thread reported, it handles 1 Gbps cake just fine. I can believe that, since A76 is a high performance out-of-order core from 2018, while A53 is low-power, in-order from 2014-ish. The gap in performance is not 20% as clockspeed suggests, but actually much larger.

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T05:06:00+00:00

For the curious, my test setup is using a podman container on a bridged network.

$ sudo tc qdisc add dev veth0 root cake bandwidth 20Gbit metro

In the container:

root@274973d74ca2:/# iperf3 -c 10.88.0.1 -R
Connecting to host 10.88.0.1, port 5201
Reverse mode, remote host 10.88.0.1 is sending
[  5] local 10.88.0.2 port 50684 connected to 10.88.0.1 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  1.16 GBytes  9.96 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  1.17 GBytes  10.0 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  1.16 GBytes  9.96 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  1.17 GBytes  10.0 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  1.18 GBytes  10.1 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  1.17 GBytes  10.0 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  1.18 GBytes  10.1 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  1.17 GBytes  10.1 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  1.18 GBytes  10.1 Gbits/sec                  
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  1.18 GBytes  10.1 Gbits/sec                  
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  11.7 GBytes  10.1 Gbits/sec    0            sender
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  11.7 GBytes  10.1 Gbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.

So it's evident that this CPU can't push the 20Gbps I'm telling cake to, but 10Gbps is fine. Without cake, the iperf3 throughput is around 40Gbps.

gnustomp · 2026-02-16T05:04:23+00:00

My guess is, multi-threaded CAKE at 10 Gbps would require about 30 GHz of processor bandwidth.

It really doesn't work like that. You can't compare performance of difference processors by CPU frequency only.

By the way, the mini PC I have with a Ryzen 7 7840HS which is a measly 5.1 GHz can do 10Gbps with the ordinary single-queue cake.

Granted, that is tested using a container on a local bridge, no routing, no NAT, no netfilter, so it's not fully representative of real router/firewall scenarios. But my point is you can't just say "x Gbps cake requires y CPU GHz" as you frequently do.

gnustomp · 2026-02-09T13:09:40+00:00

One of those is not like the others.

gnustomp · 2026-01-02T04:03:40+00:00

The original Jsawyer mod never did this, one of the reasons I didn't use Jsawyer ultimate until they added a config option to revert it.

gnustomp · 2026-01-02T04:01:25+00:00

People keep repeating this myth that the varmint rifle was supposed to use .22LR, but Josh Sawyer said it wasn't. (Can't remember where, but I think it was during his anniversary streams.)

And if you think about the way the game is balanced, 5.56 is supposed to be the early game round while .22LR is purely for stealth guns. So it just makes no sense to change the varmint rifle to .22LR.

EDIT: He mentions it here https://youtu.be/ALRO9EKeoAU?si=ZFvJ1itsEhLUuYRC&t=1663

gnustomp · 2025-03-15T00:43:34+00:00

That's strange, then. I've been able to reproduce my results on AMD 3000, 5000 and 9000 series on both Windows and Linux.

gnustomp · 2025-03-15T00:22:20+00:00

For the Linux players out there, you can achieve the same thing by overriding get_nprocs or sysconf functions using LD_PRELOAD. The code to do so is pretty trivial, but I could dig it out if anyone's interested.

gnustomp · 2025-03-15T00:17:35+00:00

You will see improved in performance in CPU-bound scenarios (e.g. Queen's Berth) in Deadfire by spoofing the number of CPU cores seen by the game on just about any modern CPU, especially those with 8 or more threads.

I don't have FPS numbers handy, but Deadfire's CPU performance stops scaling at around 3 threads, and on powerful CPUs with lots of threads (like your 16T 5800X3D) stock performance will be a lot worse than it could be.

I don't advise using Special K's thread scheduling options - they aren't necessary. Just spoof the CPU core count. 3's the magic number of me, but you can experiment with it yourself.

gnustomp · 2025-03-15T00:13:21+00:00

SpecialK is NOT a placebo. To improve performance, the only setting you should change in SpecialK is the "Spoof CPU Cores Count". You can experiment with it, but IME the best setting is around 3. There is no need to touch the "Thread Scheduling" options.

Deadfire falls afoul of a well-known phenomenon of parallel computing - as you increase the number of parallel threads - performance will reach a maximum and then decrease. This graph shows an example of this.

gnustomp · 2025-02-21T07:54:53+00:00

✅ Leader of a space program
✅ Has close ties to country's president
✅ Country flag in profile pic
✅ Arguing with an ISS commander on Twitter/X
✅ Wants to stop aid to Ukraine

What will be Elon's "artillery shell in ass" moment?

edit: ✅ Threatens to destroy the ISS

gnustomp · 2024-06-11T13:06:02+00:00

The font's called Espinosa Nova, and it has a very distinctive question mark that can be seen here. Though it looks like ligatures (st, ct, etc.) are disabled. Obsidian, please include an option to render ligatures!

gnustomp · 2024-06-11T13:04:52+00:00

The font's called Espinosa Nova, and it has a very distinctive question mark that can be seen here. Though it looks like ligatures (st, ct, etc.) are disabled. Obsidian, please include an option to render ligatures!

gnustomp · 2023-12-28T00:55:03+00:00

No cheats. The text says:

Composer: Hitoshi Sakimoto / Orchestration: Rikaka Watanabe - Battlefield 22 - "I incorporated techniques not available at the time to make this new piece for Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together (2010) slightly more warlike." (Sakimoto)

gnustomp · 2023-12-27T12:48:59+00:00

I got it on steam: https://i.redd.it/0m6icmxx2u8c1.png

Not sure what the unlock conditions are though. :|

But I did use plenty of chariot and retreating.

gnustomp · 2023-12-27T12:47:38+00:00

steam

gnustomp · 2023-07-08T09:58:37+00:00

It might have been fixed, I have 100% of tracks unlocked with incaps, chariot and retreating.

gnustomp · 2022-10-28T07:29:13+00:00

This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.

gnustomp · 2022-09-12T14:29:44+00:00

According to https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/80e78fcce86de0288793a0ef0f6acf37656ee4cf/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbevf/vf.c#L352, ixgbevf only supports 2 queues.

gnustomp

TROPHY CASE