1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

GS v1.1 or GL v1.1 for Tomato?

Discussion in 'Tomato Firmware' started by tomatofan, Jan 8, 2010.

  1. tomatofan

    tomatofan Addicted to LI Member

    I made a post here but realized there's much more activity and probably more knowledge since this is indeed the Tomato forum. Can't delete my old one though!

    I have the opportunity to "upgrade" from my old GS v1.1 to a new GL v1.1. Since I'm running Tomato and will continue to do so I assume I have no use for the extra memory.

    Is this a good idea? Is the GL any faster? Is the extra RAM really good for something? I know it use newer hardware, but I can't find any benchmarks.

    Anyone with a GL run dnsmasq with cache-size=10000 and 10240 maximum connections? Can all features be on without running out of RAM? Thanks!
     
  2. Toastman

    Toastman Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    I would stick with the GS personally if it has 32MB memory. That will give it more headroom in the event of connection storms and other issues, and it is less likely to crash or reboot. It's faster too, if I remember rightly, although I never even saw one here.

    Any particular reason why you want to change?
     
  3. tomatofan

    tomatofan Addicted to LI Member

    No, it's just that I can exchange it for a new GL at no cost, so if it's any better I will. I thought the GL was faster at routing since it use newer hardware, despite having the same CPU speed. I'm not sure where I got them from though.
     
  4. tomatofan

    tomatofan Addicted to LI Member

  5. CandyBoy

    CandyBoy LI Guru Member

    Well , i think cache-size=10000 for GL is too high ;)
     
  6. mstombs

    mstombs Network Guru Member

    GS 1.1 seems better by memory specification - but they are getting pretty old now and won't last for ever - mine must have been in use for 5 years now!
     
  7. Toastman

    Toastman Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    53Mbps for a GL ???
     
  8. tomatofan

    tomatofan Addicted to LI Member

    With the default firmware, yes, so it says. However it's a benchmarks, not something like say bittorrent. I suspect it's just a single connection so it's more like a HTTP or FTP transfer. Still over twice as fast at routing than the G v1.0.

    Yeah, that's what I'm thinking too, mine is about 5 years old as well. On the other hand, if it does I will get a N-router instead and if Tomato still haven't caught up by then, well, it's bye tomato, nice to know you.
     
  9. tomatofan

    tomatofan Addicted to LI Member

    OK, so that was a easy choice. The WRT54GL makes whiny, unclean noise and the WRT54GS is completely quiet. Performance be damned, there will be no GLs in my house! :)
     
  10. CandyBoy

    CandyBoy LI Guru Member

    Toastman , i want to ask you one question ,does "'cache-size"' improve perfomance in web browsing ? After adding cashe-size ,i dont fell any benefit of it.
     
  11. tomatofan

    tomatofan Addicted to LI Member

    It improve the speed of DNS. Check this out.

    http://code.google.com/p/namebench/

    If you run a big test and set the number of runs to anything above 1 you will see a major improvement because of the big cache.
     
  12. CandyBoy

    CandyBoy LI Guru Member

    tomatofan , what cache-size are you using , 10000 isn't too high value?
     
  13. tomatofan

    tomatofan Addicted to LI Member

    10000 is the maximum, total overkill, but it works on a GS (and if filling it up completely fills up the RAM then it has never filled up for me even though I've tried). Don't know about GL but I think it works. I am in fact running a GL right now with 1.27, pretty much every feature on, cache-size:10000, maximum connections: 10240 and there's still 1.5 MB of RAM left. It's not connected to the Internet though so actually using it might still kill it. ;)

    Default is 150, just setting it to 1000 would be a safer bet, yet a lot bigger.
     
  14. CandyBoy

    CandyBoy LI Guru Member

    Well ,i just do some tests ,and difference between 2000 and 10000 is a few percentages in memory usage.But i think 2000 is the best value ,just to be in a safe side.Higher doesn't mean better :)
     
  15. Pioneer

    Pioneer LI Guru Member

    where can i change the cache-size?
     
  16. hypermood

    hypermood LI Guru Member

  17. Pioneer

    Pioneer LI Guru Member

  18. Azuse

    Azuse LI Guru Member

    10000 is only 5-600kB. By comparison the adblock scripts typically load block lists between 2.5 & 4 MB. In other words if you aren't using that memory for anything else set it to 10k and forget about it.

    Free memory is only ever a waste.
     
  19. CandyBoy

    CandyBoy LI Guru Member

    Yap , just set cache-size=10000 ant leave it alone ,i play with this thing for a month, tested different values ,and all things considered 10000 is a best setting. Also it does not require a lot of memory.
     

Share This Page