3 ms·
WG is much faster in our tests than OpenVPN, and a bit faster than IPSec depending on the system. OpenVPN uses UDP too but OpenVPN is kind of slow.
by api 7y ago
WG is much faster in our tests than OpenVPN, and a bit faster than IPSec depending on the system. OpenVPN uses UDP too but OpenVPN is kind of slow.
- zajio1am 7y agoOr much slower on systems with AES-NI, but relatively slow CPU. Like are used in some hi-end SOHO routers. I did not test IPSec vs WireGuard, but scp from/to my home router/NAS is about three times faster with AES (used by IPSec) than with Chacha20 (used by WG).
- api 7y agoGood point. AES hardware acceleration makes a massive difference. It's why ZeroTier 2.x will use AES. Tiny boxes that lack HW acceleration are generally not used in cases where they're pushing enough bandwidth to matter anyway.
- bjoli 7y agoi did test it. in my setup we couldn't get IPsec to not drop a lotmof packages, so the benefits of aes-ni was lost in retries. switching that IPsec setup to chacha20-poly1305 actually made most of the drops go away. I have no idea what was going on, but wireguard and IPsec was comparable in that test, with ispec being sliiiightly faster. the network has almost no latency, so if the retries remain on slower networks, that would change.