Nah it's not, you no need i3, as a guide mader of x86 router, for 1000/1000 connection with cake sqm pentium g3460 (2 core haswell 3.5GHz) is enough, htop shows 80% CPU usage!
I can provide and proofs if you want! Or test something you want!
Bufferbloat wise? Sometimes an A but if things get busy it can get down to a D. I just tested though. In Speedtests I don't get full performance but a download in steam for example can still reach almost 100 MB/s with SQM enabled. So maybe that's good enough
I ran these from a client but, from a custom x86/x64 router/server directly connected to the cable modem.
CM <2GE> Server <2.5GE> AP <1800mbps> Client
I from a pure speed standpoint I can hit in excess of 1GE from the server itself and probably get some better scores on the testing from there vs a wifi client. It also depends on the server on the other end being used for testing.
It's all relative to what's running on each leg of the test. If you're using a console that just does gaming and nothing else connected directly to the ISP your scores should be good enough to not have much latency / bloat. Factoring in other devices on your network though determines the overall scores you see.
In reality I would expect under "normal" circumstances w/o things optimized for testing to not get an A on these sorts of tests.
NIC's are really hard to buy for regular or even advanced user, you should go correct slot, correct speeds, correct chipset (intel only lol) for example in Russia, we have A LOT OF silicom NIC's based on intel i350 but it is NOT WORK with openwrt, meanwhile basic i350 card work.., you should assembly/disassembly cheap plastic case and probably ruin it..
I wouldn't rely on Waveform's tests, unfortunately. Using Chrome the top speeds it can reach are ~50% of what I can get using the native Speedtest.com application. So, their tool can't actually apply a critical load and so their latency tests under load aren't valid.
On top of that, they were showing increased latency "under load" that is 2-3x higher than I see with MRT while running tests with the Speedtest.com application (at twice the throughput). So, it seems that their timing code is being influenced by the loading code they are running.
From my router / server though;
Server: Dallas, TX tx.na.speedtest.i3d.net:8080 by i3D.net (3.77722 km from you): 13 ms
Ping: 13 ms.
Jitter: 3 ms.
Determine line type (2) ........................
Fiber / Lan line type detected: profile selected fiber
When I was testing under load I had downloads running in an app not relying on any test suite to provide load. App vs Browser of course can be quite different. Running rhe speedtest against their servers from CLI reduces the issues you see from bad software coding. Alas I downloaded the APP for Windows and that's the one screenshot and also the openwrt scripts from gitub for comparison testing.
Yep.... what he said. The 3000's and 4000's also have AES-NI hardware encryption support, where the J1900 did not, which should take off a lot of load if you're using VPN's. Zotac for one has a cheaper 4000 series box...