So I'm looking for CCR1009-PC replacement as home router and from what I see I have two options - either CCR2004-16G-2S+PC or CCR2004-1G-12S+2XS with replaced fans to something quiet (judging from power consumption and heatsink design I assume it'll work just like CRS317 with swapped fans, which runs just fine, I have 3 of those running on Noctuas for years now). 1G-12S+ sounds like no brainer but this router... is very sus. It's so weird... in a way that I'm really afraid that it has ton of caveats and weird quirks that will be total PITA in the end and that I'm not expecting right now. I mean it's super cheap considering it's realistically 5x10G full duplex router, it doesn't make sense - where's the catch? CCR2004-1G-12S+2XS certainly looks like miracle router but its price suggests that some funky hardware has been used there to bring the price down and its block diagram doesn't make me feel any more confident... So how does it compare to something "normal" like CCR2004-16G-2S+? What's there to know before getting CCR2004-1G-12S+2XS in context of CCR1009 user? Apart from missing LCD (I hate you MikroTik) and missing USB for backup LTE modem.

The 12S+ had some issues initially with reboots (related to the port extender in the block diagram). I have not heard of issues with current versions, 7.5+, but they did exist. Be sure to check the test results and block diagram to see what the router can really do.

The 2004-16G versions don't have the port extender and have been rock solid (for me ) just like the ccr 1009 had been for years.

The 12S+ is odd because of the PIPE thing they're using. In my testing with 7.4.1, I was able to get about 19Gbps full duplex through the router, pegging the CPU in the high 90's. It's not going to switch all ports as fast as a CRS305/310/309/317, all of which can switch and now route (L3HW offload) at line rate. (The 317 is a beast; check the L3HW offload instructions--you could use that as the router!)

I look at the 12S+ as a good router for port density and the ability to push 1-10Gbps across 2-3 ports here and there, like doing a file transfer from a desktop to a server for a few minutes. Or, as an ISP, a good way to feed 12 radios at 2.5Gbps, where average traffic across all AP's is likely to hover around 1-2Gbps, but speed tests and other bursting could push two or three ports to their max every once in a while. It's less about having 10Gbps everywhere and more about having something more than 1Gbps when needed.

One nice thing about the 16G version (NOT passively cooled) is the USB3 port. That, coupled with 4GB of RAM and RouterOS 7.6 makes it a great host for containers.

Unless you are replacing a 317 or need the additional ports, the 12S+ is a hard buy. I have two of each model, with one 12S+ in the field for Ubiquiti Wave AP's, and the other three in the lab for testing and projects.

Unless you are replacing a 317 or need the additional ports, the 12S+ is a hard buy. I have two of each model, with one 12S+ in the field for Ubiquiti Wave AP's, and the other three in the lab for testing and projects.

Well I have 3x 317 and one 326 so it kinda became bottleneck to have one 10G uplink to CCR1009. Especially since all those 317 are interconnected with 40G LACP. 20G uplink of 16G would probably be sufficient for now but it seems to be less future-proof, it has noticeably lower CPU clocks and I don't think RM version would be happy with Noctua fans. I mean 12S+ is basically passive device with aux fans so they're not super critical and probably it'd survive even without them. 16G in rackmount version is not so I'll pass. I'm looking for more or less desktop device and passively cooled 16G is meh due to nerfed CPU so... unless there's some really good reason to avoid it, I guess I'll bite the bullet on 12S+. I'll probable connect it via 40G LACP to all those 317s to have 40G shared backbone across all 10G ports. I don't have a lot of 1G devices. Most of my home servers, hypervisors and workstations have at very least 2x10G bond with 9k jumbo across entire LAN with NVME Gen 4 RAID storage. That's one of main reasons to upgrade - CCR1009 is significantly underpowered comparing to end devices in this network.

I know 317 has L3HW but it only works on ROS 7 for fasttracked connections which is not applicable when you use L2 firewall on bridges and as of now - I do in some places. I hope CCR2004 will pull off 10G with 9k jumbo without fasttrack. Also I'm a bit afraid of migration to ROS 7 (which I haven't seen so far and I'm not sure if my config will properly migrate) so I'd prefer to not YOLO migrate to it on any of my existing, actively used devices. Hence getting CCR2004 sounds like good idea.

If you're getting 19G with 1500 mtu I guess it should reach about 40-50G with 9k jumbo - I was getting around 2x perf boost on CCR1009 just from moving to 9k. But then again I'll get penalty from not using fasttrack so we'll see...

I did some more research this morning.

I was able to get 19Gbps because I had no filtering rules in place, which meant FastPath was turned on and virtually all processing was bypassed. The minute you put in a single firewall rule, FastPath is disabled and the available throughput through the router goes down significantly. On these quad-core processors (testing with an RB4011 as I write this), I'm seeing 40% load with 1Gbps of throughput, which explains the 2-3Gbps I was maxing out at when I had the 2004 as a border router.

I did have the 2004 as the home router for a bit, too, and with a recent (at the time) release of RouterOS 7, port-to-port copies within the VLAN on the bridge (behind the firewall) were able to get to 7+Gbps, but I don't recall what other settings I had in the router, i.e. if the firewall was on or not. I soon replaced both 2004's with 2116's and didn't look back.

If you're thinking of having a router to sit atop the stack of CRS317's, personally I'd go with the CCR2116, since it's essentially a switch with a 40Gbps port to the CPU. You could connect each of the four SFP+ ports to one of the CRS317's/CRS326 and it would act as a great trunk between them all, never once hitting the CPU for anything. If it does hit the CPU, it's got plenty of horsepower.

It's more expensive, rack mount, and fans would have to be replaced there, too, but I love mine. The fans only spin up with certain copper SFP+ modules and under heavy CPU load. The one running our home hasn't turned its fans on in quite some time.

I did some more research this morning.

I was able to get 19Gbps because I had no filtering rules in place, which meant FastPath was turned on and virtually all processing was bypassed. The minute you put in a single firewall rule, FastPath is disabled and the available throughput through the router goes down significantly. On these quad-core processors (testing with an RB4011 as I write this), I'm seeing 40% load with 1Gbps of throughput, which explains the 2-3Gbps I was maxing out at when I had the 2004 as a border router.

I did have the 2004 as the home router for a bit, too, and with a recent (at the time) release of RouterOS 7, port-to-port copies within the VLAN on the bridge (behind the firewall) were able to get to 7+Gbps, but I don't recall what other settings I had in the router, i.e. if the firewall was on or not. I soon replaced both 2004's with 2116's and didn't look back.

If you're thinking of having a router to sit atop the stack of CRS317's, personally I'd go with the CCR2116, since it's essentially a switch with a 40Gbps port to the CPU. You could connect each of the four SFP+ ports to one of the CRS317's/CRS326 and it would act as a great trunk between them all, never once hitting the CPU for anything. If it does hit the CPU, it's got plenty of horsepower.

It's more expensive, rack mount, and fans would have to be replaced there, too, but I love mine. The fans only spin up with certain copper SFP+ modules and under heavy CPU load. The one running our home hasn't turned its fans on in quite some time.

Hmm. Those are quite disappointing numbers. I mean it implies CCR2004 is not all that much stronger than CCR1009. I mean CCR1009 pulled for me at very best 4.5G without fasttrack on single TCP. and around 1.5G with 1500 mtu. So it seems CCR2009 is at best 2x taster in single core load which is not all that impressive considering 1009 was 9 core so by definition it had very bad single core. 2004 has only 4 cores so if they're only 2x faster and there's less than half of them then if you do the math... It's not that significant upgrade XD

I mean fasttrack scenario doesn't make sense for me because if I'm about to use fasttrack then just like you said I can just do that on CRS317. So it's all about non-fasttrack perf. And if it's as low as you say then it'd probably barely exceed 10G on single TCP without fasttrack with 9k jumbo... Meh...

My testing earlier matches the 512 byte test results with 25 IP filter rules (even with just one) on each router's information page. I also can't help but wonder if they're adding in + out (aggregate) to make the numbers look better.

2004 says ~25Gbps without any rules (Fast Path), 4Gbps with 25 rules (one rule is enough to disable Fast Path). You're right, not a whole lot better than the 1009 that you've got, which says 15Gbps without rules and 3.2Gbps with rules.
Now I'm curious to run FW/NAT/L3HW testing on my 300's.

If You have the budget make yourself a favor

Get ccr2116, You Will not regret it, 995usd of the Best MikroTik can deliver

I'm not saying 2004 is a Bad product, but from a ccr1009 i don't think is a relevant upgrade

If You still on buying a ccr 2004 get 16g versión no PC

CCR2004-1G-12S+2XS is a niche product don't Buy it unless You know what are You doing

I'm not saying 2004 is a Bad product, but from a ccr1009 i don't think is a relevant upgrade.

AFAIK CCR2004 was actually meant as replacement for CCR1009, not upgrade. I guess MT didn't advertise it as such, though.

I am currently looking at the CCR2004-1G-12S-2XS myself, but leaning more towards the CCR2116-12G-4S+. I think it will be a better buy. Just a bit worried about the power consumption.

I am currently looking at the CCR2004-1G-12S-2XS myself, but leaning more towards the CCR2116-12G-4S+. I think it will be a better buy. Just a bit worried about the power consumption.

The 2004 12S is probably best suited for someone who needs to have a lot of SFP+ ports connected but only with bursty traffic. It has a hard time routing much over 3Gbps with firewall filters, barely hits 19Gbps with zero filters (maxes out CPU). The 2116 has a switch chip, so routing can be done in hardware, and it has 4 times the CPU.

The power consumption is pretty low when you're not doing much with it.

I have the 12S version on my avoid / caveat list. I bought the 16G-2S version instead, and do mostly router-on-a-stick stuff if needed.

It was something about that Marvell multiplexor chip or something. Search in the forums. Unresolved issues for long time, not good.

ah yeah, the Big Reboot thread that appears to have never reached successful conclusion after ~4 years:
viewtopic.php?t=164578&hilit=CCR2004+problems&start=300

not. good. at all.

The CCR2004-1G-12S-2XS is a lemon.

Shared buffers are the big reason, compounded by no L2 offloads.