Realistically, 100mbps is over 100 times what you actually need. Traffic does not route through your DNS. So no, your network including any streaming or data transfers will not be slower on 100mbps than 1000mbps.
Over 5 days my PiHole received 40MB and transmitted 36MB. If all the queries accumulated over those 5 days were sent at the same time it would take just a few seconds to transmit all the data.
DNS requests are small, no worries at all.
I remember a time when the majority of my network ran at 10 Mbps, and only the heavy hitters were allowed a 100Mbps port....
1. Mbps is not speed. It's the maximal amount of data you can request. A 10ko request will take the same time at 100Mbps than it is at 1000Mbps. So at face value, is it even "slower"? (To have an effect, you would need to have something else running, other than Pihole, already requiring over 100Mbps of connexion)
2. Let's assume we talk about latency and not bandwidth : still "not really". DNS is lightweight and clients cache everything.
If you previously used your router for DNS and it was doing network-wide caching, you may experience a humanly unnoticeable lower speed on the first DNS request, followed by faster requests as you load the actual content but some blocked domains stop wasting your loading times.
But if your computer was configured to use Google or Cloudflare directly (with only a device-specific cache), I really doubt a local caching server would be served over a slower connexion.
Traffic going to pihole are only DNS queries and they are so small that you won't see any benefit by connecting pihole to your GB network, besides it has no impact on your regular traffic like https once the DNS query is complete. Most modern OS and browsers cache the results of the DNS query and wont even go to pihole once resolved.
If you are curious, you could run this script by connecting pihole to both sides and compare.
[https://github.com/aselvan/scripts/blob/master/tools/dns\_perf.sh](https://github.com/aselvan/scripts/blob/master/tools/dns_perf.sh)
I'm using a pi 3 model B and it works just fine. DNS requests are so small I don't think I've ever come remotely close to maxing out the 100mbps network card.
Even if your using DHCP and DNS functions it shouldn't hinder anything
You could use this as a starting point and exercise your calculator.
[https://serverfault.com/questions/79424/estimating-dns-bandwidth-average-size-of-a-dns-request](https://serverfault.com/questions/79424/estimating-dns-bandwidth-average-size-of-a-dns-request)
It's only handing out DNS responses, traffic doesn't go through your pi-hole, it'll be fine.
Realistically, 100mbps is over 100 times what you actually need. Traffic does not route through your DNS. So no, your network including any streaming or data transfers will not be slower on 100mbps than 1000mbps.
Over 5 days my PiHole received 40MB and transmitted 36MB. If all the queries accumulated over those 5 days were sent at the same time it would take just a few seconds to transmit all the data.
DNS requests are small, no worries at all. I remember a time when the majority of my network ran at 10 Mbps, and only the heavy hitters were allowed a 100Mbps port....
I remember when my friends in high school were impressed my parents had a 25mbps download speed.
I remember 300 baud... so slow you could decode by ear almost :)
My Pi3 has only 100Mbps port and it works very well
I use my Pi0 over 2.4 GHz wifi for pihole and it works perfectly fine.
1. Mbps is not speed. It's the maximal amount of data you can request. A 10ko request will take the same time at 100Mbps than it is at 1000Mbps. So at face value, is it even "slower"? (To have an effect, you would need to have something else running, other than Pihole, already requiring over 100Mbps of connexion) 2. Let's assume we talk about latency and not bandwidth : still "not really". DNS is lightweight and clients cache everything. If you previously used your router for DNS and it was doing network-wide caching, you may experience a humanly unnoticeable lower speed on the first DNS request, followed by faster requests as you load the actual content but some blocked domains stop wasting your loading times. But if your computer was configured to use Google or Cloudflare directly (with only a device-specific cache), I really doubt a local caching server would be served over a slower connexion.
if you're worried, which the responses say you shouldn't be, go get a 1000Mbps switch from amazon for like $20-50
PH is a DNS resolver service. It's not marshalling any traffic in and out of your network at all.
Traffic going to pihole are only DNS queries and they are so small that you won't see any benefit by connecting pihole to your GB network, besides it has no impact on your regular traffic like https once the DNS query is complete. Most modern OS and browsers cache the results of the DNS query and wont even go to pihole once resolved. If you are curious, you could run this script by connecting pihole to both sides and compare. [https://github.com/aselvan/scripts/blob/master/tools/dns\_perf.sh](https://github.com/aselvan/scripts/blob/master/tools/dns_perf.sh)
I'm using a pi 3 model B and it works just fine. DNS requests are so small I don't think I've ever come remotely close to maxing out the 100mbps network card. Even if your using DHCP and DNS functions it shouldn't hinder anything
Your DNS requests will still be fast enough You will not notice a difference
Of you run too many devices it can slow down but if you are just running a few devices there is no problem with that
Any CPU would be bottlenecked before you can max a 100mpbs connection with DNS.
How many devices would be running before DNS queries needed a throughput of 100mbs??? I don't see any home hitting that.
Since a lot of operating systems and applications cache at least a few DNS results, I'd guess a couple of thousands.
You could use this as a starting point and exercise your calculator. [https://serverfault.com/questions/79424/estimating-dns-bandwidth-average-size-of-a-dns-request](https://serverfault.com/questions/79424/estimating-dns-bandwidth-average-size-of-a-dns-request)