dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

Search Topic:
uniqs
1635
share rss forum feed

jrmorfin

join:2004-04-14
Ogden, UT

1 edit

[Connectivity] Faster with gigabit ethernet card

A weird observation, it seems my speed is faster with a gigabit NIC's versus 10/100 NIC's. Anyone else observe this behaviour? I am on the 50meg tier with a SBG6580 Modem


gar187er
I do this for a living

join:2006-06-24
Dover, DE
kudos:5
its the overhead....not to mention the better chipset in the gigabit card....its nothing weird...most people wont notice a difference unless they are doing transfers on their LAN, but since you have a 50meg plan, you would notice a difference...
--
I'm better than you!


telcodad
Premium
join:2011-09-16
Lincroft, NJ
kudos:17
reply to jrmorfin
There was a thread about a month ago that discussed the use of Gigabit Ethernet NICs vs. the older and more common 10/100 Mb ones: »What is the point of high Internet speeds if....


Mike Wolf

join:2009-05-24
Beachwood, NJ
kudos:5
reply to jrmorfin
Yeah I've noticed this for years, which is why my entire network is gigabit now and why I only buy and recommend gigabit equipped routers. It's like when I'm uploading and downloading massive amounts of data I've noticed the network utilization percentage found in the windows task manager hovering between 80 and 90% with a 10/100 link speed but when I'm running at gigabit link speed I see only 8%. Anyway I really think the network performance your seeing is because it is taking stress off the processor somehow. I did some testing on a 120Mbps download and upload network at a college using Internet2 earlier today switching back and forth between the two settings and also had noticed the CPU usage being much lower when on the gigabit setting compared to the 10/100 setting.
Expand your moderator at work

JPnATL

join:2011-11-16
Bethlehem, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to jrmorfin

Re: [Connectivity] Faster with gigabit ethernet card

well when you guys are getting over 100Mbps from your service provider then the illusion may become reality but you have a 1Gbps adapter and I would assume the router as well and you have a cable modem that could have the capacity to transfer 1Gbps but can't because of the one thing holding all these big marketing numbers stamped on display everywhere which mean nothing unless transferring on a local network because Xfinity just has cleared the 100Mbps hump so. What exactly do you mean your "speed" is faster? Do you mean your capable of more bandwidth/volume per second or is your RTT's faster which really is your "speed". When you purchase a tier it says20Mbps that means how much volume per second but speed is how fast you can send a file to a server and receive it back which is RTT( Round Trip Time).


NetFixer
Bah Humbug
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Vonage
·Comcast Business..
·Cingular Wireless
I doubt that the OP in this thread is referring to RTT. More likely it is just the illusion of faster throughput (which is what speed means to most people) caused by the buffering effect of bonded channels, PowerBoost, and whatever buffering is available to the NIC and/or the router/switch to which it is attached.

Here is a Comcast speed test I just ran on my 12/2 connection. Notice the reported 193 mbps peak value? I sometimes see near gigabit per second peak values reported by this test.



--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.


RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1
said by NetFixer:

I doubt that the OP in this thread is referring to RTT. More likely it is just the illusion of faster throughput (which is what speed means to most people) caused by the buffering effect of bonded channels, PowerBoost, and whatever buffering is available to the NIC and/or the router/switch to which it is attached.

Here is a Comcast speed test I just ran on my 12/2 connection. Notice the reported 193 mbps peak value? I sometimes see near gigabit per second peak values reported by this test.

[att=1]

I'm on a Gigabit Ethernet connection on this PC from an Asus RT-N66U Router, and have the Blast! Tier (20/4), but I don't see that-



We have 8 bonded download and 2 bonded upload channels. Peak on that test shows 38.21 Mbps down, with a peak of 5.68 Mbps up.

Edit-That tool goofs on the distance, San Jose is 150 miles south of me.


NetFixer
Bah Humbug
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Vonage
·Comcast Business..
·Cingular Wireless
said by RR Conductor:

I'm on a Gigabit Ethernet connection on this PC from an Asus RT-N66U Router, and have the Blast! Tier (20/4), but I don't see that-




We have 8 bonded download and 2 bonded upload channels. Peak on that test shows 38.21 Mbps down, with a peak of 5.68 Mbps up.

Edit-That tool goofs on the distance, San Jose is 150 miles south of me.

I see the obscenely high peak readings from every PC on my network. I suspect that my local resources and the handling of PowerBoost with bonded channels by my local franchise probably has something to do with it (but whatever the reason, it is not "real", which was my point).

As for the understanding of basic geography by the test designers, that has never been a strong point of that test. Memphis, TN is at least 300 miles west from where the Comcast speed test shows it.



--
We can never have enough of nature.
We need to witness our own limits transgressed, and some life pasturing freely where we never wander.


plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3
reply to jrmorfin
I do want to point out that the same does happen with routers.

I am currently using a Netgear RP114 Router. I would provide a link to the Netgear page for the specs, but its to old, and they don't even have a page anymore (I did a search on their site, and nothing comes up). I have had this router for at least 12 years now (maybe 13 or 14).

What I'm getting at is it has 10 MB WAN port, and four 10/100 LAN ports. So, with a 10 MB WAN port, even though the plan I have with Comcast has my max download speed being either 15 MB or 20 MB, my connections tops out at 7 or 8 MB, due to the overheard of the 10 MB WAN Port. I know I won't get 10 MB on the download, or anything faster. So, I know I need to get a new router very soon.

--Brian
--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail


Mike Wolf

join:2009-05-24
Beachwood, NJ
kudos:5
wow i didn't know those old routers were still being used lol I'm glad you let us know. If you need any help picking out one let us know

Anyway your right, slower WAN or LAN ports on network equipment (including modems) can definitely cause a bottleneck and cause all sorts of problems, especially if the customer is not aware of the bottleneck, goes to a speed test site and gets really low numbers when they are paying for the Extreme 105 package, freaks out and starts publicly blaming Comcast and the government for cover-ups and conspiracies, and ends up paying for a tech to come out only to have the tech discover said bottleneck. I kid you not this has happened more then once.


Chris 313
Come get some
Premium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
kudos:1
reply to plencnerb
Ooh! Why would you keep a router in your setup that old, and that obviously limits your performance so badly? If I can't get my rated speed, I'd have been tracking down and replacing ASAP. You have a lot more patience then I do.


Mike Wolf

join:2009-05-24
Beachwood, NJ
kudos:5
or worse, the people who dont notice or even care about the performance problem.

flasher404

join:2007-07-01
Greeneville, TN
said by Mike Wolf:

or worse, the people who dont notice or even care about the performance problem.

I have noticed that Kaspersky Internet Suite (KIS) seems to buffer some of the speed tests and blasts the data in all at once. It shows fantastic speeds. BUT, if I disable/pause KIS, I then get a more realistic reading. This may be the reason for the "Peak" reading in some of the tests.

Flash


Chris 313
Come get some
Premium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
kudos:1
reply to Mike Wolf
Now that is just scary. I personally pay too much for my 16/2 Blast! and I want every ounce of performance possible. I couldn't not care or notice.


EG
The wings of love
Premium
join:2006-11-18
Union, NJ
kudos:10
reply to flasher404
said by flasher404:

I have noticed that Kaspersky Internet Suite (KIS) seems to buffer some of the speed tests and blasts the data in all at once. It shows fantastic speeds. BUT, if I disable/pause KIS, I then get a more realistic reading. This may be the reason for the "Peak" reading in some of the tests.

Flash

I noticed this as well a year ago after using KAV for many years. It was enough to make me switch A/V apps. I now use Nod32 for my A/V needs.


Mike Wolf

join:2009-05-24
Beachwood, NJ
kudos:5
reply to Chris 313
You know whats crazy is I went back to the local college today and put a spare E4500 router on one of the gigabit ports and was seeing solid 120Mbps up and down on the Internet2 wirelessly and wired and I was shocked at how well it performed. Now my Blast 25/6 (36 with powerboost) seems slow now lol. You know whats wierd is that my laptops seem to work alot faster the higher the connection speed, like a 50% boost in processor or RAM.


RR Conductor
NWP RR Inc.,serving NW CA
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1
reply to Chris 313
said by Chris 313:

Now that is just scary. I personally pay too much for my 16/2 Blast! and I want every ounce of performance possible. I couldn't not care or notice.

I feel you, I have Blast! (20/4 in our area now that we have D3) here too, and pay $72.95 a month The AT&T CO that serves Redwood Valley has never been upgraded to support DSL, so it's Comcast or
the road Thankfully, their HSI has been awesome.

Edit-Comcast dings us $10 a month because we have Directv and not their TV, which stinks. Adelphia (Comcast got their network here) charged us the same whether we had their tv or not.