Real speed WL500W

Printable View

04-07-2008, 22:55
luon

Real speed WL500W

Hi everbody,

I have some problem with real speed of WL-500W with Wi-Fi.
My settings are as follows:
Firmware Oleg - 1.9.2.7-10
Wi-Fi settings: Chanell Auto, Wireles Mode Auto, Bandwidth 40 MHz, Auth WPA,
Advanced settings: AfterBurner Off (if on no change), ... Frame Bursting Enable

Client side with Dell Wireless 1505 Draft 802.11n WLAN Mini-Card and
other test with MSI US70SE Wireless Adapter.
On client side I see connection with 270 Mb/s

Best download speed I ever reached was 3,2 MB/s. For me its too slow.
Any idea how to get better speed OR its the best what I can get from ASUS?
Thx
05-07-2008, 23:11
wpte

the N speed is indeed 270 and not 300:)
Try to put it on WEP encryption and see if there is any difference, some drivers of clients don''t respond well to wireless N and AES;)

How did you tested the troughput anyway?

small note:
mbits = megaBIT per second, if you devide it trough 8 you get megabyte/s
mb/s = megabyte per second

the speeds of networks are usually displayed in mbits
so the theoretical speeds of networks are:
100mbit: 12.5mb/s
270mbit: 33.75mb/s
1000mbit: 125mb/s

note that all these speeds are commonly faster than harddrives, most harddrives only can handle 10mb/s

for a proper test result I reccommend using the samba inside windows and use it to transfer files between 2 pc''s. if you have 2 vista versions you get better speeds than 1 vista and 1 xp;)

on my raid system I had a maximum speed of 11.9mb/s on the wired networks, I have a pc with raid0, capable of getting 32.6mb/s
07-07-2008, 23:21
luon

Thx

Thx wpte,

When I put my ASUS from WPA2 to WEP security my throughput raised to 4 - 4,8 MByte/s .

I tested throughput as follows

1 PC (Vista SP1) with wire connection to ASUS
1 PC (Vista SP1) with Wi-Fi connection to ASUS
copying 1 GB file from one to other

Speed was measured by DU Meter on Wi-Fi interface

Thx a lot again
08-07-2008, 10:42
wpte

Quote:

Originally Posted by luon

Thx wpte,

When I put my ASUS from WPA2 to WEP security my throughput raised to 4 - 4,8 MByte/s .

I tested throughput as follows

1 PC (Vista SP1) with wire connection to ASUS
1 PC (Vista SP1) with Wi-Fi connection to ASUS
copying 1 GB file from one to other

Speed was measured by DU Meter on Wi-Fi interface

Thx a lot again

that doesnt really change mutch...
you should at least get 6mb/s

are you sure you have a clear signal, is the signal of the laptop good enough.
try to move closer to the router;)

go into the device manager and check the propeties of the wlan adapter.
in the advanced tab, you may find settings for saving batteries, if you disable this, you will get bigger troughputs;)

and also, test it the other way around, file from laptop to pc, it might change something:)
I hope it helps
23-08-2008, 23:11
Debugger

i have 3.0 mbit/s download speed with Asus wl500w over wifi n draft wpa2-psk and i'm lucky :)
29-08-2008, 12:36
wpte

Quote:

Originally Posted by Debugger

i have 3.0 mbit/s download speed with Asus wl500w over wifi n draft wpa2-psk and i'm lucky :)

hmm, I also forgot to take into account that laptop hdd are commonly pretty slow
it might bottleneck your connection a bit:rolleyes:
normal desktop hdd easily get 80mbits, but laptop hdd mostly 40mbits
upgrading to a 7200rpm laptop hdd might fix that
10-10-2008, 05:40
dal

Are you high? If I get less than 30mBYTES/s (240mbit/s) throughput on either my desktop PC or my laptop I'm worried. This ain't 1998 anymore.

You honestly own a laptop that can't put out more than 5mbytes/sec hdd throughput? Thats less than halfway towards making a wired ethernet connection the chokepoint in that situation. That's crazy talk.
10-10-2008, 05:43
dal

Quote:

Originally Posted by wpte

the N speed is indeed 270 and not 300:)
Try to put it on WEP encryption and see if there is any difference, some drivers of clients don''t respond well to wireless N and AES;)

How did you tested the troughput anyway?

small note:
mbits = megaBIT per second, if you devide it trough 8 you get megabyte/s
mb/s = megabyte per second

the speeds of networks are usually displayed in mbits
so the theoretical speeds of networks are:
100mbit: 12.5mb/s
270mbit: 33.75mb/s
1000mbit: 125mb/s

note that all these speeds are commonly faster than harddrives, most harddrives only can handle 10mb/s

Remind me not to pick up any new hdds at the place you buy yours.
13-10-2008, 20:58
wpte

Quote:

Originally Posted by dal

Remind me not to pick up any new hdds at the place you buy yours.

hmm... you didn't even read what I said I guess..
I once was on a gigabit network with 2 raptors in raid 0.
when I downloaded something, I could only get about 340mbit
just because my hdd doesnt go any faster than about 35mb/s
it's just like dvd's, at speed 2 or 3 they also write only like 3mb/s:rolleyes:
wich is pretty fast, because an ordinary dvd would take about 500kb/s to 1mb/s depending on the lenght and disc size...
14-10-2008, 04:13
dal

Quote:

Originally Posted by wpte

hmm... you didn't even read what I said I guess..
I once was on a gigabit network with 2 raptors in raid 0.
when I downloaded something, I could only get about 340mbit
just because my hdd doesnt go any faster than about 35mb/s
it's just like dvd's, at speed 2 or 3 they also write only like 3mb/s:rolleyes:
wich is pretty fast, because an ordinary dvd would take about 500kb/s to 1mb/s depending on the lenght and disc size...

I read you quite clear.

340mbit/s = 42.5mbyte/s. 8 bits to a byte, not ten. Which is a relief, because otherwise your raid 0 setup would be no faster writing than cheapass off the shelf seagate drive in a non-raid setup.

And I'm still not quite understanding where you pulled the figure of 10mbyte/sec from. That's stone age speeds. In fact the poorest performing drive on toms hardware's hdd charts "http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/3-5-hard-drive-charts/File-Writing-Performance,662.html" scores 41mbytes/sec. Say what you like about synthetic benchmarks, but I still don't seeing that being a 4x inflated figure.
14-10-2008, 15:03
wpte

Quote:

Originally Posted by dal

I read you quite clear.

340mbit/s = 42.5mbyte/s. 8 bits to a byte, not ten. Which is a relief, because otherwise your raid 0 setup would be no faster writing than cheapass off the shelf seagate drive in a non-raid setup.

And I'm still not quite understanding where you pulled the figure of 10mbyte/sec from. That's stone age speeds. In fact the poorest performing drive on toms hardware's hdd charts "http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/3-5-hard-drive-charts/File-Writing-Performance,662.html" scores 41mbytes/sec. Say what you like about synthetic benchmarks, but I still don't seeing that being a 4x inflated figure.

pcmark05 displays it's speeds in mb/s while it should say mbits
toms hardware think they are right and just put them up.
yes, the velociraptor is fast, but I was talking about normal desktop hdd wich only get between 70 and 90mbits.

and yes, we say 8 bytes, but that would cause a lot of errors these days...
so since like... well... since the first real computers arrived they took 9 bits.
1 of those bits is the so called parity bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity_bit)
that is why a real gigabyte takes up about 1024mb instead 1000mb.
but the error correction goes further these days, and a short hash of the received package is send back to the sender to check if the received data is correct.
that's also why you upload something while you're downloading from the web.

believe me or not, but it's not all advanced super speed like you expect.
if you really need super speed, get yourself a nice samsung scsi drive, wich reads and writes over 100mb/s;)
15-10-2008, 08:25
dal

So you're trying to say that my year old cheapass 160gb harddrive is almost eight times faster than the western digital 100gb drive at the bottom of those charts? And just over twice as fast as the fastest (Samsung spinpoint F1)? No man. The measurement is listed as MB/s. Big b generally means bytes not bits, as it does in this case.

My initial point stands. Show me a hdd that maxes out at 10mbytes/sec transfer speed and I'll show you a piece of computing (pre)history.
17-01-2009, 00:30
sigxcpu

Hmmm...

I've created myself an account here because I'm simply amazed about the quantity of stupidity I see:

1. 1 byte(1 b) = 8 bits (8b)
2. 1 Megabyte (1 MB) = 1048576 bytes = 8Mbits
3. In hard drive capacity, 1 GB (Gigabyte) equals 1000000000 bytes, because of marketing purposes. Real unformatted capacity is 953MBytes, in this case.
4. A 2008 hard-drive (seagate 500GB) has the following write performance:

$ time dd if=/dev/zero of=outfile bs=1048576 count=1024
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 11.0258 s, 97.4 MB/s

real 0m11.091s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m1.520s

5. One Kilobyte has 1024 bytes because of the addressing scheme (binary) that doubles the capacity with each address line. So, one Kilobyte = 2^10 bytes, by convention. What was the crap about parity and shit? Are you high?
It simply cannot scale up/down otherwise than doubling/cutting in half.

6. About TCP: there is not "short hash" sent to the server. It is simply an ACK about a data segment number. Error correction is done at the receiver level by comparing checksums. If they mismatch, there is no ACK to the server, therefore a retransmission occurs.

C'mon, if you know nothing about computers, ask, read or listen, don't "teach" others.