Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[theboyk]

I'm running two Intel iMacs (wireless N) connected to the DIR-825. One iMac is wired to the DIR-825 via gigabit ethernet. The second is connected via wifi (wireless N) on the 5Ghz band. Both iMacs are within a couple feet of each other (with the DIR-825 in between).

Hard drive speed tests on both iMacs are running around 60MB/s (average for their drive types), so the HD speed is not the limitation.

When I transfer a 1GB file between the two machines (testing using AFP and FTP) I usually max out at around 12MB/s — is this an acceptable speed for a wireless N connection on the 5Ghz band?

Regards,
Kristin.

[Fatman]

What link speed is reported on each Mac under the Network Utility?

What speed do you get if you hardware both computers?

Do you have the option of doing any more literal speed tests than a file transfer?

You may be testing your equipment too close together, I would be curious to see what your speeds look like 10-15 feet away from the router.

[theboyk]

I'll check those numbers for you when I get home, but to answer one of your questions, using Activity Monitor to monitor the network throughput is really my only option. I used to use iperf, but since I've upgraded to 10.6 I've not been able to get it installed successfully. Any other suggestions for testing LAN/WLAN speed under OS X?
k.

[Fatman]

Truthfully, I don't do much benchmarking, so I don't have any software to suggest.

[theboyk]

No worries — I found something.
Given that, is 12MB/s a poor speed?
k.

[Fatman]

Truthfully I wouldn't know.  I jumped into this case cause you are a Mac user and had very specific numbers.  Getting 96Mbps in application data isn't likely unless you are connecting at a PHY speed of over 100Mbps, I suspect you are getting the full 144.4Mbps PHY possible with the wireless card that Apple likes to use (it only supports 20Mhz channel width, not 20/40).

That said I would accept that personally, but that is a personal thing, I don't do anything important or heavy over wireless.  My MacBook stays plugged into my desk network if I am doing anything important (other than a wireless test), at home I will use a wired PC for anything I am concerned about.  Personal web browsing for entertainment is done wirelessly, but if it fails or is slower than LAN speed I won't be bothered.

[bkspero]

Test wired to wired.  I would not be surprised if you found that the router itself was the bottleneck and not the wireless.  I could get wireless connection readings on my wireless utility of 270 mb/sec routinely (34 mB/sec).  But my transfer speeds rarely reached even 5 mB/sec (similar or slower than yours).  I tested it using both the 5 and 2.4 gHz bands using a Windows 7 HP pc and on the 2.4 gHz band using the Windows PC and a Macbook.  Transferring/receiving from any of several gigabit ethernet sources (Mac Pro, mac mini, the HP laptop, the Macbook, and a gigabit network drive).

Wired speeds were not clearly better using new Cat 6 cables.  I replaced my 825 with a cheap Trendnet 639 and my transfer speeds tripled.  And this router is just supposed to contain a hub and not a switch (although Trendnet claims their new firmware changes its function to that of a switch).

I wish I had a solution for you, and not just confirmation of your issues.  Sorry.

[theboyk]

To test, I decided to bring the DIR-825 into a space where I design/built/manage the network (115+ gigabit drops, all Cat5e [all under max range], cisco switches, cisco router, 3 x Xserves, etc.) — the network peaks at just under 100 MB/s, which is the result of the HDs being used and protocol overhead — even then, roughly 95 MB/s (about 85 MB/s on average) for a gigabit network isn't too shabby, IMO. And wired-to-wired wasn't an issue. I was using the following in my wired-to-wired testing:

Server (hosting the data) = latest Xserve with 1TB RAID1 drive clicking in at 100+ MB/s read/write
Main Switch = stack of Cisco 48 port gigabit managed switches
Computer (receiving the data) = Mac Pro with 1TB RAID1 drive clocking in at 100+ MB/s read/write
File sizes for Testing = 2 – 2.5 GB file sizes

Again, in the above setup I get about 85+ MB/s transfer speeds (after running the test 10x).

I then placed the DIR-825 between the Mac Pro and the main switch. I expected the numbers to be drastically lower, but they weren't — I was getting almost the exact same speeds, on average 80+ MB/s with the peak hitting 90.6 MB/s. So, IMO, the DIR-825 held its own with respect to wired gigabit speeds.

All these tests were done in the middle of the day in a busy production environment.

Now, I did the same test wireless. Connecting via the 5Ghz band, dedicated to Wireless N, 20 Mhz channel width I was showing a "Transmission Rate" between 115 – 130 with an RSSI of -18 — pretty strong signal. After running the test 10x I averaged 8.7 MB/s and peaked at 9.3 MB/s. I was about 15 feet away, direct line of site. At home, running the same sort of test, but going from one room to the room directly 1 floor down (old, hardwood floor), I average between 7–8 MB/s (though, it's peaked at 12.6 MB/s).

So, while by no means a definitive test, it is what it is. The wired speeds are fantastic. Wireless — well, not sure — thus my original post. Is getting 8–9 MB/s on average via Wireless N on the DIR-825 a good speed?

I'm receiving a Netgear WNDR3700 this afternoon and will hopefully be able to sneak the same tests in.

Thanks,
Kristin.

Test wired to wired.  I would not be surprised if you found that the router itself was the bottleneck and not the wireless.  I could get wireless connection readings on my wireless utility of 270 mb/sec routinely (34 mB/sec).  But my transfer speeds rarely reached even 5 mB/sec (similar or slower than yours).  I tested it using both the 5 and 2.4 gHz bands using a Windows 7 HP pc and on the 2.4 gHz band using the Windows PC and a Macbook.  Transferring/receiving from any of several gigabit ethernet sources (Mac Pro, mac mini, the HP laptop, the Macbook, and a gigabit network drive).

Wired speeds were not clearly better using new Cat 6 cables.  I replaced my 825 with a cheap Trendnet 639 and my transfer speeds tripled.  And this router is just supposed to contain a hub and not a switch (although Trendnet claims their new firmware changes its function to that of a switch).

I wish I had a solution for you, and not just confirmation of your issues.  Sorry.