Pgoodwin1

About once every 3-4 weeks, my network slows down to 20% of my averages. I called Time Warner on this and they said "well your modem hasn't been reset in a long time". It had been about 5-6weeks since the last reset. To reset it I have to go down into the basement, unplug it, then re-power it. After every reset the network speeds jump right back to their normally pretty decent speeds. Anyone have any idea as to why it wouldn't manage itself to where you didn't have to do a hard boot reset every month. The modem is a Motorola Surfboard SB5101 My network configuration is:

Yeah their test tool typically shows almost 3x what the TMN tool shows. Theirs shows really good numbers even when the service is herky jerky and intermittent and nowhere near their guaranteed 10 down and 1 up. When I'm having problems with their service, the numbers are more like 4-5 down and 0.2 up tested on TMN, but show green on theirs at about 15 down curiously their tool reads much more accurately measuring upload-reads almost the same as TMN. Our local RoadRunner here in Cincinnati is also quite a bit slower than the Nat'l typical numbers that you can pull up here on TMN.

It was the cable modem. A reset fixed the problem. Time Warner's online chat support guy said empty browser cache often, delete cookies often and reset the modem more often. I hadn't reset it it in probably 3-4 weeks. The problem was fixed without deleting any cookies. Not sure what they'd have to do with connection speed??? Anyone got any experience/advice on how often to reset a Motorola SURFBoard (SB5101 I think) modem to keep things running smoothly? It's way down in the basement so it tends to get neglected

My download speeds are off 1/3 and my upload speeds are down by 80%. anyone else having issues today? I didn't reset any of my stuff yet to see if it cleared because the wife works from the home and can't go offline until after 6PM

Thanks guys. Well, according to Time Warner I'm only guaranteed 10 MBps down and 1 MBps up. I consistently get about 9 and 0.9 using TMN - it shows above 20 down on Time Warner's OOKLA derived tool, and 0.9 up. And this is on two different modems (they swapped one out for me lately because my speeds were erratic, but later found it was circuits outside). Based on those upload and download numbers, I doubt if the the modem is the bottleneck. But to be honest, MudMan, I don't really know if bigger RAM buffer sizes and faster processor in a more modern modem still might help some. And yes the numbers are 42.88 (30). Mbps Where: "Maximum raw throughput including overhead (maximum usable throughput without overhead)"

Thanks TriRan. I had a hunch it wouldn't be that simple

Set the fan turn on point as low as you can stand from a fan noise and power consumption perspective. If the fan is relatively low power compared to the total power draw of the computer, then it's not much of a money impact letting it run at just above the idle temperature. If the fan is real noisy, and it's bothersome except when you're gaming, set the threshold higher- just above the hottest temp it gets when the room is warm and your doing you typical stuff on the computer. Running electronics hot decreases the reliability of the components. The predicted failure rates double about every 10 deg C for most electronic assemblies. Allowing the parts to get hot then cool down is also detrimental in that the temperature cycles stress and unstressed the solder joints. The bigger the temperature swing the more detrimental it is and the less likely it is that some solder joint will fail. The best case is cool and constant. If you have the option of low speed and high speed fan set points, you could set the fan to low ON at 25C and high ON at 40C for example. The one sentence in there is wrong. "The bigger the temperature swing the more detrimental it is and the less likely it is that some solder joint will fail". It should have said: The bigger the temperature swing the more detrimental it is and the MORE likely it is that some solder joint will fail Sorry 'bout that, didn't proof read. B(-).

From Wikipedia: DOCSIS 3.0 features channel bonding, which enables multiple downstream and upstream channels to be used together at the same time by a single subscriber and adds management over IPv6. Speeds 2.0 38 Mbit/s downstream 27 Mbit/s. upstream 3.0 m × 38 Mbit/s n × 27 Mbit/s Where m and n are # channels, max of 4 It looks to me that the the throughput increase of DOCSIS 3 over 2 is from multiple channel operation. If I put a DOCSIS 3 TIme Warner Cable compatible modem in place of my DOCSIS 2 model they provided me, will I automatically get multi channel operation and a speed increase on their standard service? i.e. does Time Warner have to enable the multi channel operation on their end? Or does the modem respond back to Time Warner that it's multi channel and automatically TxRx in multi channel. I'm wondering if their high speed service is as simple as a DOCSIS 3 model or do they have to enable the 4 channel operation

Mudman.. You think they'd let me keep the modem? I'd probably like the faster service and be disappointed when I dropped it for this serve. I'm limited to 1 Mbps upload and they "guarantee" 10 Mbps download times on the plan I'm on now. I rarely get over 9 down and 0.9 up as measured by TMN. Of course it's all green and 3 times as high on download with their speed test tool. Strange though that their upload speed measures about the same on their tool as the on on this site.

Thanks for the suggestion TMNSV. I may try that.

I did the 7.6.1 update about a week ago and everything in the house that I've tested (2 Macs, 2 iPads, 1 Dell laptop, 2 iPhones) improved. All wireless bands a, b, g and n improved. I'm getting much more consistent results, and a much improved range. I'm using it in Bridge mode connected to a 10/100 wired router. I'm getting pretty much my ISP (RoadRunner Cincinnati) max speeds even at over 40 feet thru 2 walls and kitchen cabinets on the iPad and nearly that on the iPhone on WiFi. I'm getting the same speeds now on the iPad that I get on the iMac on wired Ethernet through the 10/100 router and Time Warner provided Motorola cable modem. Too bad the modem maxes out at about 8-9 Mbps down and 0.9 up. One note on the update. At first the iPhone speeds were only about 1/2 of their prior averages on Wifi. I looked on the Apple Support Airport forum and a lot of people had the phone slow down issue. the fix was to change the AEBS 2.4 GHz channel from automatic (was on ch 6) to a different fixed channel (I chose 10). That fixed the phone. People surmised that the firmware update changed the gain of the unit and that interference from neighbor's wifi on ch 6 was bleeding more of their signals into the unit and worsening the noise figure. I did note using the Airport Utility that the signal to noise ratio was better, and that 3 more of the the neighbor's networks showed up on the list of networks showing. Even the older Dell laptop 802.11a is running faster. And the the 2006 MacBook Pro with 802.11g is running as fast as the "n" devices-which shows me that Time Warner and their equipment are the bottleneck, not my gear - confirmed with a direct wired connection to the cable modem. They want more money per month to get faster service. I wonder if they would even have to change any of their equipment other than the cable modem.

That's cool. I didn't know that at first, but now that I do, it's not a big deal. Once I deleted out the orphan readings, it shows me what the simultaneous readings were. I just now always run the UP and Down.

I deleted the download data points where there wasn't an upload test point at the same time value and the plot now shows upload and download points at the same point on the X axis. This simply means that the X axis isn't really time.

Cisco currently makes a SG 100D-08 8-port unmanaged gigabit switch. It's about $65 new at B&H Photo. I can't find a spec in any of Cisco's documentation that says whether or not it supports jumbo frames. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps10863/datasheet_C78-582017.html

Can you administer a 2900 series Cisco with a Mac running Safari or Firefox? LOL if it's command line programming, it's a No

Mudman- I do agree though that it's not often that I'm moving the huge GB of data across the network, and it's not that often that the PS3 is running games online while both BluRays are streaming Netflix. But I'm not going to spend all that much money on all of this. The router and switches I'm using were probably designed in the 90s, and I've owned them for years. They've been on 24/7 for probably 50,000 hrs or more, and probabilities tell me they're likely to fail before too much longer. Of course, buying new stuff is a quality crapshoot these days.

good discussion- haha. At times we do have two BluRay players streaming HD video and a PS3 gaming all at the same time, and while all that is going on, the iPhones and iPads are always doing something-syncing/backing up wirelessly. So there's quite a bit of traffic. I also back up files across the network, many times sending 100s of gigabytes from one computer to another's ext HDD. I'm also thinking of hanging a big drive off the Airport Extreme Base Station's USB port and using that as a shared networked volume, although hanging a FireWire 800 drive off the iMac might be a better solution-it's always on. So I think spending a few bucks for the faster equipment would help internally. I don't expect to get much improvement in Internet speed, not with Time Warner RoadRunner as the ISP

Yes. I'm starting to see/understand that that might be a much cheaper option.

TriRan. I thought about that too - getting a wireless on and not using the wireless but there aren't many of them with more than 4 ports either. I'll checkout the ones you mentioned above. thanks I'll go on Cisco's website again. They're product picker on the website isn't the easiest thing to use. I need more than 4 ports Of the RVS4000. I'm sure they make an 8 port.

I can't find many wired 10/100/1000 routers out there. Everyone makes scads of wireless ones with 4 ports. There's lots of ethernet switches but not many routers. Almost all of the routers are only 10/100. Anyone have any suggestions.

Mudman-I'll try that to see if it's periodic.

Don't underestimate the effect of the monitor on your experience. They are not all created equal in terms of brightness, contrast, linearity, speed, color accuracy. I haven't researched them for a few years so I don't have any recommendations.

Thanks TriRan. Those were the same thoughts I had about the router-more up to date with a better computer in it. I hadn't thought about the local transfer speed improvement though but that's right, they would be better. Now I just have to pick one. I do see significant slowdowns at times here but they never last long enough to nail down the problem. I don't really know if it's inside or outside my network that's varying.

The DI-604 router is only 5-ports as is the Netgear Switch. I've had the router for a long time and the network has grown considerably (wireless devices added plus a couple of added computers). I was thinking of replacing the DI-604 and FS105 Switch with a 10/100/1000 wired router - 8 port. Given the number of connections going through it, I was thinking that a faster router might speed things up some. I realize that the limiting factor at the port to the outside world (the cable modem) is 10/100 and Time Warner only really guarantees 10 Mbps download. I also realize that the Airport Extreme could be used in place of the DI-604, however, the D-link and modem is in the basement where the house ethernet distribution system box is - a long way from any wireless devices. And the Airport Extreme Base Station is upstairs fairly close to the wireless devices. So I'd rather keep it upstairs. The six wireless things at the bottom are almost always doing something. The Dell laptop is my wife's work laptop (encrypted data traffic) - she works at home but interfaces all over the country all day. The MacBook Pro and i3 iMac are part timers (home use) with substantial use. The other computers are not used much. The BlueRay players stream Netflix and are on simultaneously at times. For downloads: the MacBook Pro averages about 7 Mbps, the i3 iMac averages about 8.3 Mbps, The iPads average about 5 Mbps, and the iPhones average about 1.7 Mbps. I haven't measure the Dell laptop speeds, but would imagine they are similar to the MacBook Pro times - although I don't know what impact encryption has on network throughput. For uploads: the MacBook Pro averages about 0.9 Mbps, the i3 iMac averages about 0.9 Mbps, The iPads average about 0.7 Mbps, and the iPhones average about 0.5 Mbps. Questions: 1. Would upgrading the router and switch to a single higher speed router improve performance? 2. What 8 port 10/100/1000 router(s) would you recommend? - they're require Mac software compatibility

Yes. The values are correct, I only meant that the upload points aren't plotting at the right time value on the x axis.