bamafamily Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 I just saw a post of this 20 minutes ago and now it is gone... Here are a bunch of links to NDT servers: Rochester Institute of Tech: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 very nice, those tests are great for fiber optic speedtesting its amazing what i pulled all the way from Sweden to Brazil VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bamafamily Posted February 10, 2005 Author CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 wish I could get speeds like that and not always have that "Congested Link" message... What kind of line are you on Van Buren?? No competing traffic it looks like bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
just- Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 http://web100.rit.edu:7123/ TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.3a click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.17Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 4.49Mb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Half duplex Fast Ethernet subnet Information: The receive buffer should be 1328.0029296875 Kbytes to maximize throughput http://ndt.gt-med.ufsc.br:7123/ TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.3a click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 321.09Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 1.75Mb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Full duplex Fast Ethernet subnet Information: The receive buffer should be 3157.71484375 Kbytes to maximize throughput http://speedtest.umflint.edu/ click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 1.01Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 3.82Mb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 45 Mbps T3/DS3 subnet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 wish I could get speeds like that and not always have that "Congested Link" message... What kind of line are you on Van Buren?? No competing traffic it looks like bama i have fiber optic to my house, im capped 10 Mbps up and 10 Mbps down, i was surprised that it was only 19 hops, seems like a stable route VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cholla Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 Hi all :this is the ndt test from the slow connection Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xs1 Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 sweet one in florida.. TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.2.0f click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 471.76Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 5.12Mb/s Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem Information: Other network traffic is congesting the link click START to re-test Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
just- Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 after tweaking my machine in the university network http://web100.rit.edu:7123/ Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 13.94Mb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 6.45Mb/s The slowest link in the end-to-end path is a 100 Mbps Half duplex Fast Ethernet subnet Information: Other network traffic is congesting the link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim2006 Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 My speeds are below not bad for 3mbs/384!!! TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.3a click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 468.20Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 2.49Mb/s Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem Information: Other network traffic is congesting the link click START to re-test Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustinOhioRR Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 TCP/Web100 Network Diagnostic Tool v5.3.3a click START to begin Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 373.03Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 3.99Mb/s Your PC is connected to a Cable/DSL modem Alarm: Duplex mismatch condition exists: Host set to HD and Switch set to FD click START to re-test WTF?!!? DUPLEX MISMATCH CONDITION?!!? wtf?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bamafamily Posted February 10, 2005 Author CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 hmmm...There was talk of adjusting ones NIC to 10mbs Half Duplex to make up fro deficiences in protocols with Cable Modems... All I can say is that routers usually run at 100Mb/s Full Duplex...Do a check on your NIC and make sure it is set to "Auto Negotiate" although with your speeds, this may be an upstream problem.... Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 hmmm...There was talk of adjusting ones NIC to 10mbs Half Duplex to make up fro deficiences in protocols with Cable Modems... All I can say is that routers usually run at 100Mb/s Full Duplex...Do a check on your NIC and make sure it is set to "Auto Negotiate" although with your speeds, this may be an upstream problem.... Mark hes using a USB adapter, dont know if its possible to change duplex mode in that anyways "Auto" works very bad for alot of network cards i tested 3 diffrent NIC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bamafamily Posted February 10, 2005 Author CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 I understood that the limit on the USB adapter was 10Mbs, and then you have to start throwing in overhead plus other devices using the USB functionality... A couple of questions: How do you tell what mode you are in when set to Auto??(HD or FD) I assume that with the NIC at 10Mbs/FD you are definately hurting if you want to transfer things around on your internal LAN... Have you ever thought about trying to force 100Mbs FD and see if your UL or DL speeds increase?? MArk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 I understood that the limit on the USB adapter was 10Mbs, and then you have to start throwing in overhead plus other devices using the USB functionality... A couple of questions: How do you tell what mode you are in when set to Auto??(HD or FD) I assume that with the NIC at 10Mbs/FD you are definately hurting if you want to transfer things around on your internal LAN... Have you ever thought about trying to force 100Mbs FD and see if your UL or DL speeds increase?? MArk i only have one pc, directly connected to the ISP switch, if you use a router and have a LAN at the home, then force 100 Mbps full. If you only have one PC connected to the modem, use half duplex for Cable, and link speed depend on the modem port, i suggest to start with 10 Mbps half duplex and then compare with 100 Half duplex. If you have dsl, try both half and full, some dsl connections is full duplex VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bamafamily Posted February 10, 2005 Author CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 Thanks VanBuren...I will give it a shot... and someday I will get over to posting about my speeds and see if we can tweak it anymore than it already is...(although I am reluctant to d/l SP2 for XP...) Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrainerd Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 This is what I got. My connection is 2568/898 WEB100 Enabled Statistics: Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 842.80Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 2.10Mb/s ------ Client System Details ------ OS data: Name = Windows XP, Architecture = x86, Version = 5.1 Java data: Vendor = Sun Microsystems Inc., Version = 1.4.2_06 ------ Web100 Detailed Analysis ------ Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found. Link set to Full Duplex mode No network congestion discovered. Good network cable(s) found Normal duplex operation found. Web100 reports the Round trip time = 107.02 msec; the Packet size = 1460 Bytes; and No packet loss - but packets arrived out-of-order 0.11% of the time This connection is receiver limited 92.97% of the time. Increasing the current receive buffer (0 KB) will improve performance This connection is network limited 6.40% of the time. Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to: RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: ON RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF RFC 1323 Window Scaling: OFF Packet size is preserved End-to-End Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End Information: Network Address Translation (NAT) box is modifying the Client's IP address Server says [66.117.105.5] but Client says [172.25.25.2] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 This is what I got. My connection is 2568/898 WEB100 Enabled Statistics: Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 842.80Kb/s running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 2.10Mb/s ------ Client System Details ------ OS data: Name = Windows XP, Architecture = x86, Version = 5.1 Java data: Vendor = Sun Microsystems Inc., Version = 1.4.2_06 ------ Web100 Detailed Analysis ------ Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found. Link set to Full Duplex mode No network congestion discovered. Good network cable(s) found Normal duplex operation found. Web100 reports the Round trip time = 107.02 msec; the Packet size = 1460 Bytes; and No packet loss - but packets arrived out-of-order 0.11% of the time This connection is receiver limited 92.97% of the time. Increasing the current receive buffer (0 KB) will improve performance This connection is network limited 6.40% of the time. Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to: RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: ON RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF RFC 1323 Window Scaling: OFF Packet size is preserved End-to-End Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End Information: Network Address Translation (NAT) box is modifying the Client's IP address Server says [66.117.105.5] but Client says [172.25.25.2] nice speed mbrainerd why isnt it reporting a receive buffer VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROGMAN Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 click START to re-test Preparing Speedtest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrainerd Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 Hey Van... I do not know why, i thought I was tweaked just right, normally they always tell mt to increase by 24kb. I take it that has s/thing to do with a cable nut setting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROGMAN Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 I was flitting by posts and i saw your thing bout cachmen5.0, so since i like to try things I downloaded it and what a diff. My pagefile useage has dropped to 8.2Mbs to 8.4Mbs. Pages are switching out much faster. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 its reporting fine for me, but i use other values, maybe you had too small buffer i dont know VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanBuren Posted February 10, 2005 CID Share Posted February 10, 2005 I was flitting by posts and i saw your thing bout cachmen5.0, so since i like to try things I downloaded it and what a diff. My pagefile useage has dropped to 8.2Mbs to 8.4Mbs. Pages are switching out much faster. Thanks yea cacheman rulez VanBuren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bamafamily Posted February 11, 2005 Author CID Share Posted February 11, 2005 Cacheman?? now I gotta go search and find out what this is all about..you guys are killing me... bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROGMAN Posted February 11, 2005 CID Share Posted February 11, 2005 Its a program that manages your swap file.It take longer for your puter to go search for something on your hard drive then getting it direcitly from ram. So it limits how much goes into your virtual memory ( swap file). Pages load faster and switching from 1 window to another is faster if its getting it from ram instead of your swap file on your hard drive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bamafamily Posted February 11, 2005 Author CID Share Posted February 11, 2005 ahhh...well, I just checked and my peak usage was 434MB ram. I have 1GB installed so no caching for me as of yet.. thx bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.