On 11/07/2017 11:45 AM, stan wrote: > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 20:09:40 +1100 > Stephen Morris <samorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I am in Australia. The router is rated at 600 Mb/s on the 2.4 GHz >> interface and 1300 Mb/s on the 5 GHz interface to give it the >> connection speed of 1900 Mb/s AC. As I mentioned above under Windows >> I get 452 Mb/s and 1300 Mb/s respectively so I was expecting similar >> connection speeds under Linux. > > Which is reasonable. If this is an open spec, I would expect linux to > be at least as good as the windows results. Specs (open or not) often have little to do with it. It's more trying to figure out how the bloody hardware works. If you don't know which bits to fiddle on the chip, you may never get the speeds the thing supposedly advertises. Most Windows drivers are produced with the assistance of the manufacturer of the hardware because M$ funds it. On the flip side, I'd bet the majority of Linux drivers are reversed engineered and in some cases, the manufacturers actively try to hinder development (Texas Instruments was notorious for this 8-10 years ago). Take any info that the Windows drivers report with a large grain of salt (perhaps even an entire salt lick). They've been known to, uhm, "fudge" the actual performance numbers. Even ignoring that, my machine is hardwired to another machine over a 1Gbps wire. I know I should get 1Gbps between the two, but in reality I get 850Mbps at best. That's the nature of the beast...there's a certain amount of overhead in TCP/IP you'll never, ever get past (on copper/glass links, 10-15%, on wifi it's higher). The only way to accurately measure things is to transfer a big file across the wifi network from one wireless node to another on the same wireless segment (make sure both nodes have attached to the same wireless access point so you're not adding the router's latencies into it) and actually time the transfer. Make sure the network is quiet and that you use the same file transfer technique in each test (e.g. if you use FTP on Linux, use it on Windows, too) for an apples-to-apples comparison. Do multiple tests as well and average the results. Don't do the tests using some native NAS-type thing (e.g. NFS on Linux and CIFS on Windows) since now you're adding yet another network protocol layer on top of the rest. You should also keep in mind that no matter which transfer technique you use, some implementations will be better than others (there's performance differences between FTP servers such as VSFTPd and ProFTPd and differences in the clients, as well). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx - - AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 - - - - Fear is finding a ".vbs" script in your Inbox - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
