Isn't this a bit slow for gigabit lan?

Radiation · 9 Dec 2011 at 17:03

I just got a gigabit switch, transferring files between win7 and ubuntu only managed 30mb/s to begin with, once i turned off MSE it hit 40mb/s, this is one large file for testing, i checked cables etc, i was hoping for at least 60mb/s on average?

3dcandy · 9 Dec 2011 at 18:02

could be a multitude of things...got jumbo frames on? latest drivers on both puters? something else running in the background?

Radiation · 10 Dec 2011 at 13:56

It seems to defeat the point a bit if you setup a gigabit network and it doesn't just run at gigabit speeds or at least what the hard drives are capable of, what's the average speed to expect then?

I found jumbo frames, what setting are they suppose to be as there's a few, also will they cause problems by having them on, anything else i should look at?

Zarf · 10 Dec 2011 at 14:58

Get some decent nics. I get 110MB/s between the Intel ones on my network, without any Jumbo Frames. If the machine running Ubuntu is a bit slow (Think P4 or worse) this can also effect the speeds becasue SAMBA isn't particularly efficient)

3dcandy · 10 Dec 2011 at 18:46

yeah jumbo frames on usually improves things a little bit, unless it's loads of small files...
gigabit doesn't get anywhere near hard drive speeds most of the time, it's a lot faster, but not 10 times like you think!

Radiation · 10 Dec 2011 at 22:27

I still don't get why it isn't better by default, surely expecting at least half of what it's capable of isn't unreasonable?

3dcandy · 10 Dec 2011 at 22:31

many reasons...cables, network cards, needs more overheads to achieve the speeds...etc. etc.
Usually I find it's rubbish NIC's though....and onboard are pretty useless sometimes. Is the Ubuntu machine a bit older? Also, gigabit switches, especially the cheap ones can be next to useless...are they both connecting at gigabit speeds?

Radiation · 10 Dec 2011 at 22:38

The ubuntu pc is a bit older, amd scoket 939 2.4ghz, asus onboard gigabit, win7 pc is c2d 3ghz tplink pcie gigabit card, connected by a tplink 5 port gigabit switch, it's cheap but should be capable of a lot more.

Is there a way i can test files held in ram, taking hard drives out of the mix?

NathanE · 10 Dec 2011 at 23:28

Does the AMD machine have its NIC connected via a PCI Express bus? If not, then you've no hope!

3dcandy · 10 Dec 2011 at 23:35

socket 939 machine is doubtful to have a great NIC I'm afraid...they were never that good back then, I reckon that's your problem!

Zarf · 10 Dec 2011 at 23:47

Radiation said:
The ubuntu pc is a bit older, amd scoket 939 2.4ghz, asus onboard gigabit, win7 pc is c2d 3ghz tplink pcie gigabit card, connected by a tplink 5 port gigabit switch, it's cheap but should be capable of a lot more.

Is there a way i can test files held in ram, taking hard drives out of the mix?

even better, use iperf.

HangTime · 11 Dec 2011 at 02:33

^Definitely worth checking out, 40MB/s could be due to poor write speeds on a drive, especially an older system like that (guessing it is at least 5 years old).
Generally speaking until recently gigabit ethernet will have been bottlenecked by bog standard consumer harddisks, at least in cases where they aren't performing optimally (full and fragmented etc).

anything I don't mind · 11 Dec 2011 at 10:09

Well 100mbit is restricted to 10mbyte a second so 40mbyte a second is 4x as fast. Still worth it if you do a lot of copying or stream hd content.

KIA · 11 Dec 2011 at 10:42

groen said:
Well 100mbit is restricted to 10mbyte

No, it isn't.

( |-| |2 ][ $ · 11 Dec 2011 at 10:49

KIA said:
No, it isn't.

100Mbit connection = 12.5M Bytes per second theoretical maximum.
With over heads that's not going to be much over 10MB/s

On another note, two PC's on my Gb network will max out with my network port showing 99-100% usage, can usually been sustained until my RAM hard drive buffer fills up, then it's reduced to about 50%. (It's is a limitation of my Laptop harddrive write speeds)