Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
Yeah, but some of the other routers seem to offer much higher performance in this area. Backups aren't the only thing...moving files and share files are other good reasons to have a cheap USB drive on the router. On 5/9/2010 1:37 AM, Naushad Zulfiqar wrote: Aside from small files yes, the usb is dog slow for backups or anything of that sort. It's more of a handy thing other than anything. If you're serious about backups, a NAS would be more "proper". On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Anthony Q. Martinwrote: Duncan, At lot of the dual-band wirless N routers have a usb port of them for connecting an HD that is then available to machines connected for backups etc. over the network. One disadvantage of the WNDR3700 is that it is really slow for file transfers even on a 1Gbit network (which you'd have if you have it). So, that's the one of two negatives about this router. Still, I'm going to get it as they all have pros and cons. On 5/8/2010 7:27 PM, DSinc wrote: Anthony, What do you mean by, "Too bad the storage is so slow, though." ?? If your current router is only capable of 10/100, then your current LAN is only capable of 10/100. Even with G-Bit cards installed in devices. I think, anyway. Duncan On 05/08/2010 15:32, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: Yes, as Bryan says and I have confirmed. I guess I didn't realize how long it has been since I paid any attention to my network. Even with the powerline adapters, which claim a max throughput of 200 Mbps, I'd have to get a newer& better router to get that (or the best real world numbers I can get). So, I guess I'll go with the Netgear WNDR3700 if no one else chimes in with a reason not too. It seems to be rated as highly as any other and has some cool features. Too bad the storage is so slow, though. On 5/8/2010 3:20 PM, Gaffer wrote: On Saturday 08 May 2010 18:23:39 Anthony Q. Martin wrote: I'm using a linksys wrt54g with a wsb24 booster. My mothers claim to do 1000 Mbps yet on file transfers I only get like 11 MB/s which is more like 100Mpbs/8 = 12.5 MB/s. If my wired network is running at 1000 Mbps shouldn't I bet getting around 125 MB/s file transfers over the wired network? What gives? Your speeds will only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain. If I recall the wrt54g is only 10/100 Mbs on the Ethernet ports. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2861 - Release Date: 05/08/10 02:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00
Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
Get an Apple Extreme Router then. It should fit the bill. They are good routers too. Please note my new mobile number listed in my signature. With best regards, Zulfiqar Naushad Siemens Limited Energy Sector Oil & Gas Division Oil & Gas Solutions E O OS P.O. Box 719, Al-Khobar, 31952 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Phone: +966 (3) 865-9730 (*NEW) Mobile: +966 (59) 561-2990 (*NEW) Fax: +966 (3) 887-0165 mailto:zulfiqar.naus...@siemens.com www.siemens.com.sa -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:55 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs Yeah, but some of the other routers seem to offer much higher performance in this area. Backups aren't the only thing...moving files and share files are other good reasons to have a cheap USB drive on the router. On 5/9/2010 1:37 AM, Naushad Zulfiqar wrote: > Aside from small files yes, the usb is dog slow for backups or anything of > that sort. > > It's more of a handy thing other than anything. > > If you're serious about backups, a NAS would be more "proper". > > > > On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Anthony Q. Martinwrote: > > >> Duncan, >> >> At lot of the dual-band wirless N routers have a usb port of them for >> connecting an HD that is then available to machines connected for backups >> etc. over the network. One disadvantage of the WNDR3700 is that it is really >> slow for file transfers even on a 1Gbit network (which you'd have if you >> have it). So, that's the one of two negatives about this router. Still, I'm >> going to get it as they all have pros and cons. >> >> On 5/8/2010 7:27 PM, DSinc wrote: >> >> >>> Anthony, >>> What do you mean by, "Too bad the storage is so slow, though." ?? >>> If your current router is only capable of 10/100, then your current LAN is >>> only capable of 10/100. Even with G-Bit cards installed in devices. >>> I think, anyway. >>> Duncan >>> >>> >>> On 05/08/2010 15:32, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >>> >>> Yes, as Bryan says and I have confirmed. I guess I didn't realize how long it has been since I paid any attention to my network. Even with the powerline adapters, which claim a max throughput of 200 Mbps, I'd have to get a newer& better router to get that (or the best real world numbers I can get). So, I guess I'll go with the Netgear WNDR3700 if no one else chimes in with a reason not too. It seems to be rated as highly as any other and has some cool features. Too bad the storage is so slow, though. On 5/8/2010 3:20 PM, Gaffer wrote: > On Saturday 08 May 2010 18:23:39 Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > > >> I'm using a linksys wrt54g with a wsb24 booster. >> >> My mothers claim to do 1000 Mbps yet on file transfers I only get >> like 11 MB/s which is more like 100Mpbs/8 = 12.5 MB/s. If my wired >> network is running at 1000 Mbps shouldn't I bet getting around 125 >> MB/s file transfers over the wired network? >> >> What gives? >> >> > Your speeds will only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain. If I > recall the wrt54g is only 10/100 Mbs on the Ethernet ports. > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2861 - Release Date: > 05/08/10 02:26:00 > > > >>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>> Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 >>> 14:26:00 >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00 > >
Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
Naw...I'll stick with the Netgear that you mentioned. I was just trying to explain to Duncan about the port and mentioned why the USB port could be nicebut I use Windows 7 homegroups, so I can easly move files between PCs. And my printer is wireless too, so I can print to it from the various computers. The Airport seems more for mac users to me...my 3700 should be hear early this week... On 5/9/2010 5:01 AM, Naushad, Zulfiqar wrote: Get an Apple Extreme Router then. It should fit the bill. They are good routers too. Please note my new mobile number listed in my signature. With best regards, Zulfiqar Naushad Siemens Limited Energy Sector Oil& Gas Division Oil& Gas Solutions E O OS P.O. Box 719, Al-Khobar, 31952 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Phone: +966 (3) 865-9730 (*NEW) Mobile: +966 (59) 561-2990 (*NEW) Fax: +966 (3) 887-0165 mailto:zulfiqar.naus...@siemens.com www.siemens.com.sa -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:55 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs Yeah, but some of the other routers seem to offer much higher performance in this area. Backups aren't the only thing...moving files and share files are other good reasons to have a cheap USB drive on the router. On 5/9/2010 1:37 AM, Naushad Zulfiqar wrote: Aside from small files yes, the usb is dog slow for backups or anything of that sort. It's more of a handy thing other than anything. If you're serious about backups, a NAS would be more "proper". On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Anthony Q. Martinwrote: Duncan, At lot of the dual-band wirless N routers have a usb port of them for connecting an HD that is then available to machines connected for backups etc. over the network. One disadvantage of the WNDR3700 is that it is really slow for file transfers even on a 1Gbit network (which you'd have if you have it). So, that's the one of two negatives about this router. Still, I'm going to get it as they all have pros and cons. On 5/8/2010 7:27 PM, DSinc wrote: Anthony, What do you mean by, "Too bad the storage is so slow, though." ?? If your current router is only capable of 10/100, then your current LAN is only capable of 10/100. Even with G-Bit cards installed in devices. I think, anyway. Duncan On 05/08/2010 15:32, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: Yes, as Bryan says and I have confirmed. I guess I didn't realize how long it has been since I paid any attention to my network. Even with the powerline adapters, which claim a max throughput of 200 Mbps, I'd have to get a newer& better router to get that (or the best real world numbers I can get). So, I guess I'll go with the Netgear WNDR3700 if no one else chimes in with a reason not too. It seems to be rated as highly as any other and has some cool features. Too bad the storage is so slow, though. On 5/8/2010 3:20 PM, Gaffer wrote: On Saturday 08 May 2010 18:23:39 Anthony Q. Martin wrote: I'm using a linksys wrt54g with a wsb24 booster. My mothers claim to do 1000 Mbps yet on file transfers I only get like 11 MB/s which is more like 100Mpbs/8 = 12.5 MB/s. If my wired network is running at 1000 Mbps shouldn't I bet getting around 125 MB/s file transfers over the wired network? What gives? Your speeds will only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain. If I recall the wrt54g is only 10/100 Mbs on the Ethernet ports. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2861 - Release Date: 05/08/10 02:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00
Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build
Well, I got my 1055T yesterday and with the latest Gigabyte BIOS it was recognized just fine and Vista gives me a 5.9 on performance. CoolNQuiet is enabled and AMD Turbo Core may or may not work as I've not placed that big a load on it yet. I'm crunching down a 7.5 gig DVD movie to 700 MB's and it's ETA is 27 minutes. All 6 cores are being used and processor usage is around 50 %. Default vcore is 1.2750 at 2.8 GHz and I haven't tried overclocking because frankly I'm not interested. It's fast enough as it is but most people are reporting 4.2 GHz stable on air cooling with 1.5 or 1.55 volts. Real nice so far and I couldn't be more pleased. On 5/3/2010 7:49 PM, tmse...@rlrnews.com wrote: It outpaces the i975 at the office (but its close, really close). But as a drop in replacement, easiest option ever. Sent via BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Stan Zaske Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 19:42:29 To: Subject: Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build Yeah, can't wait to see the difference on Handbrake myself. On 5/3/2010 4:14 PM, tmse...@rlrnews.com wrote: Our local microcenter had the 1090t for $199. Basically too good of a deal. It won't challenge intels high end anywhere, but its performance out of handbrake any on the newer x64 x264 encoder rocks. I mean, really rocks. I guess I'm not so much a gamer where that's a big sell factor for me. Sent via BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Julian Zottl Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 15:42:12 To: Subject: Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build Just curious why you're not considering the 1099T? I too as going to build a 930 setup, but now with the 1099T, I'm seriously considering it. Julian On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:38 PM, maccrawj wrote: Looks like a great system! Personally I'm firmly an Asus ROG guy but doubt you can go wrong with Gigabyte. Consider a BluRay-R/DVD-RW vs. plain DVD-RW. What about sound card? Don't get burnt by ADI, etc... AC97 crap like I did! On 5/3/2010 11:58 AM, GPL wrote: OK, well I see it's time I update the post. So far I already have here: Intel Core i7-930 CORSAIR CMPSU-850HX 850W COOLER MASTER HAF 922 Windows 7 Ultimate O/S Here is what I plan on ordering next: * GIGABYTE GA-X58A-UD3R * G.SKILL PI Series 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) * XFX HD-587A-ZND9 Radeon HD 5870 1GB * Intel X25-M Mainstream SSDSA2MH080G2R5 2.5" 80GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive - For second HD I'll either go with a Western Digital VelociRaptor WD6000HLHX 600GB or regular SATA perhaps the SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB 7200. I'll pick up a cheap DVD drive for it as well. I think I feel pretty good about this setup, but if anyone has anything they would like to add, recommend, suggest that may make me change my mind on something please let me know. Thanks All...
Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build
Whoops, forgot that movie is being done in 2 passes and the second pass also took about 26 minutes but my processor usage jumped way up to near 100% and my CPU heat is 47C. I'm going to try to undervolt it until it becomes unstable. Hopefully K10STAT will work as it still uses 4 P states like any other Phenom II going down to 800 MHz. On 5/9/2010 5:18 PM, Stan Zaske wrote: Well, I got my 1055T yesterday and with the latest Gigabyte BIOS it was recognized just fine and Vista gives me a 5.9 on performance. CoolNQuiet is enabled and AMD Turbo Core may or may not work as I've not placed that big a load on it yet. I'm crunching down a 7.5 gig DVD movie to 700 MB's and it's ETA is 27 minutes. All 6 cores are being used and processor usage is around 50 %. Default vcore is 1.2750 at 2.8 GHz and I haven't tried overclocking because frankly I'm not interested. It's fast enough as it is but most people are reporting 4.2 GHz stable on air cooling with 1.5 or 1.55 volts. Real nice so far and I couldn't be more pleased. On 5/3/2010 7:49 PM, tmse...@rlrnews.com wrote: It outpaces the i975 at the office (but its close, really close). But as a drop in replacement, easiest option ever. Sent via BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Stan Zaske Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 19:42:29 To: Subject: Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build Yeah, can't wait to see the difference on Handbrake myself. On 5/3/2010 4:14 PM, tmse...@rlrnews.com wrote: Our local microcenter had the 1090t for $199. Basically too good of a deal. It won't challenge intels high end anywhere, but its performance out of handbrake any on the newer x64 x264 encoder rocks. I mean, really rocks. I guess I'm not so much a gamer where that's a big sell factor for me. Sent via BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Julian Zottl Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 15:42:12 To: Subject: Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build Just curious why you're not considering the 1099T? I too as going to build a 930 setup, but now with the 1099T, I'm seriously considering it. Julian On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:38 PM, maccrawj wrote: Looks like a great system! Personally I'm firmly an Asus ROG guy but doubt you can go wrong with Gigabyte. Consider a BluRay-R/DVD-RW vs. plain DVD-RW. What about sound card? Don't get burnt by ADI, etc... AC97 crap like I did! On 5/3/2010 11:58 AM, GPL wrote: OK, well I see it's time I update the post. So far I already have here: Intel Core i7-930 CORSAIR CMPSU-850HX 850W COOLER MASTER HAF 922 Windows 7 Ultimate O/S Here is what I plan on ordering next: * GIGABYTE GA-X58A-UD3R * G.SKILL PI Series 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) * XFX HD-587A-ZND9 Radeon HD 5870 1GB * Intel X25-M Mainstream SSDSA2MH080G2R5 2.5" 80GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive - For second HD I'll either go with a Western Digital VelociRaptor WD6000HLHX 600GB or regular SATA perhaps the SAMSUNG Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB 7200. I'll pick up a cheap DVD drive for it as well. I think I feel pretty good about this setup, but if anyone has anything they would like to add, recommend, suggest that may make me change my mind on something please let me know. Thanks All...
Re: [H] Powerline adapter (rather than wireless N)
I just looked quickly and did not find a definitive answer as to which conductor carries the signal. Neutral being tied to earth ground at the SE would likely eat the signal IMO. From what I've seen over the past 30 years with X10 "carrier current operated switches" they have the Achilles heel that signals do not travel between the two "legs" of power feed without an active 220V device running or a signal coupler added at the mains service panel to join the legs. PNA's would not be a panacea given that line noise would be an issue, this has been very true of X10 remote control systems. Best bet is still a single CAT 6 or 5E drop terminating at Gb Ethernet switch to feed the devices. Of course it really depends on how much throughput you need and if latency plays a role as to if power line or wireless bridge makes more sense. On 5/8/2010 6:46 AM, DSinc wrote: Anthony, Your wiring should be; IF you only have a single breaker panel/load center. I am not familiar with powerline adapters. I would hope that it uses the AC Neutral (white) power line because all the white wires should be tied together at the commoning bus. JMHO. Best, Duncan
Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build
5.9 sounds like the HDD speed bringing you down. My now aging Q6600 gives me that much, with the rest of the system rating 7.1. It's been awhile since I've transcoded DVD but 27min sounds on the high side unless the GPU is not playing a role. On 5/9/2010 3:18 PM, Stan Zaske wrote: Well, I got my 1055T yesterday and with the latest Gigabyte BIOS it was recognized just fine and Vista gives me a 5.9 on performance. CoolNQuiet is enabled and AMD Turbo Core may or may not work as I've not placed that big a load on it yet. I'm crunching down a 7.5 gig DVD movie to 700 MB's and it's ETA is 27 minutes. All 6 cores are being used and processor usage is around 50 %. Default vcore is 1.2750 at 2.8 GHz and I haven't tried overclocking because frankly I'm not interested. It's fast enough as it is but most people are reporting 4.2 GHz stable on air cooling with 1.5 or 1.55 volts. Real nice so far and I couldn't be more pleased.
Re: [H] Moving on to 802.11n
Well don't have experience with the d-link but real happy with the WRT610N V1 & DD-WRT here. Dunno if the V2's are better or worse but they are also supported. On 5/8/2010 2:29 AM, Naushad, Zulfiqar wrote: I recommend the WNDR 3700. I have one and it rocks!
Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
Make sure you read up on it vs. the linksys WRT610's! Oh, and screw apple anything for various reason even if they poop gold eggs! On 5/9/2010 5:24 AM, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: Naw...I'll stick with the Netgear that you mentioned. I was just trying to explain to Duncan about the port and mentioned why the USB port could be nicebut I use Windows 7 homegroups, so I can easly move files between PCs. And my printer is wireless too, so I can print to it from the various computers. The Airport seems more for mac users to me...my 3700 should be hear early this week... On 5/9/2010 5:01 AM, Naushad, Zulfiqar wrote: Get an Apple Extreme Router then. It should fit the bill. They are good routers too. Please note my new mobile number listed in my signature. With best regards, Zulfiqar Naushad Siemens Limited Energy Sector Oil& Gas Division Oil& Gas Solutions E O OS P.O. Box 719, Al-Khobar, 31952 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Phone: +966 (3) 865-9730 (*NEW) Mobile: +966 (59) 561-2990 (*NEW) Fax: +966 (3) 887-0165 mailto:zulfiqar.naus...@siemens.com www.siemens.com.sa -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:55 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs Yeah, but some of the other routers seem to offer much higher performance in this area. Backups aren't the only thing...moving files and share files are other good reasons to have a cheap USB drive on the router. On 5/9/2010 1:37 AM, Naushad Zulfiqar wrote: Aside from small files yes, the usb is dog slow for backups or anything of that sort. It's more of a handy thing other than anything. If you're serious about backups, a NAS would be more "proper". On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Anthony Q. Martinwrote: Duncan, At lot of the dual-band wirless N routers have a usb port of them for connecting an HD that is then available to machines connected for backups etc. over the network. One disadvantage of the WNDR3700 is that it is really slow for file transfers even on a 1Gbit network (which you'd have if you have it). So, that's the one of two negatives about this router. Still, I'm going to get it as they all have pros and cons. On 5/8/2010 7:27 PM, DSinc wrote: Anthony, What do you mean by, "Too bad the storage is so slow, though." ?? If your current router is only capable of 10/100, then your current LAN is only capable of 10/100. Even with G-Bit cards installed in devices. I think, anyway. Duncan On 05/08/2010 15:32, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: Yes, as Bryan says and I have confirmed. I guess I didn't realize how long it has been since I paid any attention to my network. Even with the powerline adapters, which claim a max throughput of 200 Mbps, I'd have to get a newer& better router to get that (or the best real world numbers I can get). So, I guess I'll go with the Netgear WNDR3700 if no one else chimes in with a reason not too. It seems to be rated as highly as any other and has some cool features. Too bad the storage is so slow, though. On 5/8/2010 3:20 PM, Gaffer wrote: On Saturday 08 May 2010 18:23:39 Anthony Q. Martin wrote: I'm using a linksys wrt54g with a wsb24 booster. My mothers claim to do 1000 Mbps yet on file transfers I only get like 11 MB/s which is more like 100Mpbs/8 = 12.5 MB/s. If my wired network is running at 1000 Mbps shouldn't I bet getting around 125 MB/s file transfers over the wired network? What gives? Your speeds will only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain. If I recall the wrt54g is only 10/100 Mbs on the Ethernet ports. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2861 - Release Date: 05/08/10 02:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: 05/08/10 14:26:00
Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
The apple extreme router (imho) is a terrible product. Apple has some winners, but their routers are not amongst them. Configuration is ridiculous, support is bad and performance is not very good. Just a bad combination. Sent via BlackBerry -Original Message- From: maccrawj Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 21:41:04 To: Subject: Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs Make sure you read up on it vs. the linksys WRT610's! Oh, and screw apple anything for various reason even if they poop gold eggs! On 5/9/2010 5:24 AM, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > Naw...I'll stick with the Netgear that you mentioned. I was just trying > to explain to Duncan about the port and mentioned why the USB port could > be nicebut I use Windows 7 homegroups, so I can easly move files > between PCs. And my printer is wireless too, so I can print to it from > the various computers. The Airport seems more for mac users to me...my > 3700 should be hear early this week... > > On 5/9/2010 5:01 AM, Naushad, Zulfiqar wrote: >> Get an Apple Extreme Router then. It should fit the bill. >> >> They are good routers too. >> >> >> Please note my new mobile number listed in my signature. >> >> With best regards, >> Zulfiqar Naushad >> >> Siemens Limited >> Energy Sector >> Oil& Gas Division >> Oil& Gas Solutions >> E O OS >> P.O. Box 719, Al-Khobar, 31952 >> Kingdom of Saudi Arabia >> Phone: +966 (3) 865-9730 (*NEW) >> Mobile: +966 (59) 561-2990 (*NEW) >> Fax: +966 (3) 887-0165 >> mailto:zulfiqar.naus...@siemens.com >> www.siemens.com.sa >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com >> [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. >> Martin >> Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:55 AM >> To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com >> Subject: Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs >> >> Yeah, but some of the other routers seem to offer much higher >> performance in this area. Backups aren't the only thing...moving files >> and share files are other good reasons to have a cheap USB drive on the >> router. >> >> On 5/9/2010 1:37 AM, Naushad Zulfiqar wrote: >>> Aside from small files yes, the usb is dog slow for backups or >> anything of >>> that sort. >>> >>> It's more of a handy thing other than anything. >>> >>> If you're serious about backups, a NAS would be more "proper". >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Anthony Q. >> Martinwrote: >>> Duncan, At lot of the dual-band wirless N routers have a usb port of them for connecting an HD that is then available to machines connected for >> backups etc. over the network. One disadvantage of the WNDR3700 is that it is >> really slow for file transfers even on a 1Gbit network (which you'd have if >> you have it). So, that's the one of two negatives about this router. >> Still, I'm going to get it as they all have pros and cons. On 5/8/2010 7:27 PM, DSinc wrote: > Anthony, > What do you mean by, "Too bad the storage is so slow, though." ?? > If your current router is only capable of 10/100, then your current >> LAN is > only capable of 10/100. Even with G-Bit cards installed in devices. > I think, anyway. > Duncan > > > On 05/08/2010 15:32, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > > >> Yes, as Bryan says and I have confirmed. I guess I didn't realize >> how >> long it has been since I paid any attention to my network. Even >> with the >> powerline adapters, which claim a max throughput of 200 Mbps, I'd >> have >> to get a newer& better router to get that (or the best real world >> numbers I can get). >> >> So, I guess I'll go with the Netgear WNDR3700 if no one else chimes >> in >> with a reason not too. It seems to be rated as highly as any other >> and >> has some cool features. Too bad the storage is so slow, though. >> >> On 5/8/2010 3:20 PM, Gaffer wrote: >> >> >>> On Saturday 08 May 2010 18:23:39 Anthony Q. Martin wrote: >>> >>> I'm using a linksys wrt54g with a wsb24 booster. My mothers claim to do 1000 Mbps yet on file transfers I only get like 11 MB/s which is more like 100Mpbs/8 = 12.5 MB/s. If my >> wired network is running at 1000 Mbps shouldn't I bet getting around >> 125 MB/s file transfers over the wired network? What gives? >>> Your speeds will only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain. >> If I >>> recall the wrt54g is only 10/100 Mbs on the Ethernet ports. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>> Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2861 - Release Date: >>> 05/08/10 02:26:00 >>> >>> >>> >> > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2862 - Release Date: >> 05/08/10 > 14:26:00 > > >>
Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
The airport extreme is actually very nice, esp for the price. A lot of N routers/APs don't even give you Gig ports. Why bother if the Wifi can do 300Mbit and the wired is only 100. On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 09:41:04PM -0700, maccrawj wrote: > Make sure you read up on it vs. the linksys WRT610's! > > Oh, and screw apple anything for various reason even if they poop gold eggs! > > > On 5/9/2010 5:24 AM, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > > Naw...I'll stick with the Netgear that you mentioned. I was just trying > > to explain to Duncan about the port and mentioned why the USB port could > > be nicebut I use Windows 7 homegroups, so I can easly move files > > between PCs. And my printer is wireless too, so I can print to it from > > the various computers. The Airport seems more for mac users to me...my > > 3700 should be hear early this week... > > > > On 5/9/2010 5:01 AM, Naushad, Zulfiqar wrote: > >> Get an Apple Extreme Router then. It should fit the bill. > >> > >> They are good routers too. > >> > >> > >> Please note my new mobile number listed in my signature. > >> > >> With best regards, > >> Zulfiqar Naushad > >> > >> Siemens Limited > >> Energy Sector > >> Oil& Gas Division > >> Oil& Gas Solutions > >> E O OS > >> P.O. Box 719, Al-Khobar, 31952 > >> Kingdom of Saudi Arabia > >> Phone: +966 (3) 865-9730 (*NEW) > >> Mobile: +966 (59) 561-2990 (*NEW) > >> Fax: +966 (3) 887-0165 > >> mailto:zulfiqar.naus...@siemens.com > >> www.siemens.com.sa > >> > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com > >> [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. > >> Martin > >> Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:55 AM > >> To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com > >> Subject: Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs > >> > >> Yeah, but some of the other routers seem to offer much higher > >> performance in this area. Backups aren't the only thing...moving files > >> and share files are other good reasons to have a cheap USB drive on the > >> router. > >> > >> On 5/9/2010 1:37 AM, Naushad Zulfiqar wrote: > >>> Aside from small files yes, the usb is dog slow for backups or > >> anything of > >>> that sort. > >>> > >>> It's more of a handy thing other than anything. > >>> > >>> If you're serious about backups, a NAS would be more "proper". > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Anthony Q. > >> Martinwrote: > >>> > Duncan, > > At lot of the dual-band wirless N routers have a usb port of them for > connecting an HD that is then available to machines connected for > >> backups > etc. over the network. One disadvantage of the WNDR3700 is that it is > >> really > slow for file transfers even on a 1Gbit network (which you'd have if > >> you > have it). So, that's the one of two negatives about this router. > >> Still, I'm > going to get it as they all have pros and cons. > > On 5/8/2010 7:27 PM, DSinc wrote: > > > > Anthony, > > What do you mean by, "Too bad the storage is so slow, though." ?? > > If your current router is only capable of 10/100, then your current > >> LAN is > > only capable of 10/100. Even with G-Bit cards installed in devices. > > I think, anyway. > > Duncan > > > > > > On 05/08/2010 15:32, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > > > > > >> Yes, as Bryan says and I have confirmed. I guess I didn't realize > >> how > >> long it has been since I paid any attention to my network. Even > >> with the > >> powerline adapters, which claim a max throughput of 200 Mbps, I'd > >> have > >> to get a newer& better router to get that (or the best real world > >> numbers I can get). > >> > >> So, I guess I'll go with the Netgear WNDR3700 if no one else chimes > >> in > >> with a reason not too. It seems to be rated as highly as any other > >> and > >> has some cool features. Too bad the storage is so slow, though. > >> > >> On 5/8/2010 3:20 PM, Gaffer wrote: > >> > >> > >>> On Saturday 08 May 2010 18:23:39 Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > >>> > >>> > I'm using a linksys wrt54g with a wsb24 booster. > > My mothers claim to do 1000 Mbps yet on file transfers I only get > like 11 MB/s which is more like 100Mpbs/8 = 12.5 MB/s. If my > >> wired > network is running at 1000 Mbps shouldn't I bet getting around > >> 125 > MB/s file transfers over the wired network? > > What gives? > > > >>> Your speeds will only be as fast as the slowest link in the chain. > >> If I > >>> recall the wrt54g is only 10/100 Mbs on the Ethernet ports. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> No virus found in this incoming message. > >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > >>> Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2861 - Release Date: > >>> 05/08/10 02:26:00 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > No virus found in this incoming mes
Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
On 5/9/10 9:59 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: > The airport extreme is actually very nice, esp for the price. > A lot of N routers/APs don't even give you Gig ports. Why > bother if the Wifi can do 300Mbit and the wired is only 100. > Simple, most N routers are not dual frequency, thus only 150Mbit, and that is the wireless data rate, not the actual data rate. 150Mbit wireless can easily fit on a 100Mbit wired pipe. Does not mean I don't prefer to have a Gig switch in the router, but 100Mbit won't be your bottle neck in most 802.11n networks. As far as routers go, if it runs dd-wrt, I am interested in it, otherwise, I am not. Harry
Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build
He said Vista. The WEI scale tops out at 5.9 in Vista, and 7.9 in W7. > -Original Message- > From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- > boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of maccrawj > Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2010 11:33 PM > To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com > Subject: Re: [H] My 2010 Gamer PC Build > > 5.9 sounds like the HDD speed bringing you down. My now aging Q6600 gives > me that much, with the rest of the system rating 7.1. > > It's been awhile since I've transcoded DVD but 27min sounds on the high side > unless the GPU is not playing a role. > > On 5/9/2010 3:18 PM, Stan Zaske wrote: > > Well, I got my 1055T yesterday and with the latest Gigabyte BIOS it > > was recognized just fine and Vista gives me a 5.9 on performance.
Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs????
I've pushed over 240mbit/s on my D-Link DIR-655 N "router" (which I use as nothing more than an AP) and an Intel 5300 NIC. You don't have to run dual frequency, but that was with a double (40MHz) channel. I know that the dd-wrt project is quite popular, but for router and/or firewall duties, think they're all garbage compared to pfSensebut will allow that I have a complex setup with unusual requirements. Greg > -Original Message- > From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- > boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Harry McGregor > Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 12:11 AM > To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com > Subject: Re: [H] 1000 Mbps vs 100 Mpbs > > On 5/9/10 9:59 PM, Bryan Seitz wrote: > > The airport extreme is actually very nice, esp for the price. > > A lot of N routers/APs don't even give you Gig ports. Why bother if > > the Wifi can do 300Mbit and the wired is only 100. > > > Simple, most N routers are not dual frequency, thus only 150Mbit, and that is > the wireless data rate, not the actual data rate. > > 150Mbit wireless can easily fit on a 100Mbit wired pipe. > > Does not mean I don't prefer to have a Gig switch in the router, but 100Mbit > won't be your bottle neck in most 802.11n networks. > > As far as routers go, if it runs dd-wrt, I am interested in it, otherwise, I am > not. > > Harry
