Recommended Posts

I've been poking around lately trying to find a solution to the problem of excessive bandwidth usage. Now, in Windows I simply use DU Super Controller to limit the bandwidth a certain program can use, but I have failed to find an alternative for Linux. If anyone can assist me, I would greatly appreciate it. It may or may not help, but the specific applications I want to limit are Up2date (I'm using Fedora Core 3 and it uses that for updating) and Azureus. I'm not too familiar with the network underworkings of Linux so if I can do something with whatever is already on my machine, you may want to be extremely specific. Thanks.

That can be done with iptables and iproute2, but setting that up isn't trivial at all:

http://www.knowplace.org/shaper/

http://lartc.org/

You can find more stuff serching "traffic shaping" on google. Probably there are some (likely comercial) apps that are easier to set up.

Sorry for not being more specific but I've never tried to do that myself :blush:

Or you could build an ipcop firewall to put both windows and linux behind and not have to run extra software on your PC to do bandwidth shaping

585219120[/snapback]

Well, I don't have enough spare (compatible) parts to build one. I want to be able to browse in Linux, and I dual boot so I don't really need a seperate solution to encompass both operating systems.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • It is silly there is no simple way to check whether this profile has been activated. CFRs are normal, but trying to even hide the fact if it's on / off seems silly, especially for something so user-facing. Surely Microsoft is "proud" of their engineering efforts on this one and ought to display it somwhere in the GUI.
    • Many Linux distros are not known for excellent battery life, so I'm not sure that is the best example. A more apt example may be Apple, but Apple's CPUs are simply far more efficient than Intel & AMD at single-threaded tasks like these, so "boosting" is not as power-hungry and less heat-inducing. Not to mention Apple will hardly engage P-cores for basic UI tasks; they use a pretty complicated QoS scheme to only activate P-cores for more serious workloads like HTML / JS execution or decompression or application launch. Microsoft is (smartly) doing it for launch, but also for UI tasks, which is the more nonsensical part: why ... do Windows 11's UIs need modern CPUs to boost? It should load so quickly that there's not even time for the CPU to boost.
    • I've not seen any controlled testing and, judging by Microsoft's mentality, within a year, they'll have added so much more bloat, it'll undo any perceptible latency benefit and we'll have boosted the CPU clocks for nothing.
    • It depends: heat soak is a thing. Initially on cold boot-up, the heatsinks & heatpipes are at ambient temp. After heatsinks & heatpipes warm up (through normal usage), they don't immediately cool to ambient temp when the load goes away. So their baseline is higher and the trigger point for fans is much less stress. Add a few more CPU spikes → it's too hot to stay at the same fan RPM → fans get triggered to start up up much sooner / get triggered to ramp much more quickly.
    • Can LibreOffice just shut up and worry about themselves and stop comparing themselves? Do we see Microsoft complaining about euro office?
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      slackerzz earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      highriskpaym earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      501
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      198
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      157
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      84
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      74
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!