Recommended Posts

I was pretty certain I started a thread for this but I can't seem to find it. Anyway, I'm having a tough time understanding why my internal network speeds are not consistent and not at gigabit speeds. I checked that the nics on both ends are set to 1 gbs and the switch / router between the devices are all 1 gbs capable. Why would I sometimes get 25 mb/s and other times 80 mb/s?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1136090-slow-internal-network-speeds/
Share on other sites

Are you copy files to / from the same devices when you notice a difference in speed? I find larger files will transfer a lot quicker than loads of smaller files.

Also copying to an IDE hard drive from an IDE hard drive would likely be a lot slower than copying from a SATA3 drive to a SATA3 drive.

80 MB/s ?

I don't think so, I got Maximum 25 MB/s in Giga Netowrk & 12 MB/s in 100 Mb/s Network.

& that's how it works ...

You probably have poor hard drive's then, I can easily exceed 80 MB/s across my home network.

so you stated mb (megabits) are you talking MBytes?

25MBytes is clearly on a gig network, now is it great performance - no.. But its way over what is possible on a 100mbit network. As stated there are more variables that come into play than just your network speed.

But I would also check to see what your getting with wirespeed, take the HDD out of the equation. Use iperf or netio to do a test of what speeds your seeing on the wire. I would hope your seeing in the 800mbps range -- but might be as low as 300, etc. Depends on your nics, depends on your settings, etc.

When moving large files I normally see 50 to 90 MBytes per second.

Sounds like cache on HDDs or something not being able to keep up.

Then again on my 1 Gbps network (Linksys E4200v1 router/switch) I can push 90-100MB/s straight (then again my laptop has a SSD to my NAS which are big 2TB Drives). At work from my machine (standard Office desktop) to the Server (SAS RAID 10 Drives) I get about 50-60MB/s off a WD 250GB 7200RPM HDD.

So I guess it depends on defragmentation of the file you are copying as well as the head moves to get all the pieces.

Are you copy files to / from the same devices when you notice a difference in speed? I find larger files will transfer a lot quicker than loads of smaller files.

Also copying to an IDE hard drive from an IDE hard drive would likely be a lot slower than copying from a SATA3 drive to a SATA3 drive.

You probably have poor hard drive's then, I can easily exceed 80 MB/s across my home network.

I have SATA Drive, which is gives me 80 to 150 MB/s speed when transferring from one partition to other. but on the Giga network just 25MB/s

I have SATA Drive, which is gives me 80 to 150 MB/s speed when transferring from one partition to other. but on the Giga network just 25MB/s

Cant honestly say why you speeds are so low, I have an Asus RT-N16 gigabit router running the Tomato firmware, with 4x Netgear gigabit switches connected to each port on the router which reside in various rooms of the house.

Nothing really fancy, however i have always been happy with the file transfer speeds on my home network.

speedao.png

Cant honestly say why you speeds are so low, I have an Asus RT-N16 gigabit router running the Tomato firmware, with 4x Netgear gigabit switches connected to each port on the router which reside in various rooms of the house.

Nothing really fancy, however i have always been happy with the file transfer speeds on my home network.

speedao.png

WOW, & I am connected throw Cisco SG 100 Giga Switch.

I remember using jumbo frames back in the XP days but I sort of remember having issues after enabling it. I guess it's worth a shot regardless

EDIT - also the drives on my server are mostly green drives so all of them are 5400 rmp. The primary drive is a wd black drive, though. Not sure if the bottlenecks are due to the 5400rpm drives

Jumbo frames are NOT going to be a magic pill. And unless everything in your house is gig and supports jumbo your going to cause yourself more pain.

80MB is not all that.. Yes it is quite possible with gig gear.

And sorry 3 switches does not = hops ;) Are going through 3 different "routers" then you could consider it hops.. But if they are all local and the latency is couple of ms RTT doesn't matter if it was 10 hops.

Green drives are not going to be the speed demons - they are meant for storage, low power usage not moving your file across your network at 100MB plus.

So you think my drives are the culprits then? I don't really need gigabit speeds - just a little annoyed that I spent money making sure everything is gigabit compatible to still hit some bottlenecks. I'm not going to upgrade my hard drives to faster drives to overcome the issue since I am using those drives for storage / media serving purposes as you refer to

But I would at least expect some consistency. Just seems weird that sometimes I can hit 80MB/s but then can't get past 25MB/s with the same transfer from main PC to server

I enabled 4K jumbo frames before leaving my apartment. I'll see if it makes any difference later

So your switch supports jumbo? And all your devices support jumbo?

Jumbo can lower cpu usage, but since I would have to think that you have devices that don't support it - you could have other issues with communication. Do you talk to wireless devices? Do you have any devices that are only 100mbit?

So when do you hit 80? From different device to your server, or from your server to your main pc?

Lets get some details

When you copy file from your server to your main pc what are the speeds? I would really suggest you test this with iperf or netio. Then do a file copy with robocopy so you can get a printout of the speed.

Now when you copy file from your main pc TO your server what is the speeds - do the same iperf/netio test in that direction as well, and again use robocopy to get printout of details of copy with speed.

Now repeat this test to some other box on your network to and from your server - is same results?

Is this other box same OS as your main PC? Same nic? Same Driver for nic?

I won't be able to give you all the information necessary till I'm back at my place but for now...

These are the two DLink switches I have...

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16833127422

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16833127083

Looks like both support jumbo frames according to the specs

Asus RT-N66U is the router in use

The NICs are different but both are gigabit. One of them is Intel based on an Asus Sandy Bridge board. The other is Marvell on a Asus LGA 775 board

Transfers are from my main pc (that has the Asus board) to the server (LGA). I use either Teracopy or FlashFXP to send files ranging from 1mb to 30 GB files (bluray rips). FlashFXP seems to be slower for some reason. I was going to try Filezilla to see if it's more consistent. Either way, both Teracopy and FlashFXP vary in performance

Transfers to my main PC seem to be faster. Usually above 50MB/s.

All PCs on my network are set up with Windows 8 including server. Server used to be WHS 2011 but moved to Windows 8 to make it an HTPC as well. Storage is set up using Drive Bender which is a third party app that mimics / improves on Microsoft's Drive Extender. 4 2TB drives are pooled into one virtual drive.

It could also be performance issues with Drive Bender? I'll check into that with support after seeing how transfers do between my third PC and HTPC

On the network...

Main Desktop connected to one of the switches

Server / HTPC combo connected to router

Printer connected to one of the switches

mini HTPC for main bedroom connected through Wifi

Surface Pro on Wifi

Phone on Wifi

Xbox 360 currently on wifi

PS3 connected to one of the switches

Sony TV on Wifi

Yamaha receiver connected to router

Both switches connected to router

Currently setting up home theater and devices so most of the devices will be connected to a switch or router directly. Prefer only to use Wifi if no other option is possible

  • 11 months later...

Almost a year later and this is finally resolved.  My speeds ended up locked at anywhere between 4-8 MB/s and I couldn't figure out why.  Tried a different cable.  Tried everything before buying new hardware.  Then I got ###### off back in November and replaced all the green drives I had with WD reds, added a PCIE Intel network card, switched to Server 2012 R2 ( from Windows 8) and switched to DrivePool (from DriveBender).  I don't know what did it but I'm back ~80-100 MB/s.  May be the drives but I also had issues with speeds to a separate black drive I was using for game installs.  At the end of day, it really isn't that big of a deal I was locked at slower speeds but 4-8 MB/s I found pretty annoying.

Hello,

Almost a year later and this is finally resolved.  My speeds ended up locked at anywhere between 4-8 MB/s and I couldn't figure out why.  Tried a different cable.  Tried everything before buying new hardware.  Then I got ****ed off back in November and replaced all the green drives I had with WD reds, added a PCIE Intel network card, switched to Server 2012 R2 ( from Windows 8) and switched to DrivePool (from DriveBender).  I don't know what did it but I'm back ~80-100 MB/s.  May be the drives but I also had issues with speeds to a separate black drive I was using for game installs.  At the end of day, it really isn't that big of a deal I was locked at slower speeds but 4-8 MB/s I found pretty annoying.

Did you do a direct network cable between two PCs? No router, no switch, just 1 cable between two PCs....

And one year later?

I never connected the two.  And yeah, 1 year later.  I've made some changes over time but speeds just seemed to get worse instead of improve.  Not sure what from the list of stuff I did in November till now that helped but I'm back where I expect things to be

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!