Test the speed of internal network (not internet)


Recommended Posts

I am begging to suspect that my internal network (LAN) is having some issues with everything that is connected to it, I am noticing that my 2 PoE camera's are frequently loosing connection for a few seconds and I am wondering if it is the router to blame, so I want to check that. Is there a way to do so?

40 minutes ago, Mindovermaster said:

OK, so these all work from my PC to the Router, I really need something from the Router, just to see if there is a problem somewhere, according to the tests I just ran, I'm getting 500+ Mbs transfer speed to the router, which is great, but I need to know the over all network speeds, not just my PC.

16 minutes ago, jnelsoninjax said:

OK, so these all work from my PC to the Router, I really need something from the Router, just to see if there is a problem somewhere, according to the tests I just ran, I'm getting 500+ Mbs transfer speed to the router, which is great, but I need to know the over all network speeds, not just my PC.

Does your router do anything like that? Sorry, I'm out of ideas atm. BudMan?

34 minutes ago, jnelsoninjax said:

 OK, I downloaded iperf, how exactly do I use it? When I try to tell it to scan the default gateway, it says connection refused.

Setup one machine to be the server and start it. Set another as the client and test against the server. 
 

https://itigic.com/iperf3-tutorial-to-measure-speed-between-two-lan-and-wifi-devices/

I have been using iperf for years and years.. I started compiling the windows version because they were hard to find.. If you have any questions just ask ;)

 

In a nutshell

pc1

iperf3 -s

 

pc2

iperf3 -c ipaddressPC1

 

Here is a iperf test from my pc nas over 1gig

$ iperf3.exe -c 192.168.9.10
warning: Ignoring nonsense TCP MSS 465664
Connecting to host 192.168.9.10, port 5201
[  5] local 192.168.9.100 port 36285 connected to 192.168.9.10 port 5201
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec   108 MBytes   909 Mbits/sec
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   113 MBytes   949 Mbits/sec
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec   115 MBytes   966 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  1.10 GBytes   947 Mbits/sec                  sender
[  5]   0.00-10.03  sec  1.10 GBytes   943 Mbits/sec                  receiver

iperf Done.

 

Here is test over my 2.5 gig connection to same nas.

 

$ iperf3.exe -c 192.168.10.10                                                    
warning: Ignoring nonsense TCP MSS 465664                                        
Connecting to host 192.168.10.10, port 5201                                      
[  5] local 192.168.10.9 port 36290 connected to 192.168.10.10 port 5201         
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate                                    
[  5]   0.00-1.00   sec   272 MBytes  2.28 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   3.00-4.00   sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   4.00-5.00   sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   5.00-6.00   sec   282 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   6.00-7.00   sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   7.00-8.00   sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   8.00-9.00   sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
[  5]   9.00-10.00  sec   283 MBytes  2.37 Gbits/sec                             
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -                                
[ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate                                    
[  5]   0.00-10.00  sec  2.75 GBytes  2.36 Gbits/sec                  sender     
[  5]   0.00-10.01  sec  2.75 GBytes  2.36 Gbits/sec                  receiver   
                                                                                 
iperf Done.                                                                      

 

Over wireless will be slower ;)  But you should be seeing 200 or so over typical AC connection from wifi to wired, wifi to wifi is going to be slower!  And 400ish your router and clients can do it and get a good PHY connection.

 

Here is my phone to my nas.

 

602562577_PNGimage.thumb.png.dadd79b1a1c076a8d88da123df9db0dd.png

 

If you want to test with phone - Hurricane electric has a APP that has tools for network stuff, including iperf

https://networktools.he.net/

 

edit:  Didn't you just recently add that poe switch, that you picked up for like 2$ ;)  Some off brand model never heard of.. Yeah I would be testing it via these iperf tests for sure.  Take it out of the loop and just connect your stuff to your router switch ports.. And validate you get same gig speeds, etc.

 

>I really need something from the Router

 

You would almost never test "to" a router - router routes (and switches for most soho routers), unless your model was also hosting files off usb or something.  You don't care what the OS of the router can really do for speed, what you care about is that its routing/switching your traffic through it at wire speed.  That phone test, was through my router from my wireless vlan to my wired vlan where the nas sits for example.

 

So it would take 2 trips through my switch, and through the router.

 

phone - AP -- switch - 192.168.2 - router - 192.168.9 - switch -- nas

I changed the PoE switch to a TpLink, the cheap one was giving me issues...

This is what I am getting from phone to PC:

Screenshot_20210619-094521.thumb.png.6f49402f6a54ff70aacb1779153d2f46.png

I have also come to the conclusion that the 'problems' that I am having are software, not hardware, for example this morning, Blue Iris (which I am using to monitor the camera's) indicated that one of the camera's was offline, but when I checked with the Reolink app and windows program, the camera is question was not offline and was working just fine.

11Gbps?  what?  Yeah you need to edit the amount of data sent.. See how I set mine to 500M, and you prob want longer interval of time.. See how set mine to 10

 

Try it with those settings. And see what you get.

Yeah that is pretty horrible.. No offense..

 

25Mbps - that is like a 1 stream 2.4 ghz N connection..

 

Even at 40 is pretty bad.. Your device AC??

 

Here I let it show multiple readings - every second and moved 1G of data

 

1534261101_PNGimage.thumb.png.8177f390e53b365db89dc288bca073e7.png

 

Are you on the other side of the house? Are you testing wireless to wireless while multiple other devices streaming netflix? What about wired test?

 

This is my iphone XR, connect to my hallway AP. You can see it gets a good maxed out PHY connection for what its capable of.

connection.thumb.png.ebba7b740a27cb3ba44841cf58ad8a30.png

And your camera's wired right - or was your wireless camera also on.  Even with 1 wireless camera constant streaming - from the bitrate of those cameras.. That is pretty bad.

 

I would really suggest you test your wired speed.  And Also what client - maybe the client is horrible?  Is it a really old laptop with only 2.4 ghz 1 stream wireless card?

1 minute ago, BudMan said:

And your camera's wired right - or was your wireless camera also on.  Even with 1 wireless camera constant streaming - from the bitrate of those cameras.. That is pretty bad.

 

I would really suggest you test your wired speed.  And Also what client - maybe the client is horrible?  Is it a really old laptop with only 2.4 ghz 1 stream wireless card?

2 wired and 1 wireless camera's. I need to put iperf on another PC in the house to test my wired speed, I will hopefully do that tonight. The client is my desktop which has a gigabit lan port.

2 minutes ago, BudMan said:

Where all the camera's writing data to the server you were writing data too?  And your server is only connected at 100mbps?

 The camera's were not writing any data during the test. I'm not sure how to tell what my desktop is connected at.

ok so your connected at gig, so its not like your only at 100, and other data using up the pipe.. Look to see what your actually connected to via wireless.. 

 

I would hope android phone should show you - or do you have a wireless laptop?  With iphone its hard..  While with the wifi developer profile installed you can get channel and vht, which will tell you if 2.4 or 5 (20 mhz, 40 or 80).. Off the top I do not know way to see the actual PHY.. stupid apple..  Maybe your wifi router will show you this info?

 

For troubleshooting wifi issues - you really need a laptop to get info.

17 minutes ago, BudMan said:

ok so your connected at gig, so its not like your only at 100, and other data using up the pipe.. Look to see what your actually connected to via wireless.. 

 

I would hope android phone should show you - or do you have a wireless laptop?  With iphone its hard..  While with the wifi developer profile installed you can get channel and vht, which will tell you if 2.4 or 5 (20 mhz, 40 or 80).. Off the top I do not know way to see the actual PHY.. stupid apple..  Maybe your wifi router will show you this info?

 

For troubleshooting wifi issues - you really need a laptop to get info.

I don't have access to a laptop right now :( but the other choice I have is I could enable wireless on my motherboard and use it, but I am not sure if I have the antenna hooked up right now, as I never use wireless from my desktop.

Wireless we can work on - lets make sure your wired network is good..  Lets see that 900 mbps iperf test..

 

You were saying having issues when you using the new switch right.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Python programmers in a nutshell. Now, guess what lang most AI programmers use... :-)
    • There was nothing whatsoever wrong with Vista as an OS after the SP1 update. People who claim it wasn't were using ancient machines for some silly reason. Not kidding, no hyperbole/exaggeration. Vista was good.
    • Windows ME was worse.
    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      443
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!