Recommended Posts

Hello All

Some reason Network File transfers seem awfully slow,  despite Desktop using a USB 2.5Gig Ethernet adapter, and Laptop Wireless 5 connection.     

Transferring small folder of Game Capture videos from Laptop to Desktop, and well says gonna take about 9 hours, might cancel the network transfer and just hookup a flash drive or External shortly here if doesn't speed up some.  

If i don't need the USB 2.5gig Ethernet adapter with my Comcast Gigbabit 1000 Download/20 Upload plan, then will reconfigure early in the morning, and resume using Onboard Gig lan port

Any other advice welcome though

 

I've always had issues with throughput on any USB Nic.  Many times I've even found the new wireless AX standard to be faster than many of them.  Personally, stick with the onboard gigabit.  

  On 12/03/2023 at 06:39, Kelxin said:

've always had issues with throughput on any USB Nic.

Expand  

I don't have any issues with the ones I am using..

Transfer between pc and nas using 2.5 usb nics one in each.

iperf.jpg.1a9ea407e60642f97b7614f80f214d98.jpg

280speed.jpg.b60a532cc29f70e3ace0aa5148a37666.jpg

That being said - if your internet is only gig, and you don't have anything else that is higher than gig on your local network.  And you don't transfer to or from this box from multiple devices at the same time that are only gig, and you want max out say 2 connections via your 2.5 then it doesn't have any real use.

How many files are you trying to transfer, what are their actual size?  Why don't you do a single large file transfer test, also do a test with iperf to see what sort of speed your actually seeing over the wifi and wired box taking any disk reading writing out of the equation.   Highly unlikely you could exceed or get close to even gig with AC, and even AX its unlikely without the proper card and router..   Typical AC with 2 streams and 867 mbps PHY would be in the 400-500mbps range..  Maybe on a screaming day you could push 600 real world..

Even with AX, your not going to see anything close to 2.5ge - while you might be able to get close to gig with 2x2mimo and 80mhz VHT..

Here is my iphone 13, using AC (wifi 5) to my nas over its gig interface, vs its 2.5.. The nas 2.5 is limited storage network connection between pc and nas..  But as you can see not going to saturate even a gig.. But not too shabby and in line for good AC connection with 2 streams, and 80mhz VHT

phone.jpg.c2eaeeb5487cc260dca6d3e73ea08180.jpg

edit:

So comparison of large file copy vs lots of smaller ones..  I just copied over 80 some files about 169MB each to nas over the 2.5 connection for a total of like 12GB, only took a couple minutes tops.. But as you can see was not reaching full speed.. But still not too shabby and way over what gig could do..

small.jpg.301f789dd73abc8687de05ccbf50a596.jpg

Lots of smaller files is always going to be slower than large file(s)..

Much Faster than last night!  

 

Last night it was at 2.92Mb/s  

Though didn't switch off the 2.5gig USB Ethernet Adapter as yet, but did slightly move the XB7 Gateway earlier to get the Laptops wifi connecting better wifi wise, originally was only getting 650/650,  now 866/866 link speed

 

And this is the Original Files i was trying to last night lol

 

 

Laptop Network File Transfer to Desktop.png

That works out to about 340 something mbps..  somewhat in the normal range for 2 stream AC wifi of about 400mbps real world..

when you want to move large amount of data maybe you want to plug your laptop in - gig should max out at like 113MBps

Here I hit my nas over gig and moving a large 5GB file

 

gigcopy.jpg.409802cd9b3e51e21c423992104d8a50.jpg

 

 

Yeah i believe it was plugged in during that transfer

 

I can try it again once i get Desktop back to using built in Gig ethernet port which i should get to tomorrow morning early.      

Right now Desktop still using USB 2.5gig ethernet adapter as haven't had time to do the switch as yet. 

Sorry i didn't see this reply earlier today oops, got so busy with taking care of other things around here today.

 

  On 14/03/2023 at 03:00, bikeman25 said:

Yeah i believe it was plugged in during that transfer

Expand  

That was via a wire and only seeing 43MBps ?  did you do an iperf test?

gig you should be seeing over 800 for sure, but should be more like 940ish

Here is iperf from pc to nas over gig, in both directions.  Normally the client running iperf is sender, doing with -R has the server send traffic to the client.  So you can validate both directions of sending a file or downloading a file, etc.

iperf.thumb.jpg.a0eaaa9dd959ef6024812cc9c2747278.jpg

I would do this test with both your usb nic, and then when you get your normal gig interface..

If your not seeing full speed on the wire, or say 400-500ish over wifi then no your never going to be doing file transfers at full speed possible.  If you see full speed with iperf, then network is not the reason for slow file copies, and its something else like disk speed, or something else on the systems slowing it down.

 

The laptop was on wifi doing that transfer, desktop always wired.  

Didn't do an ipref test yet,  but will asap here...soon as I wake up from sleeping today will conduct ipref test 

Laptop was recently clean installed of Windows 10.

Desktop is Windows 11 Pro 64bit if that matters any

Last clean install on Desktop 10-6-2021

 

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

    • If you look at all RAID implementations that exist, you're going to find exceptions. However, all the modern consumer varieties tend to have some things in common (by default). I'll stick to describing those. When you add a disk to a RAID array, metadata is stored at the end of the disk. It records the array the disk is part of, which other disks are in the array, etc. This is called the RAID superblock. If you create a RAID 1 array, your operating system will see them all as a single disk that is very slightly smaller than a single disk (due to the superblock). Everything you write to the RAID disk gets written identically to each of its member disks by the storage controller. Technically, disks are read/written in blocks (each block is multiple sectors in size), but this is all transparent to the user. Every file you create or change or delete is created/changed/deleted on every member disk simultaneously. This is true whether you have 2 disks in the array or more than 2.  If one disk completely fails, you can still operate just fine off the remaining disk(s) (but see the caution below). If you remove one disk and attach it to another PC, it should work fine. The partition information and everything is all at the front of the disk, just as expected. The superblock will just appear as some extra junk at the very end of the disk, outside any partition. In some scenarios, where it is recognized as a RAID member disk from another PC, there might be an extra step before it will let you use it, but it's all very doable. Caution:  Blocks are read from the disks in a staggered fashion. For example, with 2 disks, all the odd blocks are read from one disk and all the even blocks are read from the other. By working together like this, read speeds can be practically doubled. But this comes with a huge drawback. If a disk doesn't fail completely, but instead develops bad sectors, you may not realize it. The bad sectors may happen to be in blocks that are never read on that disk. In some cases, people have had bad sectors develop on one disk, then had the other disk fail, and only then realized that the remaining disk has bad sectors and corrupt data. Every backup method has its pros and cons. Never trust just RAID, or just an external HDD, or just the cloud. Use multiple methods to backup important data.
    • Evidence that it affects "most" people negatively? Based on what? The fact that their are millions of users in fact show me the opposite, that "most" are quite happy.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Kavin25 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      Leonard grant earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      pcdoctorsnet earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rising Star
      Phillip0web went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      Epaminombas earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      537
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      205
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      167
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      151
    5. 5
      Som
      127
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!