New Asus RT-AC68U has slow LAN file transfer?

[JohnnyBeGood]

Hi all,

Yesterday I received my new router and I was really surprised with Wireless speed test before I was getting around 17Mbit/s down even with Shibby's firmware on my old Asus N-16. Now I get my max speed provider by ISP which is 54Mbit down.

One part that bothers me is local LAN file transfer speed. When using my HP Pavilion m6-1045dx I only get around 10.5MB/s (mega bytes) which is equivalent to 84 Mbit/s. I've tried to copy file from my main desktop and HTPC and result is the same it almost looks like its stuck on 100Mbit setting somewhere.


I've tried also file transfer between desktop and HTPC and speed was around 65MB/s (mega bytes).

I even uninstalled Norton 360 provided for free by ISP and installed MS essentials.
Here's network diagram


Also, I've tried without gigabit switch and results were about the same.
Called Asus support and was on hold for a long time, left voicemail and never heared back.

What could it be?

TIA

 

[John Kotches]

Transferring to the phone is going to be limited to the speed of the media you are writing to.

Based on your results it would seem your media (integrated or SD card) is class 10.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

Thanks for the reply!
I'm using my laptop and not my phone when doing file transfers.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

Anyone?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[RMerlin]

What is the link rate of the Pavilion?

 

[azazel1024]

First thing to check is the link rate. On network properties for the connection, just double click on it and it'll tell you the link rate.

If it is 100Mbps, I'd suspect a cable first. Replace or reterminate.

Also...could be bad firmware possibly not auto-negotiating the links properly.

Those speeds are a little low for fast ethernet though. A decent fast ethernet connection should be capable of around 90-94Mbps realizable.

If you also have a gigabit switch, try that in place of the router and everything connected together and see if you get the same results. If so, it isn't the router and I'd look at cables

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

What is the link rate of the Pavilion?

Not sure where I can check that?
Newegg specs say it's " 802.11b/g/n Wireless LAN"

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[remixedcat]

Must be an N150 class "Wireless N" WLAN chipset. Those are the norm in laptops most of the time.

 

[RMerlin]

Not sure where I can check that?
Newegg specs say it's " 802.11b/g/n Wireless LAN"

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

http://kb.linksys.com/Linksys/GetAr...79294b05bd6b5bedc_3967.xml&pid=80&converted=0

This will give you the link rate between the router and the laptop. Divide this by two to get a rough estimate of the expected transfer rate.

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

It appears to be Intel Centrino Wireless-N 2230
I've tried running thru the switch only and only thru the router and speeds are about the same when trying to copy files between 2 desktops. Both desktop show link speed of 1Gpbs

Laptop/wireless issue
Thanks for the link. Here's my link rate:


What was odd is that when I ran this command it did not show N radio:



After driver update from here http://www.intel.com/p/en_US/support/detect/wireless



It showed N radio



But my file transfer speed is the same and link rate did not change.

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

Should I change anything here?

 

[RogerSC]

Looks to me like you're getting about the transfer rate that you can expect with 20MHz. channel width on 2.4GHz. If you could use 5GHz. using an external wireless network adapter with 40MHz. or 80MHz. channel width, you could do a lot better in terms of throughput/speed. Doesn't look like your built-in wireless adapter is dual-band, though, just 2.4GHz. So you're kind of stuck there. You could also consider replacing the internal wireless adapter, but you'd also have to add internal antennas to your laptop, so that would be more challenging than using an external wireless adapter (like a USB 3.0 wireless adapter).

Unless you can use 40MHz. channel width on 2.4GHz., most people can't do that because they have too much interference from neighbors. I, for one, can't use 40MHz. channel width on 2.4GHz., but I can use 40MHz. or 80MHz. channel width on 5GHz.

 

[RMerlin]

Those speeds are perfectly normal for the wireless connection that you have. If you need better wireless performance, you will need to upgrade your wireless card.

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

Those speeds are perfectly normal for the wireless connection that you have. If you need better wireless performance, you will need to upgrade your wireless card.

If speeds are normal than I'm giving up. Just wanted to make sure I did not miss any setting.

 

[azazel1024]

Is this a WIRED transfer, or a wireless? I am confused because you are mentioning doing to through the switch.

If it is s WIRED transfer, no, that is well below speed. If this is a WIRELESS transfer, that is roughly what you should expect to get if your router is either an N150 class in 40MHz mode or an N300 class in 20MHz mode (or with congestion, far from the router, what have you).

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

Is this a WIRED transfer, or a wireless? I am confused because you are mentioning doing to through the switch.

If it is s WIRED transfer, no, that is well below speed. If this is a WIRELESS transfer, that is roughly what you should expect to get if your router is either an N150 class in 40MHz mode or an N300 class in 20MHz mode (or with congestion, far from the router, what have you).

I have two testing scenarios:

1. Transferring from desktop to laptop
2. Transferring between two desktops

I've tried running thru the router only and I also tried with switch connected to the router (for testing purpose) and resaults are about the same.

To put wireless to a side for a moment what do you guys get when transfering big files 1.5GB+ between two 1Gbit desktops? Just curious.

 

[sm00thpapa]

Does anyone have an estimate on the street date of the AC87U?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Shikami]

I agree that you are getting the proper amount of bits per second. A few changes in hardware configuration on router and wireless could give a a little difference. But at the link rate and divide that by 8 and you will get to what you should expect, before you apply limitations of hardware. 144/8=18MB/s is within to what to expect. After applying a limitations of hardware used, you can very well expect the MB/s you were receiving.

As for your gigabit to gigabit hosts at 65MB/s you are getting what you should get with hardware being the most limiting factors. Even though gigabit can transfer at double that, which is its maximum (~120MB/s).

 

[JohnnyBeGood]

I agree that you are getting the proper amount of bits per second. A few changes in hardware configuration on router and wireless could give a a little difference. But at the link rate and divide that by 8 and you will get to what you should expect, before you apply limitations of hardware. 144/8=18MB/s is within to what to expect. After applying a limitations of hardware used, you can very well expect the MB/s you were receiving.

As for your gigabit to gigabit hosts at 65MB/s you are getting what you should get with hardware being the most limiting factors. Even though gigabit can transfer at double that, which is its maximum (~120MB/s).

Good to know that its about the maximum for wireless and wired. Initially it seemed it was too low.

 

[Shikami]

Good to know that its about the maximum for wireless and wired. Initially it seemed it was too low.

That is the hardest factor you have to calculate. Between my Core i7's I can get 112MB/s with very casual dips into 94MB/s and back up going one way. If I change to the other way it will go from 112MB/s for 20% range and then dip to 40-50 MB/s because of the lesser capable drive used in the system. Writing always take more than reading with HDD too, especially older drives.