Superhub The All New Super Hub 2AC from virgin media, Did we mention its as bad as the 1st - Page 5

**Hugh** · 27-09-2014, 23:43

Baiting others can lead to negative outcomes - kindly desist.

Gtimers · 27-09-2014, 23:56

a theory of mine.
An internet forum is not a social circle. take heed and get out more

**Hugh** · 28-09-2014, 00:12

Bless.......

In other breaking news, rain is wet, bears defecate in aforested areas, and the Il Papa is a member of the Diocese of Rome.....

AMWSmith · 28-09-2014, 00:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99

So the consensus is that the sh2ac is better than the sh1

Now that the issues have been found and the upcoming fixes for them once it's released fully it should be as solid as the Superhub 2. My current sh2ac has lasted longer then any of the last 3 I had.

The SH 1 though the wifi was bad (that was down to the rubbish a antennas inside it. Yep I pulled one apart with VMs permission of corse) it worked great wired and even better in modem mode. The Broadcom DOCSIS chip was fine. The rest was not. It also had memory shortage issues to the point firmware was set to delete all logs on successful connection to the CMTS.

---------- Post added at 23:44 ---------- Previous post was at 23:23 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by jb66

I think the NDA is a joke, once virgin started handing these things out to customers there shouldnt be one

As far as I know the NDA now only covers the firmware but I need to check that.

Gtimers · 28-09-2014, 02:58

I don't have the BT ac router , but I know people whom have had it as VM is not available there or they prefer bt ( god knows why..vm got a bad rep in some areas for utilization).

From the info they have given me, the sh2ac seems better performing...example...

range on 2.4ghz on sh2ac is better according to them & on 5ghz ac, they state same thing. range...
I don't know if its to do with the bt antennas as I havnt got HH.

I have 7 devices at home with AC but iv only tested 4 at length..all at 25-30 metres with two walls...and getting 161 wired..
these are averages based on 10 tests on different days..

Samsung s4: 149mbps
Samsung s5 :147mbps
apple mac book pro: 155mbps
sony vaio (usb ac adapter £15): 141mbps

Im using it on 1.3gbps mode with router downstairs. nothing is wired here at all but I never ever get less than 145 wired..... good area for that...

Samsung s4:
Samsung s4

AMWSmith · 28-09-2014, 03:12

Is the Sony on win 8.1. I expect any apple device to do good even my old 2006 imac gets 160 wired with the 2ac.
Edit and on 5ghz it does 160Mb

MovedGoalPosts · 28-09-2014, 11:22

A number of posts have been deleted.

What ever happens on other web sites is irrelevant to this site - don't bring attitudes and issues from elsewhere on here.

If people don't like the way this site is moderated, and operated find another site. Derailing threads whinging about is will simply see more intervention.

Ignitionnet · 28-09-2014, 15:15

How about leaving what happens on other forums there?

*Sigh*

---------- Post added at 14:15 ---------- Previous post was at 14:12 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gtimers

Bt have claimed a lot and provided 300mbps to a small number of people..
some of the users on virgin media broadband forums have ideas on this.
apcyberax / ignition ...well that's when they are not busy crying to mods.lol

BT are trialing 1Gb downstream on their FTTP network this calendar or financial year, unsure which.

They will be trialling G.fast 1Gb aggregated (so upstream + downstream = 1Gb) over copper 2015/2016.

Neither is getting a widespread rollout any time soon unless something very disruptive happens to the UK broadband market. People are too addicted to cheap/free broadband and the idea of paying more for better if they don't absolutely need it is anathema to most.

apcyberax · 28-09-2014, 15:20

i have been thinking about getting BT Infinity for the upload and load balencing the 2 connections.

Something about 228 Down and 32 up makes me happy

Sephiroth · 28-09-2014, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by apcyberax

i have been thinking about getting BT Infinity for the upload and load balencing the 2 connections.

Something about 228 Down and 32 up makes me happy

I forget who warned me off doing that - If I've read you correctly, AP, you're thinking of bonding VM & FTTC or did you really mean load balancing?

Bonding the two seems likely to me to produce oodd results owing to different routing etc. Igni will know all about that sort of risk, I reckon.

Gtimers · 28-09-2014, 15:29

the risk of bonding the two together is not that bad. it only will have an effect if you use qam320 on FEC ceb scales

apcyberax · 28-09-2014, 15:29

Seph Never tested it myself but i know someone did it a few years ago.

Ignitionnet · 28-09-2014, 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I forget who warned me off doing that - If I've read you correctly, AP, you're thinking of bonding VM & FTTC or did you really mean load balancing?

Bonding the two seems likely to me to produce oodd results owing to different routing etc. Igni will know all about that sort of risk, I reckon.

It can have some interesting effects when certain issues happen.

Don't really have problems with jitter as flows stick to whichever connection they start on.

Depends what you use to bond them I guess. I can't recommend the hardware I use as it won't reliably handle the throughput requirements of a 152Mb VM service and a full rate Infinity FTTC service, doesn't have the CPU.

apcyberax · 28-09-2014, 15:41

I'd use PFSense running on a Rackmount server with Multi core CPU and Lots of ram.

Would just add a a new dual or tri network card to give more ports.

PF sense can bond/load balance.

MovedGoalPosts · 28-09-2014, 16:01

Far too many posts deleted as off topic dispute brought here from elsewhere. Desist or you will find you have a permanent holiday from this forum.