1000M : M1000 is available. How to order?

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Kush - are you saying that the Hub 4's WAN port has a capability higher than 1Gbps?

No no no, I'm saying the WAN connection internal to the HUB is capable of it, that connection that feeds into the HUB's LAN and Wireless switch.

Originally Posted by General Maximus

Am i missing something or is the wan port 1gbit?

When I spoke about the WAN capacity, I meant internal to the hub. I wouldn't call any of the external ports on the hub WAN ports. Even in modem mode from what I understand it's still a bridged LAN port.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Kushan

No no no, I'm saying the WAN connection internal to the HUB is capable of it, that connection that feeds into the HUB's LAN and Wireless switch.



When I spoke about the WAN capacity, I meant internal to the hub. I wouldn't call any of the external ports on the hub WAN ports. Even in modem mode from what I understand it's still a bridged LAN port.

Ah - it's becoming clearer now.

The coax WAN port is not constrained to 1Gbps. I'm happy with that. The internal LAN bus handling limit will obviously be higher than 1 Gbps to cover what peops would be doing on the LAN.

The bridge LAN port is by definition 1 Gbps. The WiFi is AC not AX so nothing to win there.

If the Hub 4 is configured by VM for 2 x CPE, then each CPE would be able to use 1 Gbps through a LAN port.

All clear to me, thanks.

[General Maximus]

yeah I get it, I was visualising the back of my router when I was thinking about the scenario which is why I said wan port, obviously the shub hasn't got one.

[Kushan]

Pretty much. I'm as annoyed as anyone, I just don't think Virgin is going to suffer from saying it's greater than 1gbit. Hell, most of us here lamenting the lack of a 2.5G+ port don't even have the networking equipment to handle it anyway.

I've got a 10Gbit port on my motherboard, but no way to use it even internally on my own LAN. The cost of entry is just too high

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Ah - it's becoming clearer now.

The coax WAN port is not constrained to 1Gbps. I'm happy with that. The internal LAN bus handling limit will obviously be higher than 1 Gbps to cover what peops would be doing on the LAN.

The bridge LAN port is by definition 1 Gbps. The WiFi is AC not AX so nothing to win there.

If the Hub 4 is configured by VM for 2 x CPE, then each CPE would be able to use 1 Gbps through a LAN port.

All clear to me, thanks.

It took me a while too, but I still don't think I am quite there yet.

I understand how the >1.2Gb WAN to LAN throughput of Hub 4 can be utilised, in full, by two devices calling for > 550Mb , for example. Yet, I run just one of the Hub 4 1Gb ethernet ports through a GT-AX11000, but still only max at 948Mb. I guess the difference is due to overheads / built-in latency?

I know it seems picky, but it's nice to have explanations.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

It took me a while too, but I still don't think I am quite there yet.

I understand how the >1.2Gb WAN to LAN throughput of Hub 4 can be utilised, in full, by two devices calling for > 550Mb , for example. Yet, I run just one of the Hub 4 1Gb ethernet ports through a GT-AX11000, but still only max at 948Mb. I guess the difference is due to overheads / built-in latency?

I know it seems picky, but it's nice to have explanations.

If you are in modem mode, then the one port feeding the AX1100 is constrained to 1 Gig.

If you are in router mode, then two LAN ports can each download to a maximum of 1 Gig. So, if you have, say, two PC connected to the Hub 4, each downloading at 550 Meg, then the speed through the Hub 4 coax (the WAN port) will be > 1 Gbps.

If you are in router mode and the AX1100 is connected to one of the Hub 4's LAN ports, it is still constrained to 1 Gig.

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

If you are in modem mode, then the one port feeding the AX1100 is constrained to 1 Gig.

If you are in router mode, then two LAN ports can each download to a maximum of 1 Gig. So, if you have, say, two PC connected to the Hub 4, each downloading at 550 Meg, then the speed through the Hub 4 coax (the WAN port) will be > 1 Gbps.

If you are in router mode and the AX1100 is connected to one of the Hub 4's LAN ports, it is still constrained to 1 Gig.

I get that 1Gb is going to be my ceiling, but am I right in saying that I don't reach the full 1Gb because of overheads/my Ethernet network latency?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

I get that 1Gb is going to be my ceiling, but am I right in saying that I don't reach the full 1Gb because of overheads/my Ethernet network latency?

I don't think so, Roughie. In the older days when we were on 200 Meg, for example, we were all getting well in excess of that. Those who were on 500 Meg were reporting 540 Meg. This both in router mode and modem mode.

What seems to be perplexing you is why can't you go all the way to 1 Gbps. With a bit of thought, you could lash up two computers on the same LAN and perform a huge file transfer and then time it (there must be some software to do this somewhere).

Addressing the latency question, it's quite complicated. The LAN ports are buffered - which is a mitigation against latency. So latency could then depend on what else is happening in target equipment - like sending ACKs back to the data source. That said, speeds tests don't require ACKs. But through the AX1100 LAN port, other stuff in the background might be doing things like looking for emails or whatever. That will steal bandwidth.

Do you have an AX capabvle mobile and if so, what speed test speed do you get when every other app is dormant?

[Martin_D]

Am looking to upgrade to a 1Gbps service in the very near future we have two choices

Virgin 1000/50 - Not available just yet
BT FTTP 900/100 - Available now

We have the £99 bundle at the moment but have no interest of taking that again Just don’t know if BT are any good never been with them

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I don't think so, Roughie. In the older days when we were on 200 Meg, for example, we were all getting well in excess of that. Those who were on 500 Meg were reporting 540 Meg. This both in router mode and modem mode.

What seems to be perplexing you is why can't you go all the way to 1 Gbps. With a bit of thought, you could lash up two computers on the same LAN and perform a huge file transfer and then time it (there must be some software to do this somewhere).

Addressing the latency question, it's quite complicated. The LAN ports are buffered - which is a mitigation against latency. So latency could then depend on what else is happening in target equipment - like sending ACKs back to the data source. That said, speeds tests don't require ACKs. But through the AX1100 LAN port, other stuff in the background might be doing things like looking for emails or whatever. That will steal bandwidth.

Do you have an AX capabvle mobile and if so, what speed test speed do you get when every other app is dormant?

I'm not sure that the overclocking that VM does in its modem config, to allow for overheads, applies here, if the absolute ceiling of a 1 Gig port is 1 Gig.

My phone is a Samsung Galaxy S10 Plus. I've been getting something like 850Mb on the 5G-2 channel, but without putting other apps to sleep. I just now got 929Mb after a reboot. Experimentation required.

I might try what you suggest regarding hitching up two PCs to a single Erthernet port, (The 2.5Gb one.), just as a challenge. However, when one gets 948Mb consistently, I don't suppose missing the extra 52Mb matters much. A free boost to 100Mb upstream would be handy though. I know, that is probably a long way off, given VM's network architecture.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Martin_D

Am looking to upgrade to a 1Gbps service in the very near future we have two choices

Virgin 1000/50 - Not available just yet
BT FTTP 900/100 - Available now

We have the £99 bundle at the moment but have no interest of taking that again Just don’t know if BT are any good never been with them

I'm still with them in our other house and used to have BT Infinity here. They're OK - their kit works well and have never needed to contact them. If it's FTTP, then it obvs won't suffer distance rules.

The 100 upload is attractive.

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I'm still with them in our other house and used to have BT Infinity here. They're OK - their kit works well and have never needed to contact them. If it's FTTP, then it obvs won't suffer distance rules.

The 100 upload is attractive.

It won't be long before Vodafone's 900Mb/900Mb is available in my street, so when my VM contract runs out next May, I am likely to make the switch. I won't really miss the the TV.

[pip08456]

BT did until recently have an issue with their super hub 2 not being able to deliver more than 50Mb. They appear to have resolved it though.

[watercooled]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

I get that 1Gb is going to be my ceiling, but am I right in saying that I don't reach the full 1Gb because of overheads/my Ethernet network latency?

You are correct about it being overheads. When we talk about gigabit Ethernet it literally means 1,000,000,000 bits per second transferred on the wire, but not all of this is usable for actual data because of the way it is arranged into frames/packets. Each frame/packet needs a header to say where it's going e.g. a MAC header on layer two, then an IP header on layer 3, then more for TCP/UDP above that - you get the point though. More information available online if you search for those terms.

In an overly simplified way and ignoring multiple layers, lets say a packet can hold 95 bits of data with a 5 bit header. All 100 bits still need to be transferred over the Ethernet link but only 95 bits of actual data (payload) are being transmitted per packet. Translating that into speed, instead of 100 bits per second say, you now only have 95 bits per second. It is still literally 100 bits being sent mind, that's not in question, but like you say some is overhead because of how networks work.

If you have two computers on a LAN, set up file sharing and share a file between them, you'll see a similar limitation which tends to be around 930-950Mb/s throughput depending on things like packet size, protocol used, etc.

This is also true with DSL - if you're close enough to the cabinet for VDSL you will sync at 80Mb/s on the highest Openreach package, but do a speed test and this shows more like 76ish Mb/s for exactly the same reason. This is also why it's now advertised as such because that's the number that shows up in speed tests.

The reason this is different with Virgin is because what they sell as 200Mb is not 200Mb - go check your modem stats. Virgin have changed these profiles from time to time but at the time of making this post my profile speed is 230,000,061 bps. So pretty much 230Mb/s.

Hope that explains it well enough!

[spiderplant]

https://www.speedtest.net/insights/b...bps-speedtest/
says "a 1 Gbps payload usually loses 6-9% to overhead", so roughbeast is actually doing well to only lose 5.2%.