Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: TCP Optimizer Did Not Work For Me

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13

    Angry TCP Optimizer Did Not Work For Me

    Hi Everyone,

    Over the weekend, I discovered that my wife was getting download speeds of around 930 kbps on her Toshiba laptop against my weedy 600 kbps on my desktop PC. Incidentally, our BT Broadband line is supposed to be capable of supporting speeds up to 2000 kbps. So, I thought I'd try out TCP Optimizer. To keep things simple, I followed the basic instructions and saved the changes. Then re-booted. Re-run speed tests and, in actual fact, my download speed reduced - from 630 kbps to 579 kbps. So, I thought I'd restore the original Windows settings and download speed increased a tad to 619 kbps. My desktop PC has a Belkin 11 Mbps PCI card fitted, which is one of the network cards recognised by TCP Optimizer.

    I really would appreciate some help with this. Does anyone have any suggestions I could try?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Post your TCP Analyzer report.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13
    TCP Analyzer Report

    SpeedGuide.net TCP Analyzer Results
    Tested on: 04.10.2007 05:56
    IP address: 217.43.xx.xxx

    TCP options string: 020405b4
    MSS: 1460
    MTU: 1500
    TCP Window: 17520 (multiple of MSS)
    RWIN Scaling: 0
    Unscaled RWIN : 17520
    Reccomended RWINs: 64240, 128480, 256960, 513920
    BDP limit (200ms): 701kbps (88KBytes/s)
    BDP limit (500ms): 280kbps (35KBytes/s)
    MTU Discovery: ON
    TTL: 108
    Timestamps: OFF
    SACKs: OFF
    IP ToS: 00000000 (0)

  4. #4
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Try the following with TCP Optimizer:

    General Settings tab:
    Custom settings - check
    Modify All Network Adapters - check
    network adapter selection - your NIC
    MTU 1500
    TTL - 64
    TCP Receive Window - 64240
    MTU Discovery - Yes
    Black Hole Detect - No
    Selective Acks - Yes
    Max Duplicate ACKs - 2
    TCP 1323 Options:
    Windows Scaling - uncheck
    Timestamps - uncheck

    Advanced Settings tab:
    Max Connections per Server - 10
    Max Connections per 1.0 Server - 20
    LocalPriority - 1
    Host Priority - 1
    DNSPriority - 1
    NetbtPriority - 1
    Lan Browsing speedup - optimized
    QoS: NonBestEffortLimit - 0
    ToS: DisableUserTOSSetting - 0
    ToS: DefaultTOSValue - 80
    MaxNegativeCacheTtl - 0
    NetFailureCacheTime - 0
    NegativeSOACache Time - 0
    LAN Request Buffer Size - 32768
    Then select "Apply Changes" and reboot to take effect

    After reboot, test your speed at this link using a few nearby test servers:

    http://www.speedtest.net/

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13

    Thumbs up On the up!

    Hi Trogers,

    I made the changes that you suggested in TCP Optimizer. I've also been in touch with my ISP (BT Broadband) who've made some tweaks at the exchange. They've asked me to monitor the situation until 6:00 pm tomorrow evening. Anyway, I'm now getting:



    I appreciate your help.

    Thanks.

  6. #6
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Quote Originally Posted by jaypeecee View Post
    Hi Trogers,

    I made the changes that you suggested in TCP Optimizer. I've also been in touch with my ISP (BT Broadband) who've made some tweaks at the exchange. They've asked me to monitor the situation until 6:00 pm tomorrow evening. Anyway, I'm now getting:



    I appreciate your help.

    Thanks.
    Post a new TCP Analyzer to see if your TCP Window has been correctly changed to 64240.

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13

    Latest TCP/IP Analyzer Results

    SpeedGuide.net TCP Analyzer Results
    Tested on: 04.10.2007 12:39
    IP address: 81.154.xx.xxx

    TCP options string: 020405b401010402
    MSS: 1460
    MTU: 1500
    TCP Window: 65535 (NOT multiple of MSS)
    RWIN Scaling: 0
    Unscaled RWIN : 65535
    Reccomended RWINs: 64240, 128480, 256960, 513920
    BDP limit (200ms): 2621kbps (328KBytes/s)
    BDP limit (500ms): 1049kbps (131KBytes/s)
    MTU Discovery: ON
    TTL: 44
    Timestamps: OFF
    SACKs: ON
    IP ToS: 01010000 (80)
    Precedence: 010 (immediate)
    Delay: 1 (low delay)
    Throughput: 0 (normal throughput)
    Reliability: 0 (normal reliability)
    Cost: 0 (normal cost)
    Check bit: 0 (correct)
    DiffServ: AF22 010100 (20) - Assured Forwarding class 2, medium drop precedence (RFC 2597).

  8. #8
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Quote Originally Posted by jaypeecee View Post
    SpeedGuide.net TCP Analyzer Results
    Tested on: 04.10.2007 12:39
    IP address: 81.154.xx.xxx

    TCP options string: 020405b401010402
    MSS: 1460
    MTU: 1500
    TCP Window: 65535 (NOT multiple of MSS)
    RWIN Scaling: 0
    Unscaled RWIN : 65535
    Reccomended RWINs: 64240, 128480, 256960, 513920
    BDP limit (200ms): 2621kbps (328KBytes/s)
    BDP limit (500ms): 1049kbps (131KBytes/s)
    MTU Discovery: ON
    TTL: 44
    Timestamps: OFF
    SACKs: ON
    IP ToS: 01010000 (80)
    Precedence: 010 (immediate)
    Delay: 1 (low delay)
    Throughput: 0 (normal throughput)
    Reliability: 0 (normal reliability)
    Cost: 0 (normal cost)
    Check bit: 0 (correct)
    DiffServ: AF22 010100 (20) - Assured Forwarding class 2, medium drop precedence (RFC 2597).
    No. Your TCP Window is not 64240. Re-run the custom settings I gave. Make sure TCP Window is 64240 before clicking 'ok' and rebooting.

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13

    TCP Receive Window now 64240

    Hi,

    I changed the TCP Receive Window to 64240, applied the changes, re-booted and ran the speedtest, which now shows:



    Still some way to go yet before I'm any way near the 2000 kbps download speed. I'll re-run the speedtest several times throughout the day to see if anything improves.

    Thanks again.

  10. #10
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Do a tracert to www.yahoo.com and post.

    To do a tracert, click 'Start' and then 'Run'. Type "cmd" into the box and click 'ok'.

    A DOS black screen will appear. Type after the C:\>

    tracert www.yahoo.com

    and press enter key

    When test is completed, move mouse cursor to the DOS black screen, click right and choose 'select all'.

    Move mouse cursor to the Quick Reply box of this forum, click right and 'paste'.

  11. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13
    See below.
    Last edited by jaypeecee; 04-11-07 at 12:05 PM. Reason: Incorrect info entered.

  12. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13
    Tracing route to www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 3 ms 2 ms 1 ms voyager.home [192.168.1.1]
    2 12 ms 13 ms 12 ms 213.123.109.58
    3 14 ms 12 ms 11 ms 213.123.109.161
    4 16 ms 12 ms 13 ms 217.41.169.17
    5 25 ms 24 ms 34 ms 217.41.169.130
    6 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms 217.41.169.42
    7 13 ms 12 ms 11 ms 217.47.206.113
    8 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms core1 [194.72.0.225]
    9 14 ms 13 ms 13 ms core1 [194.74.16.145]
    10 574 ms 12 ms 13 ms transit1 [194.72.17.194]
    11 18 ms 34 ms 45 ms 166 [166.49.168.57]
    12 86 ms 87 ms 87 ms t2c2 [166.49.164.62]
    13 87 ms 88 ms 87 ms 166 [166.49.169.2]
    14 89 ms 89 ms 89 ms ge [216.115.108.57]
    15 87 ms 87 ms 87 ms ge [66.196.112.33]
    16 93 ms 89 ms 89 ms www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]

    Trace complete.

  13. #13
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Quote Originally Posted by jaypeecee View Post
    Tracing route to www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 3 ms 2 ms 1 ms voyager.home [192.168.1.1]
    2 12 ms 13 ms 12 ms 213.123.xxx.xxx <= X out part of your public IP address
    3 14 ms 12 ms 11 ms 213.123.109.161
    4 16 ms 12 ms 13 ms 217.41.169.17
    5 25 ms 24 ms 34 ms 217.41.169.130
    6 11 ms 12 ms 12 ms 217.41.169.42
    7 13 ms 12 ms 11 ms 217.47.206.113
    8 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms core1 [194.72.0.225]
    9 14 ms 13 ms 13 ms core1 [194.74.16.145]
    10 574 ms 12 ms 13 ms transit1 [194.72.17.194]
    11 18 ms 34 ms 45 ms 166 [166.49.168.57]
    12 86 ms 87 ms 87 ms t2c2 [166.49.164.62]
    13 87 ms 88 ms 87 ms 166 [166.49.169.2]
    14 89 ms 89 ms 89 ms ge [216.115.108.57]
    15 87 ms 87 ms 87 ms ge [66.196.112.33]
    16 93 ms 89 ms 89 ms www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]

    Trace complete.
    Some irregular and high ping times at the router (hop 1). All 3 normal pings are <1ms.

    Make sure router is placed a few feet away from any electrical device. If you have a cordless phone unit nearby, disconnect it and use a line phone in its place..

    When done, power off the router fr a few minutes before reconnecting. Do a new tracert to see if ping times at hop 1 improve.

  14. #14
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13

    Tracert is very variable.

    Here's another traceroute run...

    Tracing route to www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 16 ms 48 ms 21 ms voyager.home [192.168.1.1]
    2 14 ms 12 ms 13 ms 213.123.109.58
    3 12 ms 11 ms 12 ms 213.123.109.161
    4 14 ms 13 ms 14 ms 217.41.169.17
    5 12 ms 11 ms 12 ms 217.41.169.130
    6 13 ms 12 ms 11 ms 217.41.169.42
    7 10 ms 13 ms 44 ms 217.47.206.113
    8 14 ms 12 ms 12 ms core1 [194.72.0.225]
    9 13 ms 13 ms 12 ms core1 [194.74.16.145]
    10 15 ms 14 ms 13 ms transit1 [194.72.17.194]
    11 12 ms 13 ms 12 ms 166 [166.49.168.57]
    12 88 ms 87 ms 86 ms t2c2 [166.49.164.62]
    13 88 ms 87 ms 88 ms 166 [166.49.169.2]
    14 1015 ms 89 ms 87 ms ge [216.115.108.17]
    15 89 ms 87 ms 88 ms ge [66.196.112.39]
    16 93 ms 89 ms 89 ms www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]

    Trace complete.

  15. #15
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    Quote Originally Posted by jaypeecee View Post
    Here's another traceroute run...

    Tracing route to www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]
    over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 16 ms 48 ms 21 ms voyager.home [192.168.1.1]
    2 14 ms 12 ms 13 ms 213.123.xxx.xxx
    3 12 ms 11 ms 12 ms 213.123.109.161
    4 14 ms 13 ms 14 ms 217.41.169.17
    5 12 ms 11 ms 12 ms 217.41.169.130
    6 13 ms 12 ms 11 ms 217.41.169.42
    7 10 ms 13 ms 44 ms 217.47.206.113
    8 14 ms 12 ms 12 ms core1 [194.72.0.225]
    9 13 ms 13 ms 12 ms core1 [194.74.16.145]
    10 15 ms 14 ms 13 ms transit1 [194.72.17.194]
    11 12 ms 13 ms 12 ms 166 [166.49.168.57]
    12 88 ms 87 ms 86 ms t2c2 [166.49.164.62]
    13 88 ms 87 ms 88 ms 166 [166.49.169.2]
    14 1015 ms 89 ms 87 ms ge [216.115.108.17]
    15 89 ms 87 ms 88 ms ge [66.196.112.39]
    16 93 ms 89 ms 89 ms www.yahoo.com [69.147.114.210]

    Trace complete.
    This position is even worse. Since it is a wireless router, place it in an elevated position (eye level), away from the modem and comp tower or any other electrical devices.

    Try relocating and checking with tracert until all 3 ping times are <1ms (less than 1ms).

  16. #16
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13

    1st hop totally inconsistent

    trogers,

    No matter where I locate my router, I get very variable and inconsistent first hop measurements. I thought the problem might be signal strength-related. I use WirelessMon to monitor signal strength at my PC. This is typically -47 dBm, regardless of where the router is located in the room immediately beneath the room where my PC is used. The floor is wooden. I think the BT Voyager 2091 puts out 100mW of RF but it's an omnidirectional antenna with nominal 2dBi gain. Perhaps I should consider one of the latest MIMO jobbies.

    Do you have any idea why the first hop measurement varies so much and what effect is this likely to have on my connection speed? Could it also contribute to temporary loss of connection? How critical is the < or = 1ms timing for each of the three pings?

    BTW, download speed is still typ. 780 kbps and upload is typ. 380 kbps.

    Once again, thanks for all your help.

  17. #17
    Elite Member trogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Bangkok, Thailand
    Posts
    12,323
    You would be getting about 1800 kbps on a wired connection. But this is rarely achievable for wireless due to higher overheads and signal clarity.

    Speed of 780 kbps is on the low side.

    Try the tweak tips for wireless in our Wireless Networking section of our forum to see if they can help increase your speed. For latest info on hardware for wireless signal, post a thread in that section:

    http://forums.speedguide.net/showthread.php?t=203247

Similar Threads

  1. need help with TCP Optimizer
    By ffjjdd in forum Broadband Tweaks Help
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-23-06, 05:55 AM
  2. Ran TCP Optimizer 2.0.3 Can't see Graphics
    By cajundon in forum Broadband Tweaks Help
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-06-06, 08:37 AM
  3. TCP OPTIMIZER: My DL Speed not LISTED..Help!
    By Rostam in forum Broadband Tweaks Help
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-12-06, 12:22 PM
  4. I see they still haven't fixed it yet
    By Sid in forum Distributed Computing
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 03-20-05, 07:30 AM
  5. Did TCP Optimizer make me lose my connection?
    By Freo in forum Broadband Tweaks Help
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-06-05, 11:22 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •