Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 52 of 52

Thread: Got the Cisco E3000

  1. #41
    Joel
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:

    > "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
    > news:hutlt5pc24c41iea012hp3atpa81199ocd@4ax.com...
    > > Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >> Updating
    > >>
    > >> First, and again I would like to thanks some folks here provided me with
    > >> possitive information helping me to upgrade my router which had problem
    > >> connecting more than one wireless computer for so many years. And last
    > >> time
    > >> I checked, I was able to connect *both* Wii (it has wireless capable) and
    > >> wireless network at same time, other than that I haven't done any more
    > >> testing. So, I am happy with the result, and I would be happier in
    > >> summer
    > >> break when more kids can access to internet at same time (instead of
    > >> disconnecting one to allow other to have internet)
    > >>
    > >> And as I mentioned about getting the newer SB6120 DOSCIS 3.0 top replace
    > >> the older SB5120 DOSCIS 2.0, and promise to post the result here hoping
    > >> to
    > >> share some info with others who may need some info (especially from one
    > >> with
    > >> no experience like me).
    > >>
    > >> - In the past few days, I have done like 30-40 tests
    > >> (http://speedtest.net)
    > >> not because I care about the speed, but I want to see the diffewrence to
    > >> report here.
    > >>
    > >> And the average TOP SPEED is around 23-25 Mb/s. As I have mentioned that
    > >> sometime in the evenning the speed can drop to around 6-10 Mb/s but that
    > >> is
    > >> when more people using the same line at same time. And I try to get the
    > >> TOP
    > >> speed that the modem can squeeze here.
    > >>
    > >> - I just have the SB6120 installed, activated (or setup) from COX by
    > >> giving
    > >> the tech the "Customer S/N" and "MAC S/N" then followed the instruction.
    > >> It
    > >> took around 7-10 minutes to get the modem activated.
    > >>
    > >> Right now it's 12:00 PM and I just did around dozen test and the average
    > >> TOP SPEED is around 33-35 MB/s (I got several 23-29Mb/s). The uploading
    > >> speed remain the same at around 2.3 - 2.5 Mb/s
    > >>
    > >> So, I am pretty sure that this DOSCIS 3.0 modem does gain few extra juice
    > >> from the current service/plan that I can't get from the old DOSCIS 2.0
    > >> modem. And I may do few more test at different hours like evening and
    > >> late
    > >> at night , then will give the result here.
    > >>
    > >> And this is just the other way to say THANK YOU for those who have helped
    > >> me here.

    > >
    > > It's probably the FINAL report. And now I am a little confused or I
    > > believe the speed may vary depending on the location where you live, and
    > > of
    > > course it will depend on the PLAN and the CAP as well etc..
    > >
    > > - OK, I have finally realize that SpeedTest.Net has option to select
    > > specific STATE instead of whatever default or auto state SpeedTest.net
    > > selects. I selected the near by city of the state where I live and I am
    > > only getting around 16Mb/s
    > >
    > >
    > > - This morning, I tried different sites with different speed tests from
    > > many
    > > different states and countries. And I got the wildest speeds and they
    > > gave
    > > different "kbps" "KB/s", "Kbps", "MB/s" and the sad thing that they don't
    > > say "bytes" or "bits" and the speed were from 6 to 25 and 6xxx to 25xx.
    > >
    > > To me it's a WASTE to set up a web page but lacking of some important
    > > information "bits or bytes".
    > >
    > > - I tested few other sites with option to select different FIXED Cities
    > > and
    > > States (still don't have my state). and I got different speed. from this
    > > Speed Test Site http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/
    > >
    > >
    > > - LOWEST speed I got was around 17Mbps (NY)
    > > - LOWER speed I got was 20Mbps (CA)
    > > - MID Speed I got was around 30-33Mbps (WA, GA)
    > > - HIGHER Speed I got was around 44-46Mbps (TX, DC)
    > > - HIGHEST Speed was around 76Mbps (IL the only one)
    > >
    > > So, base on different results above, we may see what the newer modem is
    > > capable of. But then it will depend on the PLAN, location where the ISP
    > > may
    > > have different setup (or CAP).
    > >
    > > So, by looking at many different results I may say that these test can
    > > only give some general idea of what SPEED the modem can handle, and the
    > > MAX
    > > speed the connection (my connection) is capable of. IOW, my plan may not
    > > offer 76Mbps *but* because COX at my local hasn't set the CAP to this
    > > specific plan (cuz not many people have DOSCIS 3 so they don't need to do
    > > it
    > > right away?), and it's possible that I may be able to get more than 76Mbps
    > > (if I connect to faster site).
    > >
    > > Right now I don't know if there is any program to test the real speed of
    > > what my plan is. And I may have to use the same old method I used around
    > > a
    > > decade ago by
    > >
    > > 1. Running a program measuring the OUT/IN DATA. I don't know about the
    > > current version of ZoneAlarm, but I know the older v1.x or v2.x displayed
    > > the IN/OUT DATA, and few others like MU and similar.
    > >
    > > 2. Then running couple File Transferring Management and whatever tool I
    > > can
    > > find, then start downloading data from all sources I can find like from
    > > FTP,
    > > HTTM, Peer-2-Peer, Usenet, File Hostings, or trying to download dozens of
    > > data from many difference sources, then pay closer attention to the
    > > Incoming
    > > and Outgoing speed/data
    > >
    > > Is it the only way?

    >
    >
    >
    > you can drive yourself nuts worrying about all the minutia, but ask yourself
    > is my wireless (54) wired (100) faster than anything your isp provides?
    >
    > how about a usb interface to an external hard disk (480) and now you want to
    > putz with gigabit ethernet (1000).....
    >
    > whether your isp provides 10-20-30-40 thats a smaller number than you have
    > locally, so why worry at all until it gets to 54? (lowest local number for
    > wireless or even 100 wired)


    It sounds like we have so many misunderstanding here.

    1. First, I do not worry about anything, I don't expect the newer modem will
    give faster speed than whatever my plan is. And because I can't be able to
    get the answer by reading the question, answer via internet (because I
    understand different ISP has different limitation or capping etc.) so I
    spent $83 to find the answer myself. And trying to share the information to
    one who wants to give it a try etc..

    2. So my question is still the same.

    - Since the speed test reports the SB6120 DOSCIS modem can get up to
    76Mb/s at some location (site), so does it mean I can get upto 76Mb/s
    with my current plan?

    3. Most of us know the max transferring speed depends on 2 ends, and the
    slowest speed is the final speed the modem use. IOW, if we connect our T3
    to 5.6K Dial-Up-Modem then 5.6K is the final max speed.

    And since the test reports 76Mb/s from the Chicago, Il, so I am pretty
    sure that my current plan and this modem is capable of pumping 76Mb/s or
    more. But the problem that I didn't know the Chicago, IL site to test the
    older SB6120 DOSCIS 2.0 modem to see the difference.

  2. #42
    Warren Oates
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    In article <fOudncofH_vfC0bWnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
    "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:

    > how about a usb interface to an external hard disk (480) and now you want to
    > putz with gigabit ethernet (1000).....


    Our LAN is all gigabit. Only the poor guests who show up with laptops
    use our wireless connection. We move large files around the LAN; you
    can't pull enough cable.
    --
    Very old woody beets will never cook tender.
    -- Fannie Farmer

  3. #43
    Joel
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    alexd <troffasky@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > On 01/05/10 03:47, Peter Pan wrote:
    >
    > > whether your isp provides 10-20-30-40 thats a smaller number than you
    > > have locally, so why worry at all until it gets to 54? (lowest local
    > > number for wireless or even 100 wired)

    >
    > Two points.
    >
    > a) You may well not connect at 54Mbps to your AP, especially if you're
    > not in the same room. The AP is going to drop it's speed to the lowest
    > common denominator, so if you've got another user on your AP who's got
    > poorer signal strength than you, you're not going to get 54Mbps even if
    > you're sat on top of it [at which point you'd be using a cable anyway].
    >
    > b) Even if you do manage to connect at a rate of 54Mbps, that's just the
    > rate of link layer; your actual IP throughput will be closer to half of
    > that. Even the overheads on DSL are only ~13%, and AFAICT the data rate
    > cable companies sell is the actual IP throughput.


    Could you please shine some light into the darkest brain of mine about
    this one. As I have mentioned that even I have been using router, then
    wireless for quite some years, but I never care to learn more about it so I
    am pretty much in the dark about networking. Or I just know some basic to
    get the router running, and you may have read that the reason I upgraded the
    router cuz with my older Buffalo wireless router I can't be able to connect
    more than one wireless system for many years.

    Also, I do not really care about the faster speed than whatever I pay for,
    and I know nothing about 2.4Mhz and or vs 5Mhz (besides more band). But to
    me $83 for the lesson or answer is cheap enough for me so I bought the
    Motorola SB6120 DOSCIS modem to replace a working SB5120 just to find out
    the answer.

    - Before the SB6120 arrived, I done some speed test just to have some record
    to compare with the newer modem, And the max speed was around 25Mb/s

    - And with the SB6120 DOSCIS 3.0 modem I was getting around 35Mb/s

    - I was ok with that, and reported the result here with the promise that I
    will do few more at different time.

    a. Yesterday, I found out that different test site (even from the same
    company, web but different states) give different result. So I tried
    to find more test sites with option to connect the SAME testing program
    or java script whatever they use to different states

    b. And I reports the huge difference results as you can see from the
    original report.

    I was thinking that I just post the final report then disappear for years
    like I did before, but then I got the 76Mb/s so I probably stay foot a
    little longer to find some little more about the max speed.

  4. #44
    alexd
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    On 01/05/10 14:04, Joel wrote:

    > Could you please shine some light into the darkest brain of mine about
    > this one. <snip>


    I'm sure there's a question in there, but I'm damned if I can work out
    what it actually is.

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
    19:27:12 up 3 days, 19:07, 2 users, load average: 0.23, 0.31, 0.23
    It is better to have been wasted and then sober
    than to never have been wasted at all

  5. #45
    Peter Pan
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
    news:2c7ot51p6i7tjqn9sbqdvq7nh3m8lhnlav@4ax.com...
    > "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
    >
    >> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
    >> news:hutlt5pc24c41iea012hp3atpa81199ocd@4ax.com...
    >> > Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> Updating
    >> >>
    >> >> First, and again I would like to thanks some folks here provided me
    >> >> with
    >> >> possitive information helping me to upgrade my router which had
    >> >> problem
    >> >> connecting more than one wireless computer for so many years. And
    >> >> last
    >> >> time
    >> >> I checked, I was able to connect *both* Wii (it has wireless capable)
    >> >> and
    >> >> wireless network at same time, other than that I haven't done any more
    >> >> testing. So, I am happy with the result, and I would be happier in
    >> >> summer
    >> >> break when more kids can access to internet at same time (instead of
    >> >> disconnecting one to allow other to have internet)
    >> >>
    >> >> And as I mentioned about getting the newer SB6120 DOSCIS 3.0 top
    >> >> replace
    >> >> the older SB5120 DOSCIS 2.0, and promise to post the result here
    >> >> hoping
    >> >> to
    >> >> share some info with others who may need some info (especially from
    >> >> one
    >> >> with
    >> >> no experience like me).
    >> >>
    >> >> - In the past few days, I have done like 30-40 tests
    >> >> (http://speedtest.net)
    >> >> not because I care about the speed, but I want to see the diffewrence
    >> >> to
    >> >> report here.
    >> >>
    >> >> And the average TOP SPEED is around 23-25 Mb/s. As I have mentioned
    >> >> that
    >> >> sometime in the evenning the speed can drop to around 6-10 Mb/s but
    >> >> that
    >> >> is
    >> >> when more people using the same line at same time. And I try to get
    >> >> the
    >> >> TOP
    >> >> speed that the modem can squeeze here.
    >> >>
    >> >> - I just have the SB6120 installed, activated (or setup) from COX by
    >> >> giving
    >> >> the tech the "Customer S/N" and "MAC S/N" then followed the
    >> >> instruction.
    >> >> It
    >> >> took around 7-10 minutes to get the modem activated.
    >> >>
    >> >> Right now it's 12:00 PM and I just did around dozen test and the
    >> >> average
    >> >> TOP SPEED is around 33-35 MB/s (I got several 23-29Mb/s). The
    >> >> uploading
    >> >> speed remain the same at around 2.3 - 2.5 Mb/s
    >> >>
    >> >> So, I am pretty sure that this DOSCIS 3.0 modem does gain few extra
    >> >> juice
    >> >> from the current service/plan that I can't get from the old DOSCIS 2.0
    >> >> modem. And I may do few more test at different hours like evening and
    >> >> late
    >> >> at night , then will give the result here.
    >> >>
    >> >> And this is just the other way to say THANK YOU for those who have
    >> >> helped
    >> >> me here.
    >> >
    >> > It's probably the FINAL report. And now I am a little confused or I
    >> > believe the speed may vary depending on the location where you live,
    >> > and
    >> > of
    >> > course it will depend on the PLAN and the CAP as well etc..
    >> >
    >> > - OK, I have finally realize that SpeedTest.Net has option to select
    >> > specific STATE instead of whatever default or auto state SpeedTest.net
    >> > selects. I selected the near by city of the state where I live and I
    >> > am
    >> > only getting around 16Mb/s
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > - This morning, I tried different sites with different speed tests from
    >> > many
    >> > different states and countries. And I got the wildest speeds and they
    >> > gave
    >> > different "kbps" "KB/s", "Kbps", "MB/s" and the sad thing that they
    >> > don't
    >> > say "bytes" or "bits" and the speed were from 6 to 25 and 6xxx to 25xx.
    >> >
    >> > To me it's a WASTE to set up a web page but lacking of some important
    >> > information "bits or bytes".
    >> >
    >> > - I tested few other sites with option to select different FIXED Cities
    >> > and
    >> > States (still don't have my state). and I got different speed. from
    >> > this
    >> > Speed Test Site http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > - LOWEST speed I got was around 17Mbps (NY)
    >> > - LOWER speed I got was 20Mbps (CA)
    >> > - MID Speed I got was around 30-33Mbps (WA, GA)
    >> > - HIGHER Speed I got was around 44-46Mbps (TX, DC)
    >> > - HIGHEST Speed was around 76Mbps (IL the only one)
    >> >
    >> > So, base on different results above, we may see what the newer modem is
    >> > capable of. But then it will depend on the PLAN, location where the
    >> > ISP
    >> > may
    >> > have different setup (or CAP).
    >> >
    >> > So, by looking at many different results I may say that these test can
    >> > only give some general idea of what SPEED the modem can handle, and the
    >> > MAX
    >> > speed the connection (my connection) is capable of. IOW, my plan may
    >> > not
    >> > offer 76Mbps *but* because COX at my local hasn't set the CAP to this
    >> > specific plan (cuz not many people have DOSCIS 3 so they don't need to
    >> > do
    >> > it
    >> > right away?), and it's possible that I may be able to get more than
    >> > 76Mbps
    >> > (if I connect to faster site).
    >> >
    >> > Right now I don't know if there is any program to test the real speed
    >> > of
    >> > what my plan is. And I may have to use the same old method I used
    >> > around
    >> > a
    >> > decade ago by
    >> >
    >> > 1. Running a program measuring the OUT/IN DATA. I don't know about the
    >> > current version of ZoneAlarm, but I know the older v1.x or v2.x
    >> > displayed
    >> > the IN/OUT DATA, and few others like MU and similar.
    >> >
    >> > 2. Then running couple File Transferring Management and whatever tool I
    >> > can
    >> > find, then start downloading data from all sources I can find like from
    >> > FTP,
    >> > HTTM, Peer-2-Peer, Usenet, File Hostings, or trying to download dozens
    >> > of
    >> > data from many difference sources, then pay closer attention to the
    >> > Incoming
    >> > and Outgoing speed/data
    >> >
    >> > Is it the only way?

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> you can drive yourself nuts worrying about all the minutia, but ask
    >> yourself
    >> is my wireless (54) wired (100) faster than anything your isp provides?
    >>
    >> how about a usb interface to an external hard disk (480) and now you want
    >> to
    >> putz with gigabit ethernet (1000).....
    >>
    >> whether your isp provides 10-20-30-40 thats a smaller number than you
    >> have
    >> locally, so why worry at all until it gets to 54? (lowest local number
    >> for
    >> wireless or even 100 wired)

    >
    > It sounds like we have so many misunderstanding here.
    >
    > 1. First, I do not worry about anything, I don't expect the newer modem
    > will
    > give faster speed than whatever my plan is. And because I can't be able
    > to
    > get the answer by reading the question, answer via internet (because I
    > understand different ISP has different limitation or capping etc.) so I
    > spent $83 to find the answer myself. And trying to share the information
    > to
    > one who wants to give it a try etc..
    >
    > 2. So my question is still the same.
    >
    > - Since the speed test reports the SB6120 DOSCIS modem can get up to
    > 76Mb/s at some location (site), so does it mean I can get upto 76Mb/s
    > with my current plan?
    >
    > 3. Most of us know the max transferring speed depends on 2 ends, and the
    > slowest speed is the final speed the modem use. IOW, if we connect our T3
    > to 5.6K Dial-Up-Modem then 5.6K is the final max speed.
    >
    > And since the test reports 76Mb/s from the Chicago, Il, so I am pretty
    > sure that my current plan and this modem is capable of pumping 76Mb/s or
    > more. But the problem that I didn't know the Chicago, IL site to test the
    > older SB6120 DOSCIS 2.0 modem to see the difference.




    theres another part you are forgetting, if you run the speed test multiple
    times, the info is sometimes in your cache after the first time and used
    from there intead of it being transferred again
    not to mention xfer size, buffer size, lag time, relay time etc
    for example, sat can download big stuf faster than bat snot/most terrestial
    isp's, but in real time it's essentialy too slow for voice

    hard to say exactly since you are only giving final numbers and who knows
    how they are calculated




  6. #46
    Joel
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:

    > > 1. First, I do not worry about anything, I don't expect the newer modem
    > > will
    > > give faster speed than whatever my plan is. And because I can't be able
    > > to
    > > get the answer by reading the question, answer via internet (because I
    > > understand different ISP has different limitation or capping etc.) so I
    > > spent $83 to find the answer myself. And trying to share the information
    > > to
    > > one who wants to give it a try etc..
    > >
    > > 2. So my question is still the same.
    > >
    > > - Since the speed test reports the SB6120 DOSCIS modem can get up to
    > > 76Mb/s at some location (site), so does it mean I can get upto 76Mb/s
    > > with my current plan?
    > >
    > > 3. Most of us know the max transferring speed depends on 2 ends, and the
    > > slowest speed is the final speed the modem use. IOW, if we connect our T3
    > > to 5.6K Dial-Up-Modem then 5.6K is the final max speed.
    > >
    > > And since the test reports 76Mb/s from the Chicago, Il, so I am pretty
    > > sure that my current plan and this modem is capable of pumping 76Mb/s or
    > > more. But the problem that I didn't know the Chicago, IL site to test the
    > > older SB6120 DOSCIS 2.0 modem to see the difference.

    >
    >
    >
    > theres another part you are forgetting, if you run the speed test multiple
    > times, the info is sometimes in your cache after the first time and used
    > from there intead of it being transferred again
    > not to mention xfer size, buffer size, lag time, relay time etc
    > for example, sat can download big stuf faster than bat snot/most terrestial
    > isp's, but in real time it's essentialy too slow for voice
    >
    > hard to say exactly since you are only giving final numbers and who knows
    > how they are calculated


    Thanks for the warning and advice about the test, as I said that I never
    care for this type of test or this is pretty much the first time in decades
    of modeming. But I do know some basic of the catching and other basic
    behaviors of browser and internet in general. And I hate to go through all
    small detail of what I know, what I don't know, or what I try to avoid etc..

    - That's why I do different tests from different sources

    - That's why I tested multiple times from the same web page with multiple
    test sites.

    - That's why I don't do all at once but as you have realized that I am not
    trying at different TIMES but also in several DAYS. And if it loads from
    catched files (I don't think the test site is this clumsy not to have this
    old issue covered) then I shouldn't getting the exact same 25-30Mb/s from
    the same sites.

    Since I don't gain anything if the test gives false report, or whatever
    reason. I mean I can only have what I now have, and I try to report the
    result for anyone who wants to know or interest to find out more detail
    themselves.. and that's why I GAVE the LINKs

    And I don't think my question is too complicate, but may be a little too
    simple to give more detail? It's very simple.

    - I don't know exactly what's the max speed I can get from the current
    setting is (I am talking about COX setting not specific plan). And since I
    get 76Mb/s at Chicago, IL test site, does this mean with the current setting
    (or COX hasn't capped the max speed yet) I can get up to 76Mb/s or more (if
    connect to faster site)?

    - I do realize that the speed may not stay the same all the time, or if I
    test it again today then I may not get 76Mb/s from Chicago, IL site like
    yesterday, and it's possible that I may get a faster speed from the slower
    sites.

    IOW, I do understand those very basics so I DON'T ASK something like why I
    get faster speed from Chicago, IL, but I REPORT the DIFFERENCES.

  7. #47
    Peter Pan
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
    news:l89rt510j7upogrekb00j9nk2oc7b9fif9@4ax.com...
    > "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
    >
    >> > 1. First, I do not worry about anything, I don't expect the newer modem
    >> > will
    >> > give faster speed than whatever my plan is. And because I can't be
    >> > able
    >> > to
    >> > get the answer by reading the question, answer via internet (because I
    >> > understand different ISP has different limitation or capping etc.) so I
    >> > spent $83 to find the answer myself. And trying to share the
    >> > information
    >> > to
    >> > one who wants to give it a try etc..
    >> >
    >> > 2. So my question is still the same.
    >> >
    >> > - Since the speed test reports the SB6120 DOSCIS modem can get up to
    >> > 76Mb/s at some location (site), so does it mean I can get upto 76Mb/s
    >> > with my current plan?
    >> >
    >> > 3. Most of us know the max transferring speed depends on 2 ends, and
    >> > the
    >> > slowest speed is the final speed the modem use. IOW, if we connect our
    >> > T3
    >> > to 5.6K Dial-Up-Modem then 5.6K is the final max speed.
    >> >
    >> > And since the test reports 76Mb/s from the Chicago, Il, so I am pretty
    >> > sure that my current plan and this modem is capable of pumping 76Mb/s
    >> > or
    >> > more. But the problem that I didn't know the Chicago, IL site to test
    >> > the
    >> > older SB6120 DOSCIS 2.0 modem to see the difference.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> theres another part you are forgetting, if you run the speed test
    >> multiple
    >> times, the info is sometimes in your cache after the first time and used
    >> from there intead of it being transferred again
    >> not to mention xfer size, buffer size, lag time, relay time etc
    >> for example, sat can download big stuf faster than bat snot/most
    >> terrestial
    >> isp's, but in real time it's essentialy too slow for voice
    >>
    >> hard to say exactly since you are only giving final numbers and who knows
    >> how they are calculated

    >
    > Thanks for the warning and advice about the test, as I said that I never
    > care for this type of test or this is pretty much the first time in
    > decades
    > of modeming. But I do know some basic of the catching and other basic
    > behaviors of browser and internet in general. And I hate to go through
    > all
    > small detail of what I know, what I don't know, or what I try to avoid
    > etc..
    >
    > - That's why I do different tests from different sources
    >
    > - That's why I tested multiple times from the same web page with multiple
    > test sites.
    >
    > - That's why I don't do all at once but as you have realized that I am not
    > trying at different TIMES but also in several DAYS. And if it loads from
    > catched files (I don't think the test site is this clumsy not to have this
    > old issue covered) then I shouldn't getting the exact same 25-30Mb/s from
    > the same sites.
    >
    > Since I don't gain anything if the test gives false report, or whatever
    > reason. I mean I can only have what I now have, and I try to report the
    > result for anyone who wants to know or interest to find out more detail
    > themselves.. and that's why I GAVE the LINKs
    >
    > And I don't think my question is too complicate, but may be a little too
    > simple to give more detail? It's very simple.
    >
    > - I don't know exactly what's the max speed I can get from the current
    > setting is (I am talking about COX setting not specific plan). And since
    > I
    > get 76Mb/s at Chicago, IL test site, does this mean with the current
    > setting
    > (or COX hasn't capped the max speed yet) I can get up to 76Mb/s or more
    > (if
    > connect to faster site)?
    >
    > - I do realize that the speed may not stay the same all the time, or if I
    > test it again today then I may not get 76Mb/s from Chicago, IL site like
    > yesterday, and it's possible that I may get a faster speed from the slower
    > sites.
    >
    > IOW, I do understand those very basics so I DON'T ASK something like why I
    > get faster speed from Chicago, IL, but I REPORT the DIFFERENCES.




    forget which version of windows you run, but basically, with older versions,
    you can clear the buffers before you run the test (run or command then)
    (ipconfig /flushdns) the switch /flushdns clears the buffer....


    the ipconfig command does a lot of useful stuff, you can always use ipconfig
    /? to get a list of all the switches/commands


    as i recall, you used wired ethernet right? so no matter what speed you get
    it's still gonna be less than 100 for non gigabit wired ethernet, so what
    you use now, runs faster than your new modem.



  8. #48
    Joel
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:

    > > And I don't think my question is too complicate, but may be a little too
    > > simple to give more detail? It's very simple.
    > >
    > > - I don't know exactly what's the max speed I can get from the current
    > > setting is (I am talking about COX setting not specific plan). And since
    > > I
    > > get 76Mb/s at Chicago, IL test site, does this mean with the current
    > > setting
    > > (or COX hasn't capped the max speed yet) I can get up to 76Mb/s or more
    > > (if
    > > connect to faster site)?
    > >
    > > - I do realize that the speed may not stay the same all the time, or if I
    > > test it again today then I may not get 76Mb/s from Chicago, IL site like
    > > yesterday, and it's possible that I may get a faster speed from the slower
    > > sites.
    > >
    > > IOW, I do understand those very basics so I DON'T ASK something like why I
    > > get faster speed from Chicago, IL, but I REPORT the DIFFERENCES.

    >
    >
    >
    > forget which version of windows you run, but basically, with older versions,
    > you can clear the buffers before you run the test (run or command then)
    > (ipconfig /flushdns) the switch /flushdns clears the buffer....


    Peter, I am trying to tell you that CATCHING doesn't seem to be the
    problem. Because if it reads the data from my system then the speed should
    be very close to each other.

    - And I have been saying that I tested *different* TIMES and *different*
    DAYS, and *different* testers as well as same tester but *different* STATES

    - And I have been saying that I re-tested the same states multiple times at
    different time/day.

    > the ipconfig command does a lot of useful stuff, you can always use ipconfig
    > /? to get a list of all the switches/commands
    >
    >
    > as i recall, you used wired ethernet right? so no matter what speed you get
    > it's still gonna be less than 100 for non gigabit wired ethernet, so what
    > you use now, runs faster than your new modem.


    Yes, I tested from wired system

    - The ethernet is 10/100/1000Mb

    - The modem supoorts up to 1000Mb

    - The router supports up to 1000Mb

    Other than that I don't know much about network to say more, and that's
    why I ask the question.

  9. #49
    Char Jackson
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    On Tue, 04 May 2010 04:52:33 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

    >"Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
    >
    >> > And I don't think my question is too complicate, but may be a little too
    >> > simple to give more detail? It's very simple.
    >> >
    >> > - I don't know exactly what's the max speed I can get from the current
    >> > setting is (I am talking about COX setting not specific plan). And since
    >> > I
    >> > get 76Mb/s at Chicago, IL test site, does this mean with the current
    >> > setting
    >> > (or COX hasn't capped the max speed yet) I can get up to 76Mb/s or more
    >> > (if
    >> > connect to faster site)?
    >> >
    >> > - I do realize that the speed may not stay the same all the time, or if I
    >> > test it again today then I may not get 76Mb/s from Chicago, IL site like
    >> > yesterday, and it's possible that I may get a faster speed from the slower
    >> > sites.
    >> >
    >> > IOW, I do understand those very basics so I DON'T ASK something like why I
    >> > get faster speed from Chicago, IL, but I REPORT the DIFFERENCES.

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> forget which version of windows you run, but basically, with older versions,
    >> you can clear the buffers before you run the test (run or command then)
    >> (ipconfig /flushdns) the switch /flushdns clears the buffer....

    >
    > Peter, I am trying to tell you that CATCHING doesn't seem to be the
    >problem. Because if it reads the data from my system then the speed should
    >be very close to each other.
    >
    >- And I have been saying that I tested *different* TIMES and *different*
    >DAYS, and *different* testers as well as same tester but *different* STATES
    >
    >- And I have been saying that I re-tested the same states multiple times at
    >different time/day.


    Actually, you're most likely right that caching is no longer a
    problem. I'm not aware of any speed test sites that still fall into
    that trap. However, that's the only good thing I can say about speed
    test sites. They are absolutely not accurate, for the reasons I gave
    earlier in this thread.

    BTW, "ipconfig /flushdns" doesn't flush the browser cache, so it
    wouldn't have helped anyway.


  10. #50
    Char Jackson
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    On Sun, 02 May 2010 11:37:35 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

    >- I don't know exactly what's the max speed I can get from the current
    >setting is .


    Either check your bill or call COX. It's one thing to want to test
    your download speed, but it seems rather pointless when you don't know
    what you should be getting.

    >(I am talking about COX setting not specific plan)


    What does that mean?


  11. #51
    Char Jackson
    Guest

    Re: Got the Cisco E3000

    On Sat, 01 May 2010 07:44:25 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

    >2. So my question is still the same.
    >
    > - Since the speed test reports the SB6120 DOSCIS modem can get up to
    > 76Mb/s at some location (site), so does it mean I can get upto 76Mb/s
    > with my current plan?


    The short answer is no, because web-based speed tests lie. Use one of
    the methods I outlined earlier in this thread if you really want to
    know what your Internet connection is capable of.

    > And since the test reports 76Mb/s from the Chicago, Il, so I am pretty
    >sure that my current plan and this modem is capable of pumping 76Mb/s or
    >more.


    Bad assumption.


  12. #52
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Seoul, South Korea
    Posts
    3
    Soo.... 8 months later, how is the E3000 holding up?

    I am considering getting it. I want it to be the last wireless router I get for the next 10 years.

Similar Threads

  1. Cisco Router and DSL PPPoE HELP!
    By gautoparts in forum Wireless Networks & Routers
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-07-09, 07:02 AM
  2. Cisco 1200 series upgrade failure
    By scj6771 in forum Wireless Networks & Routers
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-05-08, 08:42 AM
  3. Cisco ASA
    By ErikD in forum Networking Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-25-08, 10:26 PM
  4. connect linksys wrt54g & cisco 2514 router
    By nigelatcisco in forum Networking Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-10-08, 11:27 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
  •