Got the Cisco E3000

[Char Jackson]

On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:39:34 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

>Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
> Right now I am just try to do the basic testing *before* the SB6120 arrive
>so I won't have to bang my head to the wall saying that I should do it when
>I have the chance.
>
> And I believe I should be able to see the difference in the next few day.
>If not this weekend then probably next Monday.

I hope you're not thinking you can just swap modems and it'll work.
<g> You'll have to request provisioning for the new modem, in case you
didn't know.

>> The 5120 is a fine modem for anything less than DOCSIS 3 service
>> plans. Assuming proper signal levels and nothing else is out of whack,
>> it will work as good as the 6120 will until you upgrade to DOCSIS 3.
>
> *If* you comparing the SPEED and feature of the modems than as I said you
>are 100% correct in general. But if you compare what both modem can and
>can't do, then who know you may not right.

I'm not sure what you mean. Unless you're on a DOCSIS 3 service plan,
there's nothing extra the 6120 can do versus the 5120.

>> Only if you upgrade to a DOCSIS 3 service tier, assuming such a tier
>> is available in your area. If not, it's no different than what you
>> already have. I assume you've checked with your cable provider to
>> verify that the 6120 is even supported.
>
> I believe that DOSCIS 3.0 service is available in my area, and I don't
>think I will need DISCIS 3 service to benefit from the better technology
>modem. Of course I won't get 100-300Mb/s, but very possible that I may get
>20-25Mb/s 24/7 instead of dropping to 6-7Mb/s at evening (and who know I may
>get 30-40Mb/s from the current sercice that my SB5120 can't deliver?).

You haven't told us what your service plan is, but it's extremely
unlikely that you'll see better performance from a 6120 versus 5120.
If your speed is dropping at certain times of the day, it's not the
fault of the modem.

> So, when my SB6120 arrived, installed. Do I report the correct number or
>some fake number either to make you happy or me won't lose face heheheh.

Well, you're already using web-based speed test sites for your initial
testing, so by all means continue to provide fake numbers. ;-)

[Joel]

Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:39:34 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
>
> >Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > Right now I am just try to do the basic testing *before* the SB6120 arrive
> >so I won't have to bang my head to the wall saying that I should do it when
> >I have the chance.
> >
> > And I believe I should be able to see the difference in the next few day.
> >If not this weekend then probably next Monday.
>
> I hope you're not thinking you can just swap modems and it'll work.
> <g> You'll have to request provisioning for the new modem, in case you
> didn't know.

Thanks for the reminding. Network then I don't know, but about modem then
I do know a little. I started modeming in early 70's, and have been using
Cable HSI since @HOME was first available, I have upgraded the modems 3
times before and this will be my 4th one.

> >> The 5120 is a fine modem for anything less than DOCSIS 3 service
> >> plans. Assuming proper signal levels and nothing else is out of whack,
> >> it will work as good as the 6120 will until you upgrade to DOCSIS 3.
> >
> > *If* you comparing the SPEED and feature of the modems than as I said you
> >are 100% correct in general. But if you compare what both modem can and
> >can't do, then who know you may not right.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean. Unless you're on a DOCSIS 3 service plan,
> there's nothing extra the 6120 can do versus the 5120.

It's very simple.

- First, I don't have the modem yet to know for sure what the result will
be.

- I am hoping that my current plan is faster than 8-25Mb/s that I get from
"speedtest.net" which I never cared to test before. Or as I mentioned that
I don't care for the speed report, but I want to have some record so I can
compare in order to share the experience with other.

What I am trying to say that there is a chance that I am using underpower
modem, or COX not yet blocked or set limit to my plan so I may be able to
get some extra speed from it. If not then it's not a big deal.

What plan do I have? I never care to ask myself or COX, All I remember
that mine was $49.xx originally, then COX gave $10 discount for having COX
Cable TV and Phone services. That's all I remember, and I dropped both
cable TV and phone services few years ago. And I never looked at the bill
to know how much they charge me now.

> >> Only if you upgrade to a DOCSIS 3 service tier, assuming such a tier
> >> is available in your area. If not, it's no different than what you
> >> already have. I assume you've checked with your cable provider to
> >> verify that the 6120 is even supported.
> >
> > I believe that DOSCIS 3.0 service is available in my area, and I don't
> >think I will need DISCIS 3 service to benefit from the better technology
> >modem. Of course I won't get 100-300Mb/s, but very possible that I may get
> >20-25Mb/s 24/7 instead of dropping to 6-7Mb/s at evening (and who know I may
> >get 30-40Mb/s from the current sercice that my SB5120 can't deliver?).
>
> You haven't told us what your service plan is, but it's extremely
> unlikely that you'll see better performance from a 6120 versus 5120.
> If your speed is dropping at certain times of the day, it's not the
> fault of the modem.

What answer if I tell you? and I never complain about the lower speed or
modem fault, I just report for one who wants to know.

And if you won't mind me asking you a question.

Lets assume that your SB5120 is broken and you have to buy a newer modem
to replace it. My question is do you spend extra $5-10 for the SB6120 or
you will buy another SB5120?

That's all I want to know so I can have some idea what I am dealing with.

> > So, when my SB6120 arrived, installed. Do I report the correct number or
> >some fake number either to make you happy or me won't lose face heheheh.
>
> Well, you're already using web-based speed test sites for your initial
> testing, so by all means continue to provide fake numbers. ;-)

[Char Jackson]

On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:39:14 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:

>Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:39:34 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> > Right now I am just try to do the basic testing *before* the SB6120 arrive
>> >so I won't have to bang my head to the wall saying that I should do it when
>> >I have the chance.
>> >
>> > And I believe I should be able to see the difference in the next few day.
>> >If not this weekend then probably next Monday.
>>
>> I hope you're not thinking you can just swap modems and it'll work.
>> <g> You'll have to request provisioning for the new modem, in case you
>> didn't know.
>
> Thanks for the reminding. Network then I don't know, but about modem then
>I do know a little. I started modeming in early 70's, and have been using
>Cable HSI since @HOME was first available, I have upgraded the modems 3
>times before and this will be my 4th one.
>
>> >> The 5120 is a fine modem for anything less than DOCSIS 3 service
>> >> plans. Assuming proper signal levels and nothing else is out of whack,
>> >> it will work as good as the 6120 will until you upgrade to DOCSIS 3.
>> >
>> > *If* you comparing the SPEED and feature of the modems than as I said you
>> >are 100% correct in general. But if you compare what both modem can and
>> >can't do, then who know you may not right.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you mean. Unless you're on a DOCSIS 3 service plan,
>> there's nothing extra the 6120 can do versus the 5120.
>
> It's very simple.

Yes, it's simple, but you're hoping for improvements anyway. :)

>- First, I don't have the modem yet to know for sure what the result will
>be.
>
>- I am hoping that my current plan is faster than 8-25Mb/s that I get from
>"speedtest.net" which I never cared to test before. Or as I mentioned that
>I don't care for the speed report, but I want to have some record so I can
>compare in order to share the experience with other.
>
> What I am trying to say that there is a chance that I am using underpower
>modem, or COX not yet blocked or set limit to my plan so I may be able to
>get some extra speed from it. If not then it's not a big deal.

Your 5120 isn't underpowered, and I seriously doubt that Cox has
forgotten to put a throughput limit on your account.

> What plan do I have? I never care to ask myself or COX, All I remember
>that mine was $49.xx originally, then COX gave $10 discount for having COX
>Cable TV and Phone services. That's all I remember, and I dropped both
>cable TV and phone services few years ago. And I never looked at the bill
>to know how much they charge me now.

Two things are completely foreign to me:
1. Paying for Internet access and not caring whether I'm getting what
I pay for, and
2. Paying the bill without looking at it.

Just thinking about either of those things makes my skin itch.

>> You haven't told us what your service plan is, but it's extremely
>> unlikely that you'll see better performance from a 6120 versus 5120.
>> If your speed is dropping at certain times of the day, it's not the
>> fault of the modem.
>
> What answer if I tell you? and I never complain about the lower speed or
>modem fault, I just report for one who wants to know.

Why bother doing any testing if you don't know what the results should
be? That goes especially if you're using web-based speed test sites,
which is why your results are all over the board. (8-25Mb/s) Once you
test properly, you'll start to see very consistent results. You may
still see slowdowns during prime time, usually due to congestion
caused by node oversubscription, but even the slowdowns will start to
be consistent.

> And if you won't mind me asking you a question.
>
> Lets assume that your SB5120 is broken and you have to buy a newer modem
>to replace it. My question is do you spend extra $5-10 for the SB6120 or
>you will buy another SB5120?

If the cost differential were $5-10, I might go for the 6120, but I
wouldn't have any expectations of service improvements without a
corresponding increase in my service plan, i.e., upgrading to a DOCSIS
3 plan. On a DOCSIS 2 plan, the two modems should be the same.

> That's all I want to know so I can have some idea what I am dealing with.

Interesting. :)

[Joel]

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.

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:dalbt55gr2k7j73pv07m3a91vkfa2mnicv@4ax.com...
> "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>
>> "Joe" <Joe@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
>> news:aeo9t59fku3c6td3ci2lp51qtaus5puthc@4ax.com...
>>
>> >
>> > I don't know what to do with the external storage and others yet, but I
>> > think I can figure it out later. I do have wireless laser printer and
>> > couple extra 1GB external hard drives so I can give it a try (may be
>> > may
>> > be
>> > not).
>> >
>>
>> just out of curiosity, got more than one puter on your network (or an old
>> one?) i have an older laptop... wireless with a few broken keys, but use
>> it
>> an always on catchall/smart network device Got a few TB usb drives, usb
>> printer etc on it, and use it from my other puters (even my ipod!) rather
>> than try to install on each device it self, i use it over the network as
>> sort of a poor mans network storage + network print server, or for big
>> data
>> transfers, just plug the big drive into the usb port on other
>> machines....
>
> At home I have 2 desktops wired to router, 1 laptop and 1 Wii which also
> have built-in wireless for news, wearther, playing online against people
> around the globe etc.. (I don't play game to know much about it, just for
> my
> grandkids).
>
> And when bigger grandkids off college each has his/her own laptop and
> that's when I have [problem with my current rounter that won't allow more
> than 1 wireless connection.
>
> Since I use computer for video and photo, so the computer itself has
> 4.5TB, and 4 external USB drives (2 500GB and 2 1TB).
>
> Even I have been using LAN for many years, but I mostly wired my desktops
> to router or having some extra connector available for laptop. But couple
> years ago, the grandkids get older, laptop gets cheaper so they started
> using wireless.
>
> Man, it's so crazy here as some of my grandkids barely able to walk
> straight, some still wearing diaper, holding bottle etc. and their parents
> have their old laptops setup for them to play online game hehehe
>
>> was what you typed above 1 GB external drives a typo, or do you really
>> have
>> old 1 gig external drives? (heck, my USB flash drives are 32 and 64 Gig)
>> if
>> that small, consider getting a boat and using them for anchors
>
> Typo, I meant 1TB. Wait for a second, if counting all the external hard
> drives then I have 7 of them, and even the Wii has 500GB hard drive (2
> portable hard drives are/were part of photography gear now I use larger
> memory cards). Talking about memory card, I may have around 50-60 of
> them.
> I mainly use SF but some cellphones and GPSes use SDHC, the newer Nuvi
> 1490T
> uses Micro SDHC (I don't remember I have 8GB or 16GB for this one).



sigh, wired or wireless is immaterial, works the same with either, if you
have a computer on the network, and set sharing permissions, ANY device on
the network can access it ....

on mine, some puters are wired, some wireless, and some even powerline

for instance (too long to teach you how to to do it, but read about sharing,
mapping and printer and file sharing) my computers have network names like
acer, toshiba, gateway, and usb devices i share (hard disks printers etc
have unique easy to remember names) and i simply map say my F: drive to
//gateway/max-1TB-A or H: to something like //toshiba/max-1TB-B or my
printer share is //toshiba/hp-3900 while not often done, you can even share
the root (like T: is \\acer\c-drive


one of the cool things i use with the newer stuff (may work with older too
but i never tried it), is to assign a specific ip/port based on the devices
mac address... ie use dynamic ip addresses cept for certain mac addys - they
are static...)

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:ukect5d6m4nveda8lbghbg6ho3amrdgkgf@4ax.com...

> Also, how do I check to see which BAND I am using (2.4M/hz or 5M/hz), and
> any advantage or disadvantage between those 2 modes? I feel like I wasn't
> born for advanced tech.



at this point, don't worry about it, most devices your grandkids probably
have are 2.4

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:btadt5p69qqmdhd85d19sslvdqn1fs5ol9@4ax.com...

>
> I did run into some speed test between NetGear vs Linksys/Cisco, but I
> don't care much for the speed at the moment, and that's why I have
> mentioned
> about looking to retire my old Motorola SB5120 with newer SB6120 see if I
> can squeeze some juice out of the COX speed. Although, I am quite happy
> with the current speed (not the fastest but I don't really need any
> faster)
> that I been testing several times a day in the past few days (be prepared
> for next upgrade) and the speed can go somewhere around 9Mb/s -> 25Mb/s
> (download) and pretty stable at around 2Mb/s - > 2.5Mb/s. Once speedtest
> reported the download speed reached around 35Mb/s but only once.
>

ummm, you may want to consider some basics about speed, all you may get is a
bill, bragging rights for a bigger number, and absolutely no speed
increase.....
you will absolutely ALWAYS be limited to the slowest thing (ie cox is about
12-25 mbps, and they sometimes burst faster so people think they are faster
than they really are ((no matter which modem)), your wireless is 54, wired
100, gigabit ethernet 1000... if you are acessing the internet you will
NEVER get higher speed than what cox provides, so if the max from cox was
35, you will never get faster than 35)

as an analogy, summers coming, think of a swimming pool in your yard and you
have a 3/4 " water faucet on your wall and a garden hose, and a 2" fire
hose..... what fills the pool faster? (if you say 2" hose, then is it on a
fire hydrant, or connected to the 3/4" faucet on your wall... if connected
to the outside 3/4" faucet will the 2" or and 3/4" be faster or same
speed/limited to the slowest device)

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:o33et5ddceo9jgorpl6v6mqllb36n41c1b@4ax.com...
> Tony Hwang <dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> Joel wrote:
>> > Tony Hwang<dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Joel wrote:
>> >>> If you don't mind me asking another dumb question. As a slower
>> >>> learner I
>> >>> often or always try to gather as much information as I possible can,
>> >>> and
>> >>> taking my time installing new toy. As you may have reas that it took
>> >>> me
>> >>> many years to upgrade the router just to be able to solve the
>> >>> multi-connections issue I had for so many years.
>> >>>
>> >>> Now, I got the Cisco E3000, installed it after lot of reading and
>> >>> sweating
>> >>> (about the experts having some problem with some thing). I have read
>> >>> the
>> >>>
>> >>> - Basic setting
>> >>>
>> >>> - Advanced Setting
>> >>>
>> >>> - Web setting
>> >>>
>> >>> - Cisco Connecting etc..
>> >>>
>> >>> And after I got the router working, I still don't know if I used the
>> >>> Basic, Advanced, Web, or Cisco setting. All I know that I inserted
>> >>> the
>> >>> CD/DVD and following the step-by-step instruction how to hook up the
>> >>> cable,
>> >>> then NEXT and waited for the router doiung some checking or setting
>> >>> whatever. That's it.
>> >>>
>> >>> Then I clicked on something and it sent the "192.168.1.0" (or
>> >>> 192.168.0.1
>> >>> whatever) to browser and it was in Web Setting, or Advanced Setting,
>> >>> or
>> >>> Cisco setting.. I still dunno know.
>> >>>
>> >>> I read and quite afew people mention about some setting in web
>> >>> setting may
>> >>> disable the Cisco Connecting, and I believe I saw the warning from
>> >>> the
>> >>> setting (I don't think I selected that option?). Now I try to check
>> >>> the
>> >>> Cisco Connection and dunno where to find it.... I tried to run the
>> >>> SETUP
>> >>> from CD/DVD and it said the router already setup.
>> >>>
>> >>> And I read *if* something discable the Cisco Connection then I may
>> >>> have to
>> >>> RESET the router etc.. and I have no idea where I am at.
>> >>>
>> >>> Also, how do I check to see which BAND I am using (2.4M/hz or 5M/hz),
>> >>> and
>> >>> any advantage or disadvantage between those 2 modes? I feel like I
>> >>> wasn't
>> >>> born for advanced tech.
>> >> Hi,
>> >> Let's compae it to car drivers. There are automotive vehicle operator
>> >> and driver. Do you know the difference? I am using older WRT610N using
>> >> both bands. I read one comparison testing between E3000 and WRT600N.
>> >> The difference was barely 10%. I have a E3000 on the way for my own
>> >> evaluation.
>> >
>> > Well, this isn't the answer I looking for, I don't expect much
>> > difference
>> > between the similar products, or different brands with similar
>> > technology. I
>> > am looking for the answer for my confusion cuz of lacking of
>> > experience.
>> >
>> > I did run into some speed test between NetGear vs Linksys/Cisco, but I
>> > don't care much for the speed at the moment, and that's why I have
>> > mentioned
>> > about looking to retire my old Motorola SB5120 with newer SB6120 see if
>> > I
>> > can squeeze some juice out of the COX speed. Although, I am quite
>> > happy
>> > with the current speed (not the fastest but I don't really need any
>> > faster)
>> > that I been testing several times a day in the past few days (be
>> > prepared
>> > for next upgrade) and the speed can go somewhere around 9Mb/s ->
>> > 25Mb/s
>> > (download) and pretty stable at around 2Mb/s -> 2.5Mb/s. Once
>> > speedtest
>> > reported the download speed reached around 35Mb/s but only once.
>> >
>> > OK, since you are Linksys ownerm would you give me some info about the
>> > difference between those settings, or based on the conversations I read
>> > sometime I feel like I was in the BASIC setting, sometime at the
>> > Advanced
>> > Setting, sometime at the Web setting mode, and sometime at the Cisco
>> > Connecting setting mode. Or I am happy to get it running, but just
>> > want to
>> > know where I am at or where I were ... so confusing.
>> >
>> > Cuz all the routers I had before don't have this type of information or
>> > I
>> > just use the web setting. And I read that Web Setting and Cisco
>> > Setting are
>> > two different beasts they not only don't like each other but even
>> > against
>> > each other. I read that it uses 2 different programs to setup
>> > different
>> > parts of the router, and one setup could disable other which may
>> > require
>> > factory reset to bring back the option to screw up again hehehe.
>> >
>> Hi,
>> I really don't fathom what you are trying to do.
>> If you have a specific question, maybe forum at Cisco site
>> is the place to go. I am just wondering if E3000 is Linux
>> driven so it is a dd-wrt candidate.
>
> Well, if I can get good information from Cisco site then I wouldn't have
> to pay $$$ and spending time reading and asking question here. Here, I
> spend hours in the past few days reading many conversations of many web
> forums, even downloaded a large DPF manual with settting instruction,
> reading the online help etc. but
>
> - The online help (when setting) covers most options but not all
>
> - The PDF has much more information than I really need, but they don't
> cover
> everything either. And the sad part that the PICTURES are so blur that I
> can't be able to see, or if they try to use PHOTO then they should make
> sure
> that the photo is readable.
>
> - I stopped by Cisco site few times and can't even be able to find the
> manual, I end up Google for the link. IOW, the manual comes from Cisco
> site
> but the web isn't designed for manual seeker, or asking question etc..
>
> I don't know about the E3000 but I read one of the E2000 (E2000L ?) has
> Linux supported. And I am not Linux user to know much about it, and I
> found
> the info from the ads not Cisco site.



who cares, and why does it matter? for your posted uses you absolutely
positively don't need dd-wrt, so why ask about it?

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:0m3et59o343vuf6lke8cbcvf9um5liaebs@4ax.com...
> Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 04:34:14 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I did run into some speed test between NetGear vs Linksys/Cisco, but I
>> >don't care much for the speed at the moment, and that's why I have
>> >mentioned
>> >about looking to retire my old Motorola SB5120 with newer SB6120 see if
>> >I
>> >can squeeze some juice out of the COX speed. Although, I am quite happy
>> >with the current speed (not the fastest but I don't really need any
>> >faster)
>> >that I been testing several times a day in the past few days (be
>> >prepared
>> >for next upgrade) and the speed can go somewhere around 9Mb/s -> 25Mb/s
>> >(download) and pretty stable at around 2Mb/s - > 2.5Mb/s. Once
>> >speedtest
>> >reported the download speed reached around 35Mb/s but only once.
>>
>> A new modem isn't going to provide faster throughput unless your
>> existing modem is broken.
>
> In general I agree with you on this one, but in some case a newer
> technology may do something that older technology can't.
>
> I just ordered the SB6120 and will report the result here in couple days.
>
>> You pay for a certain service level. We don't know what that level is,
>> but you should. Are you getting what you're paying for? If so, the
>> best way to get more speed is to buy a higher service level. In the
>> unlikely event that you buy a service level that your existing modem
>> isn't capable of, only then does it make sense to buy a new (faster)
>> modem. If you lease your modem, your cable company will take care of
>> this automatically.
>
> In general, again I agree with you. But in some case(s)
>
> - We may underpower of what we pay for.
>
> - With the right tool we may be able to pull few extra juice that the
> older
> tech can't.
>
> As I said, I am ok with the current speed even the speed could reduce to
> 8-10Mb/s in the evening when students off school, and pumps up to 25+Mb/s
> when they are asleep. But to me $83 is a small price for the
> lesson/answer
> so I won't mind abit, and I can assume that the current SB5120 is broken
> (or
> it has served me well enough).
>
> I don't expect it's going to be much or any faster, but I guess that it
> probably handle the heavy load better (as it's kinda like multiple modems
> joined together).



nope...

however, you can cheat... most cable companies have voip... if you have both
internet AND voip, voip (digital voice) has priority over anything else on
the cable (like tv or internet), i plug my wap/router into the voip voice
modem instead of the internet modem and it runs at a higher priority

[Joel]

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

> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:0m3et59o343vuf6lke8cbcvf9um5liaebs@4ax.com...
> > Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 04:34:14 -0500, Joel <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I did run into some speed test between NetGear vs Linksys/Cisco, but I
> >> >don't care much for the speed at the moment, and that's why I have
> >> >mentioned
> >> >about looking to retire my old Motorola SB5120 with newer SB6120 see if
> >> >I
> >> >can squeeze some juice out of the COX speed. Although, I am quite happy
> >> >with the current speed (not the fastest but I don't really need any
> >> >faster)
> >> >that I been testing several times a day in the past few days (be
> >> >prepared
> >> >for next upgrade) and the speed can go somewhere around 9Mb/s -> 25Mb/s
> >> >(download) and pretty stable at around 2Mb/s - > 2.5Mb/s. Once
> >> >speedtest
> >> >reported the download speed reached around 35Mb/s but only once.
> >>
> >> A new modem isn't going to provide faster throughput unless your
> >> existing modem is broken.
> >
> > In general I agree with you on this one, but in some case a newer
> > technology may do something that older technology can't.
> >
> > I just ordered the SB6120 and will report the result here in couple days.
> >
> >> You pay for a certain service level. We don't know what that level is,
> >> but you should. Are you getting what you're paying for? If so, the
> >> best way to get more speed is to buy a higher service level. In the
> >> unlikely event that you buy a service level that your existing modem
> >> isn't capable of, only then does it make sense to buy a new (faster)
> >> modem. If you lease your modem, your cable company will take care of
> >> this automatically.
> >
> > In general, again I agree with you. But in some case(s)
> >
> > - We may underpower of what we pay for.
> >
> > - With the right tool we may be able to pull few extra juice that the
> > older
> > tech can't.
> >
> > As I said, I am ok with the current speed even the speed could reduce to
> > 8-10Mb/s in the evening when students off school, and pumps up to 25+Mb/s
> > when they are asleep. But to me $83 is a small price for the
> > lesson/answer
> > so I won't mind abit, and I can assume that the current SB5120 is broken
> > (or
> > it has served me well enough).
> >
> > I don't expect it's going to be much or any faster, but I guess that it
> > probably handle the heavy load better (as it's kinda like multiple modems
> > joined together).
>
>
>
> nope...
>
> however, you can cheat... most cable companies have voip... if you have both
> internet AND voip, voip (digital voice) has priority over anything else on
> the cable (like tv or internet), i plug my wap/router into the voip voice
> modem instead of the internet modem and it runs at a higher priority

Are you talking about the special router which supports multiple modems.
If so I have read about this typoe of router several years ago, but I don't
think I would benefit much from it. I am talking about paying extra $$$ for
this specific router, phone bill for extra 5.6Kb/s etc.. And it's probably
benefit for file transfering ?

BTW, with this new DOSCIS 3.0 modem I am gaining about 10-12Mb/s which is
about addional 1/3 of the average speed I have with the older modem. I may
update the test result in other message.

[Joel]

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

> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:btadt5p69qqmdhd85d19sslvdqn1fs5ol9@4ax.com...
>
> >
> > I did run into some speed test between NetGear vs Linksys/Cisco, but I
> > don't care much for the speed at the moment, and that's why I have
> > mentioned
> > about looking to retire my old Motorola SB5120 with newer SB6120 see if I
> > can squeeze some juice out of the COX speed. Although, I am quite happy
> > with the current speed (not the fastest but I don't really need any
> > faster)
> > that I been testing several times a day in the past few days (be prepared
> > for next upgrade) and the speed can go somewhere around 9Mb/s -> 25Mb/s
> > (download) and pretty stable at around 2Mb/s - > 2.5Mb/s. Once speedtest
> > reported the download speed reached around 35Mb/s but only once.
> >
>
> ummm, you may want to consider some basics about speed, all you may get is a
> bill, bragging rights for a bigger number, and absolutely no speed
> increase.....
> you will absolutely ALWAYS be limited to the slowest thing (ie cox is about
> 12-25 mbps, and they sometimes burst faster so people think they are faster
> than they really are ((no matter which modem)), your wireless is 54, wired
> 100, gigabit ethernet 1000... if you are acessing the internet you will
> NEVER get higher speed than what cox provides, so if the max from cox was
> 35, you will never get faster than 35)

As I reported in other message that with the SB6120 DOSCIS 3.0 modem my
average TOP SPEED has jumped from around 23-25Mb/s to 33-35Mb/s, the
uploading speed is staying the same at around 2.3 - 2.5Mb/s

I did a small test (around dozen tests) at 4:xx PM which is around the
busiest time (kids off school, and will test later when parents checking
porn hehehe) and I got one slowest once and it was 25Mb/s the rest from
30-34Mb/s

And web site pops up lot quicker too. But I may continue to test for few
more days so I can report the result here for anyone who wants to know what
they may expect on their new toys.

> as an analogy, summers coming, think of a swimming pool in your yard and you
> have a 3/4 " water faucet on your wall and a garden hose, and a 2" fire
> hose..... what fills the pool faster? (if you say 2" hose, then is it on a
> fire hydrant, or connected to the 3/4" faucet on your wall... if connected
> to the outside 3/4" faucet will the 2" or and 3/4" be faster or same
> speed/limited to the slowest device)

Talking about pumping water... well, this winter the sum pump died and I
sure can tell the difference between regular garden hose size and 1/2 pipe,
lesser hose power vs more horse power, and the one claim 3000 GPM vs 2500GPM
(I don't remember per HOUR or PER MINUTE, I guess probably per HOUR). And I
finally went with the more powerul pump.

Or I didn't realize the pump was dead and thought the water at the outlet
got frozen (cuz the pump still making some sound like it was trying to pump
some water through frozen hose) so I bought a smaller floor pump which claim
can deliver 2500-2700 GPH (something like that) which has water hose adapter
and 2" hose. First I tried the water hose as I thought the pump should pump
very good amount close to the 2 hose, I was painfully slow so I bought the
2" hose, then the hose was too long which reduce the power quite abit,, so I
reduced the length to 1/3 or 1/4 which was much better.

During that time (I spent 3 days pumping water to washer then from washer
to drainer) I put quite abit of salt to the outlet. When the ice melted, I
ran a long stick through the pipe to make so no ice inside the pipe and
wasn't any. At this time I knew the old sum pump was dead, so I replace it
with other one and it pumps much better than the lesser horse power. And it
pumps the water UP to around 5' when the floor pump pumped 2' to around 4'
(before pumping into washer I pumped to 6 gals bucket).

[Joel]

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

> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:ukect5d6m4nveda8lbghbg6ho3amrdgkgf@4ax.com...
>
> > Also, how do I check to see which BAND I am using (2.4M/hz or 5M/hz), and
> > any advantage or disadvantage between those 2 modes? I feel like I wasn't
> > born for advanced tech.
>
>
>
> at this point, don't worry about it, most devices your grandkids probably
> have are 2.4

I actually want to know the difference between them, or how I can tell
etc.. orhter than that it doesn't matter.

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:4bvjt59r2aov1bbh1hk2dlpgur1l9ulsev@4ax.com...
> "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>
>> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
>> news:ukect5d6m4nveda8lbghbg6ho3amrdgkgf@4ax.com...
>>
>> > Also, how do I check to see which BAND I am using (2.4M/hz or 5M/hz),
>> > and
>> > any advantage or disadvantage between those 2 modes? I feel like I
>> > wasn't
>> > born for advanced tech.
>>
>>
>>
>> at this point, don't worry about it, most devices your grandkids probably
>> have are 2.4
>
> I actually want to know the difference between them, or how I can tell
> etc.. orhter than that it doesn't matter.



sort of like the difference between am and fm radio (not in modulation
amplitude/frequency but in price, availability, subjet to interference from
common items)..

bottom line, you said you wanted to provide wifi for your grandkids on their
laptops when they come over...2.4 is common on most laptops, 5 is uncommon,
usually requires an extra cost receiver, and if built in costs more... never
heard of a laptop with no 2.4, but heard of tons of em with no 5...
so either you learn about marketing/radio frequency transmission,
modulation, etc, and buy 5 mhx recivers for your grandkids if they don't
have em, or just use 2.4 and deal with don't worry bout it....

sorry, but you haven't even mentioned what laptops they have, so no way of
checking to see if they even have 5 built in...

[Joel]

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

> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> news:4bvjt59r2aov1bbh1hk2dlpgur1l9ulsev@4ax.com...
> > "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
> >
> >> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:ukect5d6m4nveda8lbghbg6ho3amrdgkgf@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> > Also, how do I check to see which BAND I am using (2.4M/hz or 5M/hz),
> >> > and
> >> > any advantage or disadvantage between those 2 modes? I feel like I
> >> > wasn't
> >> > born for advanced tech.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> at this point, don't worry about it, most devices your grandkids probably
> >> have are 2.4
> >
> > I actually want to know the difference between them, or how I can tell
> > etc.. orhter than that it doesn't matter.
>
>
>
> sort of like the difference between am and fm radio (not in modulation
> amplitude/frequency but in price, availability, subjet to interference from
> common items)..
>
> bottom line, you said you wanted to provide wifi for your grandkids on their
> laptops when they come over...2.4 is common on most laptops, 5 is uncommon,
> usually requires an extra cost receiver, and if built in costs more... never
> heard of a laptop with no 2.4, but heard of tons of em with no 5...
> so either you learn about marketing/radio frequency transmission,
> modulation, etc, and buy 5 mhx recivers for your grandkids if they don't
> have em, or just use 2.4 and deal with don't worry bout it....
>
> sorry, but you haven't even mentioned what laptops they have, so no way of
> checking to see if they even have 5 built in...

It sounds like we have some misunderstanding here as I never said anything
about grandkids & 5Mhz connection as it doesn't matter, and I don't think I
can be able to tell.

I am talking about the WIRED desktop I am using now, and since it's wired
so I don't think it has anything to do with the frequency either. IOW, the
internet is wired to COX, and the Desktop is wired to the router so it may
not need frequency like the wireless (but I may be wrong).

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:rqtjt5ds68q9apt52iougd45eknq2faj8t@4ax.com...

>> nope...
>>
>> however, you can cheat... most cable companies have voip... if you have
>> both
>> internet AND voip, voip (digital voice) has priority over anything else
>> on
>> the cable (like tv or internet), i plug my wap/router into the voip voice
>> modem instead of the internet modem and it runs at a higher priority
>
> Are you talking about the special router which supports multiple modems.
> If so I have read about this typoe of router several years ago, but I
> don't
> think I would benefit much from it. I am talking about paying extra $$$
> for
> this specific router, phone bill for extra 5.6Kb/s etc.. And it's
> probably
> benefit for file transfering ?
>



no, didn't want to confuse things, pretty much all wap/routers have an
ethernet/cat5 in port, used to have cox in vegas, adelphia in idaho, sat
internet in the rv, and now comcast in baltimore, all had ethernet/cat5 out
ports..at any rate, here i have a cable modem for internet, and a voip modem
for digital voice... all have ethernet ports on the modem, just plug the
wap/router into the modem i was using (here i have both, a digital cable
internet modem AND a digital voice modem, so i can plug into either)...
return sequence after a major crash (nasty storms) was voice first, then tv,
and finally internet... happened to plug my wap/router into the digital
voice modem, was faster and happened to work before the internet cable
modem..... "forgot" to unplug it from the faster modem and into the slower
modem a few months ago, so don't think they check which you are using, if
you happen to have both...

[Peter Pan]

"Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
news:1aekt5pprn32kir8lbm176ki48fjvk4iga@4ax.com...
> "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>
>> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
>> news:4bvjt59r2aov1bbh1hk2dlpgur1l9ulsev@4ax.com...
>> > "Peter Pan" <NotDeadYetNOSPAM@MarcAlanNOSPAM.Info> wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Joel" <Joel@NoSpam.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:ukect5d6m4nveda8lbghbg6ho3amrdgkgf@4ax.com...
>> >>
>> >> > Also, how do I check to see which BAND I am using (2.4M/hz or
>> >> > 5M/hz),
>> >> > and
>> >> > any advantage or disadvantage between those 2 modes? I feel like I
>> >> > wasn't
>> >> > born for advanced tech.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> at this point, don't worry about it, most devices your grandkids
>> >> probably
>> >> have are 2.4
>> >
>> > I actually want to know the difference between them, or how I can tell
>> > etc.. orhter than that it doesn't matter.
>>
>>
>>
>> sort of like the difference between am and fm radio (not in modulation
>> amplitude/frequency but in price, availability, subjet to interference
>> from
>> common items)..
>>
>> bottom line, you said you wanted to provide wifi for your grandkids on
>> their
>> laptops when they come over...2.4 is common on most laptops, 5 is
>> uncommon,
>> usually requires an extra cost receiver, and if built in costs more...
>> never
>> heard of a laptop with no 2.4, but heard of tons of em with no 5...
>> so either you learn about marketing/radio frequency transmission,
>> modulation, etc, and buy 5 mhx recivers for your grandkids if they don't
>> have em, or just use 2.4 and deal with don't worry bout it....
>>
>> sorry, but you haven't even mentioned what laptops they have, so no way
>> of
>> checking to see if they even have 5 built in...
>
> It sounds like we have some misunderstanding here as I never said anything
> about grandkids & 5Mhz connection as it doesn't matter, and I don't think
> I
> can be able to tell.
>
> I am talking about the WIRED desktop I am using now, and since it's wired
> so I don't think it has anything to do with the frequency either. IOW,
> the
> internet is wired to COX, and the Desktop is wired to the router so it may
> not need frequency like the wireless (but I may be wrong).


sorry, so much info i forget who said what, thought you used wired, could
only use one wireless at a time, and wanted more wireless so the grandkids
could use it too, when they came over to visit, and wondered if you should
provide 2.4 or 5 wireless for them...

as rosanne rosanna dana used to say on saturday night live, "nevermind"

[Joel]

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

> >> heard of a laptop with no 2.4, but heard of tons of em with no 5...
> >> so either you learn about marketing/radio frequency transmission,
> >> modulation, etc, and buy 5 mhx recivers for your grandkids if they don't
> >> have em, or just use 2.4 and deal with don't worry bout it....
> >>
> >> sorry, but you haven't even mentioned what laptops they have, so no way
> >> of
> >> checking to see if they even have 5 built in...
> >
> > It sounds like we have some misunderstanding here as I never said anything
> > about grandkids & 5Mhz connection as it doesn't matter, and I don't think
> > I
> > can be able to tell.
> >
> > I am talking about the WIRED desktop I am using now, and since it's wired
> > so I don't think it has anything to do with the frequency either. IOW,
> > the
> > internet is wired to COX, and the Desktop is wired to the router so it may
> > not need frequency like the wireless (but I may be wrong).
>
>
> sorry, so much info i forget who said what, thought you used wired, could
> only use one wireless at a time, and wanted more wireless so the grandkids
> could use it too, when they came over to visit, and wondered if you should
> provide 2.4 or 5 wireless for them...
>
> as rosanne rosanna dana used to say on saturday night live, "nevermind"

I usually use the Desktop which wired to router. I do have laptop which
is wireless but I don't use laptop often, and if I use then it's the only
wireless so I don't have problem with the old router either.

But in the summer months or holiday when my grandkids either return from
colleges (my daughter's house is right next to mine), or other grandkids
from different tiwns or states came to visit etc.. then I have problem with
multiple wireless connection. Or with the old Buffalo wireless router I can
only be able to connect to single wireless laptop.

With the new Cisco E3000, I tested and was able to connect both Wii and
Laptop at same time.

[Joel]

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?

[Peter Pan]

"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)

[alexd]

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.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
08:40:18 up 3 days, 8:19, 2 users, load average: 1.02, 0.59, 0.32
It is better to have been wasted and then sober
than to never have been wasted at all