Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: A Bug fix from Microsoft

  1. #1
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,268
    Blog Entries
    6

    Exclamation A Bug fix from Microsoft

    Microsoft has finaly introduced a fix for a bug in all Windows 9x versions, which caused a lower throughput and higher retransmissions. The fix hasn't been completely tested, however anything should be better than the "math error" in the original Vtcp.386 file.

    For more details and the file itself, check out the Cable/DSL patches section at http://www.speedguide.net/Cable_mode..._patches.shtml

  2. #2
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,268
    Blog Entries
    6

    Post

    I'd appreciate any feedback regarding this fix, how/whether it affects your throughput and overall TCP/IP performance.

    [This message has been edited by Philip (edited 01-05-2000).]

  3. #3
    New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    31

    Post

    Philip, I am one of the "elders" at AnandTECH and though you might like to read one of the threads about the MS patch.

    http://anandforums.gisystech.com/mes...hreadid=102385

    Regards,
    John


    [This message has been edited by packetloss (edited 01-05-2000).]

  4. #4
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,268
    Blog Entries
    6

    Post

    Thanks John, both for the link and the post on the AnandTECH forum.

  5. #5
    Certified SG Addict Brent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Posts
    42,163

    Post

    heh, I posted about this earlier today ;-)

    But does this thing really increase your speeds on Cable or DSL??????

    Anyone?

    ------------------
    Brent a.k.a Borg Drone
    Owner/Webmaster
    The websites:
    eXplosive3D up soon www.mngamers.com/explosive3d
    Gamers Reality up soon www.gamersreality.com

    Out the 100TX, through the switch, down the cable modem, over the fiber optics, off the bridge, past the head end office....nothing but Net




    [This message has been edited by Brent (edited 01-05-2000).]

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    frisco,tx. usa
    Posts
    268

    Post

    Well Philip I guess my Win95 OS2 is one of the ones it won't work on. I tried the zip file one also and it just gave me an error on reboot and sent me into safe mode. Luckily I had renamed the first one like you suggested. Oh well, my tuff luck. Any input on why it won't work or if maybe it might in the future? Thanks

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    196

    Post

    Ok, I installed the thing hoping to fix my packet loss problem.

    First here are the comparision of before and after.

    Before:
    UDP Statistics

    Datagrams Received = 34205
    No Ports = 83028
    Receive Errors = 14
    Datagrams Sent = 29487

    After:
    UDP Statistics

    Datagrams Received = 51344
    No Ports = 14320
    Receive Errors = 0
    Datagrams Sent = 25734

    (These results are from after a bit of gaming and downloading)
    As you can see, the After is more error free.
    Quite happy with that.

    In general web page loading, I see them as the same.

    BUT, in downloads, they fell dramatically!
    From my first initial speed, 20 KB/sec, to the applied patch, 60 KB/sec, to the MS applied fix, 10-20 KB/sec.

    That was bad in download wise.

    This dramatic fall was the result (assuming) of error checking, as before it didnt causing more errors, but more direct packets sent. Now, when we have this error free control (once again assuming, but very close to fact i guess) Each packet may been checked, and if theres an error, it would be resent, resulting in lower packetloss, or either lowered or higher.

    But all I can say is that is should POSSIBLY enhance gaming situations due to the error free, which in my case, 10-20 reduced milliseconds.



    [This message has been edited by Raos (edited 01-05-2000).]

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    196

    Post

    Ok, I'm gonna do a little more testing to see if this DOES actually help or just useless.

    WARNING, DO NOT INSTALL THIS YET, CUZ I THINK IT MAY ALREADY MESSED MY COMPUTER UP FOR ITS SLOWER DOWNLOAD RATE

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    WISCONSIN
    Posts
    317

    Unhappy

    OOops!! Double post....continue!

    [This message has been edited by JustForFun (edited 01-06-2000).]

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    WISCONSIN
    Posts
    317

    Unhappy

    Well,

    I gave this thing a go and for me ...IT WAS BAAAAADDD!

    Since I have WIN 95 (OSR2) and a cabe connect, I decided to try using the zip file instead of the install method. Some here and elsewhere have said that WIN95 doesn't like to install this and that by changing the actual "vtcp.386" file by hand was a viable workaround.

    Well, I tried this, after backing up my original file of course. I extracted the "new" file into Windows\System and rebooted.

    Before I could reach my desktop, I had a nice new BLUE screen to look at. :-)

    It said that a "call" to a vXXX file was broken and that to enter Windows was risky as my sytem was unstable. Furthermore it suggested I rerun setup.exe for windows!! YIKES!

    Well, I chickened out, shut 'er down via some screen options and rebooted into SAFE MODE. I switched back to my "original" vtcp.386 file, rebooted (NO BLUE SCREEN) and....all is well with the world.

    I think I'll sit this one out, boys!

    JFF

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    196

    Post

    OK, (on win 98) after more intensive testing, it proves that this fix was a bad bad bad mistake, packet loss was more spikier, but pings were great (not sure why) but after that, I conclude that you shouldnt use this.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    196

    Post

    question, how do i remove this? I'm on windows 98

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    196

    Post

    Phillip, I suggest you remove it from the site incase of others using it, trust me, it didnt turn out good.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    196

    Post

    But really, I dont get it,

    if it fixes a math problem (which should be good) why does it have slight negative effects?

  15. #15
    Certified SG Addict Brent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Posts
    42,163

    Post

    wow really really really mixed results with this one

    I use win98se so I'm gonna install it and see what blows up, I can easily reformat if i need to

  16. #16
    NO-LIMIT
    Guest

    Post

    I installed the patch on a win98se machine and I am having no problems. My download speed seems to be about the same and im not sure if it helped or hurt packet loss. I will do some more testing tonite.

    NO-LIMIT

  17. #17

    Post

    well i installed it, no probs yet, havent tested in games or downloads, but the one thing i know for certain is that it dropped my ping to Kali bye 10ms!!!! FACT..lowest i got to kali before was 150, now its 140, and yes im certain because 150 was the lowest i got since i got cable a few months ago, so for that i am happy!! so i'm sure that my pings should be lower to everything, but havent checked yet.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    196

    Post

    Yeah, also I guess the fix also fixes the retransmissions so there are less retrans and so lag time will drop.

  19. #19
    sailor
    Guest

    Post

    My experience with the win95 tcp/ip workaround zip patch was identical to a couple of other posters here. Blue screen error suggesting a win reconfig, or shut down (ctl-alt-del) and boot into safe mode..then removed the new patch and renamed back the old patch to save the day (thanks to whomever for the save yer olde file idea). For some reason though, my connection rates that same evening were the highest ever? Scare your rig to near death and the thruput improves. Now even when the rig is in sleep mode I try not to denigrate wild Bill or his lousey OS.

    I'm running Win95B.

    ------------------


    [This message has been edited by sailor (edited 01-06-2000).]

  20. #20

    Smile

    ok guys, I just wanted to share my test results with you, I installed that ms update
    for the Vtcp.386, I already have my DefaultRcvWindow tweaked and I use download
    accelerator to download files, ohh, I am on @home, "what can I say" I work for them
    anyhow my average download was 200k and after the patch I average 250k to 300k, thats on a win98 450amd machine, not to bad at all, as for gaming, it depends, on say q3 I do around 90 to 100 ping, all in all, I am happing with the change, remember, you will only go as fast as the server your hitting and there are many factors that come into play, I read this site on a regular bases and enjoy the post of so many smart people that share the same sickness that I suffer from, I would be more than happy to answer any question about @home, but really, phil and the regulars have already answer most of them at one time or another, thats all, fingers would not shutup,

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
  •