Netgear WG602 speed/throughput?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi all

I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.

I've now gone to add a second station, a Wintel box, using a Netgear
WG121 USB-54g adaptor. It seemed sluggish, so a few quick tests
revealed that it was doing about 6-7Mbps receiving and about 1Mbps
transmitting - disappointing to say the least!

I then went back and measured my PowerBook and it's better, with about
20Mbps receiving and about 8-10Mbps transmitting, but still not
brilliant.

I should mention that I have performed the same tests on both via the
wired NIC and they'll each do 70-80Mbps in both directions. I'd have
to conclude that there's nothing in the file transfer itself that's
causing slowness. Also I have tested the same USB 2.0 port with an
external hard drive and it's doing about 200Mbps so in the case of the
WG121 it's not a USB bottleneck.

I have tried all manner of changes, with and without WEP,
auto-selection versus 54g-only, swapping channels etc. While I've been
testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121 have all been within a
foot or two of each other, so you'd think it would not be an
interference problem. Certainly there's not huge error rates in either
direction. Frustratingly everything reports as full strength signal
and running at 54Mbps.

So now I'm left thinking that either I have a defective WG602, or this
as as good as it gets. I'm finding it hard to accept the latter, yet
it's equally hard to believe that the WG602 would sort of work, but
just go slowly for no obvious reason. I have upgraded the firmware to
1.7.15, which seems to be the latest.

Can anybody else comment on tested throughput for the WG602, please?
Thanks.

Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 17 Sep 2004 14:06:02 -0700, philthym@yahoo.com (philthym) wrote:

>Hi all
>
>I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
>PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
>look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.

I have had a WG602 (v1.x) for about a year and a half. I noticed it
had a tendency to run hot - too hot to comfortably touch. I also
noticed that I was getting intermittent (but increasingly frequent)
bouts of throughput problems. I upgraded it to the latest firmware -
no improvement. I did some checking and the link between my wireless
PCs and the AP was fine, but the hardwire ethernet interface was
experiencing HELLACIOUS packet loss. If I unplugged it and let it cool
down, it would be fine for a while (until it got too hot again). I
chalked it up to some kind of heat-related failure.

I dumped that bitch and replaced it with a Linksys wireless-G which
has been running cool and fast ever since.

--
"I believe that forgiving [terrorists] is God's function.
Our job is to arrange the meeting."
- Norman Schwartzkopf

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

What is your signal strength? If not is not above 85%, get closer to your
access point and try the test again. Not sure if that is the culprit, but
it is one possibility.

Jeff

"philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c7692f6.0409171306.3f667d79@posting.google.com...
> Hi all
>
> I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
> PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
> look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.
>
> I've now gone to add a second station, a Wintel box, using a Netgear
> WG121 USB-54g adaptor. It seemed sluggish, so a few quick tests
> revealed that it was doing about 6-7Mbps receiving and about 1Mbps
> transmitting - disappointing to say the least!
>
> I then went back and measured my PowerBook and it's better, with about
> 20Mbps receiving and about 8-10Mbps transmitting, but still not
> brilliant.
>
> I should mention that I have performed the same tests on both via the
> wired NIC and they'll each do 70-80Mbps in both directions. I'd have
> to conclude that there's nothing in the file transfer itself that's
> causing slowness. Also I have tested the same USB 2.0 port with an
> external hard drive and it's doing about 200Mbps so in the case of the
> WG121 it's not a USB bottleneck.
>
> I have tried all manner of changes, with and without WEP,
> auto-selection versus 54g-only, swapping channels etc. While I've been
> testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121 have all been within a
> foot or two of each other, so you'd think it would not be an
> interference problem. Certainly there's not huge error rates in either
> direction. Frustratingly everything reports as full strength signal
> and running at 54Mbps.
>
> So now I'm left thinking that either I have a defective WG602, or this
> as as good as it gets. I'm finding it hard to accept the latter, yet
> it's equally hard to believe that the WG602 would sort of work, but
> just go slowly for no obvious reason. I have upgraded the firmware to
> 1.7.15, which seems to be the latest.
>
> Can anybody else comment on tested throughput for the WG602, please?
> Thanks.
>
> Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Thanks Jeff, but as I said in my original post...

"While I've been testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121
have all been within a foot or two of each other, so you'd think
it would not be an interference problem. Certainly there's not
huge error rates in either direction. Frustratingly everything
reports as full strength signal and running at 54Mbps."

So it is definitely not a signal strength/distance issue.

I've since spent half the day testing and all I can see is that
throughput varies greatly, in some ways almost opposite to what you'd
think. Right now I've got one PC with both the Netgear WG121 and a
D-Link DWL-G520 installed for testing. Both are 54g with the latest
drivers. The only problem is that the WG121 is so unreliable that the
transmit test fails altogether so I can't even do a simple looping
test. I'll have to work on that!

Anyway the tests so far seem to indicate that the speed can vary
greatly and suddenly, for no obvious reason. I can be copying a file
from one machine to both the Mac and PC via 54g and they're going
(sort of) OK at about 10-15Mbps to the Mac and about 8-10Mbps on the
PC. Suddenly both will slow to an absolute crawl, around 300-500Kbps.
They'll run this way for minutes and then may just come back again,
other times that's it, they seem to be locked in at the slow slow slow
transfer rate. Throughout this, both the Mac and PC show excellent
signal strength and 54Mbps connections.

What's somewhat surprising is that if I have a file transfer running
between my server and the Mac, then start a second one to the PC, the
Mac transfer speeds up by a factor of two or three. The same happens
if I'm running a transfer from the server to the PC then start a
transfer to the Mac, the PC goes four to five times faster. Why would
adding to the load cause transfers to go much faster? I'm sure there's
a rational explanation there somewhere!

Phil



"Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message news:<T%V2d.19407$_z4.18045@fe1.columbus.rr.com>...
> What is your signal strength? If not is not above 85%, get closer to your
> access point and try the test again. Not sure if that is the culprit, but
> it is one possibility.
>
> Jeff
>
> "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3c7692f6.0409171306.3f667d79@posting.google.com...
> > Hi all
> >
> > I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
> > PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
> > look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.
> >
> > I've now gone to add a second station, a Wintel box, using a Netgear
> > WG121 USB-54g adaptor. It seemed sluggish, so a few quick tests
> > revealed that it was doing about 6-7Mbps receiving and about 1Mbps
> > transmitting - disappointing to say the least!
> >
> > I then went back and measured my PowerBook and it's better, with about
> > 20Mbps receiving and about 8-10Mbps transmitting, but still not
> > brilliant.
> >
> > I should mention that I have performed the same tests on both via the
> > wired NIC and they'll each do 70-80Mbps in both directions. I'd have
> > to conclude that there's nothing in the file transfer itself that's
> > causing slowness. Also I have tested the same USB 2.0 port with an
> > external hard drive and it's doing about 200Mbps so in the case of the
> > WG121 it's not a USB bottleneck.
> >
> > I have tried all manner of changes, with and without WEP,
> > auto-selection versus 54g-only, swapping channels etc. While I've been
> > testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121 have all been within a
> > foot or two of each other, so you'd think it would not be an
> > interference problem. Certainly there's not huge error rates in either
> > direction. Frustratingly everything reports as full strength signal
> > and running at 54Mbps.
> >
> > So now I'm left thinking that either I have a defective WG602, or this
> > as as good as it gets. I'm finding it hard to accept the latter, yet
> > it's equally hard to believe that the WG602 would sort of work, but
> > just go slowly for no obvious reason. I have upgraded the firmware to
> > 1.7.15, which seems to be the latest.
> >
> > Can anybody else comment on tested throughput for the WG602, please?
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Can you configure your access point to support just "g" connections? I have
read that if it is in mixed mode, that can slow things down as it has to
support "b" connections. I cannot say I have confirmed that for myself.
Just a thought.

Jeff


"philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3c7692f6.0409181259.6c62f912@posting.google.com...
> Thanks Jeff, but as I said in my original post...
>
> "While I've been testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121
> have all been within a foot or two of each other, so you'd think
> it would not be an interference problem. Certainly there's not
> huge error rates in either direction. Frustratingly everything
> reports as full strength signal and running at 54Mbps."
>
> So it is definitely not a signal strength/distance issue.
>
> I've since spent half the day testing and all I can see is that
> throughput varies greatly, in some ways almost opposite to what you'd
> think. Right now I've got one PC with both the Netgear WG121 and a
> D-Link DWL-G520 installed for testing. Both are 54g with the latest
> drivers. The only problem is that the WG121 is so unreliable that the
> transmit test fails altogether so I can't even do a simple looping
> test. I'll have to work on that!
>
> Anyway the tests so far seem to indicate that the speed can vary
> greatly and suddenly, for no obvious reason. I can be copying a file
> from one machine to both the Mac and PC via 54g and they're going
> (sort of) OK at about 10-15Mbps to the Mac and about 8-10Mbps on the
> PC. Suddenly both will slow to an absolute crawl, around 300-500Kbps.
> They'll run this way for minutes and then may just come back again,
> other times that's it, they seem to be locked in at the slow slow slow
> transfer rate. Throughout this, both the Mac and PC show excellent
> signal strength and 54Mbps connections.
>
> What's somewhat surprising is that if I have a file transfer running
> between my server and the Mac, then start a second one to the PC, the
> Mac transfer speeds up by a factor of two or three. The same happens
> if I'm running a transfer from the server to the PC then start a
> transfer to the Mac, the PC goes four to five times faster. Why would
> adding to the load cause transfers to go much faster? I'm sure there's
> a rational explanation there somewhere!
>
> Phil
>
>
>
> "Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:<T%V2d.19407$_z4.18045@fe1.columbus.rr.com>...
>> What is your signal strength? If not is not above 85%, get closer to
>> your
>> access point and try the test again. Not sure if that is the culprit,
>> but
>> it is one possibility.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3c7692f6.0409171306.3f667d79@posting.google.com...
>> > Hi all
>> >
>> > I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
>> > PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
>> > look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.
>> >
>> > I've now gone to add a second station, a Wintel box, using a Netgear
>> > WG121 USB-54g adaptor. It seemed sluggish, so a few quick tests
>> > revealed that it was doing about 6-7Mbps receiving and about 1Mbps
>> > transmitting - disappointing to say the least!
>> >
>> > I then went back and measured my PowerBook and it's better, with about
>> > 20Mbps receiving and about 8-10Mbps transmitting, but still not
>> > brilliant.
>> >
>> > I should mention that I have performed the same tests on both via the
>> > wired NIC and they'll each do 70-80Mbps in both directions. I'd have
>> > to conclude that there's nothing in the file transfer itself that's
>> > causing slowness. Also I have tested the same USB 2.0 port with an
>> > external hard drive and it's doing about 200Mbps so in the case of the
>> > WG121 it's not a USB bottleneck.
>> >
>> > I have tried all manner of changes, with and without WEP,
>> > auto-selection versus 54g-only, swapping channels etc. While I've been
>> > testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121 have all been within a
>> > foot or two of each other, so you'd think it would not be an
>> > interference problem. Certainly there's not huge error rates in either
>> > direction. Frustratingly everything reports as full strength signal
>> > and running at 54Mbps.
>> >
>> > So now I'm left thinking that either I have a defective WG602, or this
>> > as as good as it gets. I'm finding it hard to accept the latter, yet
>> > it's equally hard to believe that the WG602 would sort of work, but
>> > just go slowly for no obvious reason. I have upgraded the firmware to
>> > 1.7.15, which seems to be the latest.
>> >
>> > Can anybody else comment on tested throughput for the WG602, please?
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> > Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi Jeff, already set to 54g only. As I understand it supporting 11b
only slows it down if there is an 11b device actually connected - a
moot point for me either way!

This thing's really got me stumped, I might just have to get a new
access point.

Phil

"Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Ri43d.58889$787.16000@fe2.columbus.rr.com>...
> Can you configure your access point to support just "g" connections? I have
> read that if it is in mixed mode, that can slow things down as it has to
> support "b" connections. I cannot say I have confirmed that for myself.
> Just a thought.
>
> Jeff
>
>
> "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3c7692f6.0409181259.6c62f912@posting.google.com...
> > Thanks Jeff, but as I said in my original post...
> >
> > "While I've been testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121
> > have all been within a foot or two of each other, so you'd think
> > it would not be an interference problem. Certainly there's not
> > huge error rates in either direction. Frustratingly everything
> > reports as full strength signal and running at 54Mbps."
> >
> > So it is definitely not a signal strength/distance issue.
> >
> > I've since spent half the day testing and all I can see is that
> > throughput varies greatly, in some ways almost opposite to what you'd
> > think. Right now I've got one PC with both the Netgear WG121 and a
> > D-Link DWL-G520 installed for testing. Both are 54g with the latest
> > drivers. The only problem is that the WG121 is so unreliable that the
> > transmit test fails altogether so I can't even do a simple looping
> > test. I'll have to work on that!
> >
> > Anyway the tests so far seem to indicate that the speed can vary
> > greatly and suddenly, for no obvious reason. I can be copying a file
> > from one machine to both the Mac and PC via 54g and they're going
> > (sort of) OK at about 10-15Mbps to the Mac and about 8-10Mbps on the
> > PC. Suddenly both will slow to an absolute crawl, around 300-500Kbps.
> > They'll run this way for minutes and then may just come back again,
> > other times that's it, they seem to be locked in at the slow slow slow
> > transfer rate. Throughout this, both the Mac and PC show excellent
> > signal strength and 54Mbps connections.
> >
> > What's somewhat surprising is that if I have a file transfer running
> > between my server and the Mac, then start a second one to the PC, the
> > Mac transfer speeds up by a factor of two or three. The same happens
> > if I'm running a transfer from the server to the PC then start a
> > transfer to the Mac, the PC goes four to five times faster. Why would
> > adding to the load cause transfers to go much faster? I'm sure there's
> > a rational explanation there somewhere!
> >
> > Phil
> >
> >
> >
> > "Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
> > news:<T%V2d.19407$_z4.18045@fe1.columbus.rr.com>...
> >> What is your signal strength? If not is not above 85%, get closer to
> >> your
> >> access point and try the test again. Not sure if that is the culprit,
> >> but
> >> it is one possibility.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3c7692f6.0409171306.3f667d79@posting.google.com...
> >> > Hi all
> >> >
> >> > I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
> >> > PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
> >> > look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.
> >> >
> >> > I've now gone to add a second station, a Wintel box, using a Netgear
> >> > WG121 USB-54g adaptor. It seemed sluggish, so a few quick tests
> >> > revealed that it was doing about 6-7Mbps receiving and about 1Mbps
> >> > transmitting - disappointing to say the least!
> >> >
> >> > I then went back and measured my PowerBook and it's better, with about
> >> > 20Mbps receiving and about 8-10Mbps transmitting, but still not
> >> > brilliant.
> >> >
> >> > I should mention that I have performed the same tests on both via the
> >> > wired NIC and they'll each do 70-80Mbps in both directions. I'd have
> >> > to conclude that there's nothing in the file transfer itself that's
> >> > causing slowness. Also I have tested the same USB 2.0 port with an
> >> > external hard drive and it's doing about 200Mbps so in the case of the
> >> > WG121 it's not a USB bottleneck.
> >> >
> >> > I have tried all manner of changes, with and without WEP,
> >> > auto-selection versus 54g-only, swapping channels etc. While I've been
> >> > testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121 have all been within a
> >> > foot or two of each other, so you'd think it would not be an
> >> > interference problem. Certainly there's not huge error rates in either
> >> > direction. Frustratingly everything reports as full strength signal
> >> > and running at 54Mbps.
> >> >
> >> > So now I'm left thinking that either I have a defective WG602, or this
> >> > as as good as it gets. I'm finding it hard to accept the latter, yet
> >> > it's equally hard to believe that the WG602 would sort of work, but
> >> > just go slowly for no obvious reason. I have upgraded the firmware to
> >> > 1.7.15, which seems to be the latest.
> >> >
> >> > Can anybody else comment on tested throughput for the WG602, please?
> >> > Thanks.
> >> >
> >> > Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

OK, I have an update...

I've tried testing for most of the day. The bottom line is whether
using the WG121 or the DWL-G520, I can get about 1.2Mbps receiving and
about 350Kbps transmitting. So I'm not getting anywhere near 11b
speeds, let alone 54g speeds. The results were fairly consistent over
the whole day (copying a single 50MB file backwards and forwards).

Has anybody else actually tested a PC to PC copy across similar kit to
see how they stack up?

Thanks

Phil

philthym@yahoo.com (philthym) wrote in message news:<3c7692f6.0409190202.3a34101d@posting.google.com>...
> Hi Jeff, already set to 54g only. As I understand it supporting 11b
> only slows it down if there is an 11b device actually connected - a
> moot point for me either way!
>
> This thing's really got me stumped, I might just have to get a new
> access point.
>
> Phil
>
> "Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Ri43d.58889$787.16000@fe2.columbus.rr.com>...
> > Can you configure your access point to support just "g" connections? I have
> > read that if it is in mixed mode, that can slow things down as it has to
> > support "b" connections. I cannot say I have confirmed that for myself.
> > Just a thought.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> > "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:3c7692f6.0409181259.6c62f912@posting.google.com...
> > > Thanks Jeff, but as I said in my original post...
> > >
> > > "While I've been testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121
> > > have all been within a foot or two of each other, so you'd think
> > > it would not be an interference problem. Certainly there's not
> > > huge error rates in either direction. Frustratingly everything
> > > reports as full strength signal and running at 54Mbps."
> > >
> > > So it is definitely not a signal strength/distance issue.
> > >
> > > I've since spent half the day testing and all I can see is that
> > > throughput varies greatly, in some ways almost opposite to what you'd
> > > think. Right now I've got one PC with both the Netgear WG121 and a
> > > D-Link DWL-G520 installed for testing. Both are 54g with the latest
> > > drivers. The only problem is that the WG121 is so unreliable that the
> > > transmit test fails altogether so I can't even do a simple looping
> > > test. I'll have to work on that!
> > >
> > > Anyway the tests so far seem to indicate that the speed can vary
> > > greatly and suddenly, for no obvious reason. I can be copying a file
> > > from one machine to both the Mac and PC via 54g and they're going
> > > (sort of) OK at about 10-15Mbps to the Mac and about 8-10Mbps on the
> > > PC. Suddenly both will slow to an absolute crawl, around 300-500Kbps.
> > > They'll run this way for minutes and then may just come back again,
> > > other times that's it, they seem to be locked in at the slow slow slow
> > > transfer rate. Throughout this, both the Mac and PC show excellent
> > > signal strength and 54Mbps connections.
> > >
> > > What's somewhat surprising is that if I have a file transfer running
> > > between my server and the Mac, then start a second one to the PC, the
> > > Mac transfer speeds up by a factor of two or three. The same happens
> > > if I'm running a transfer from the server to the PC then start a
> > > transfer to the Mac, the PC goes four to five times faster. Why would
> > > adding to the load cause transfers to go much faster? I'm sure there's
> > > a rational explanation there somewhere!
> > >
> > > Phil
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
> > > news:<T%V2d.19407$_z4.18045@fe1.columbus.rr.com>...
> > >> What is your signal strength? If not is not above 85%, get closer to
> > >> your
> > >> access point and try the test again. Not sure if that is the culprit,
> > >> but
> > >> it is one possibility.
> > >>
> > >> Jeff
> > >>
> > >> "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:3c7692f6.0409171306.3f667d79@posting.google.com...
> > >> > Hi all
> > >> >
> > >> > I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
> > >> > PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
> > >> > look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.
> > >> >
> > >> > I've now gone to add a second station, a Wintel box, using a Netgear
> > >> > WG121 USB-54g adaptor. It seemed sluggish, so a few quick tests
> > >> > revealed that it was doing about 6-7Mbps receiving and about 1Mbps
> > >> > transmitting - disappointing to say the least!
> > >> >
> > >> > I then went back and measured my PowerBook and it's better, with about
> > >> > 20Mbps receiving and about 8-10Mbps transmitting, but still not
> > >> > brilliant.
> > >> >
> > >> > I should mention that I have performed the same tests on both via the
> > >> > wired NIC and they'll each do 70-80Mbps in both directions. I'd have
> > >> > to conclude that there's nothing in the file transfer itself that's
> > >> > causing slowness. Also I have tested the same USB 2.0 port with an
> > >> > external hard drive and it's doing about 200Mbps so in the case of the
> > >> > WG121 it's not a USB bottleneck.
> > >> >
> > >> > I have tried all manner of changes, with and without WEP,
> > >> > auto-selection versus 54g-only, swapping channels etc. While I've been
> > >> > testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121 have all been within a
> > >> > foot or two of each other, so you'd think it would not be an
> > >> > interference problem. Certainly there's not huge error rates in either
> > >> > direction. Frustratingly everything reports as full strength signal
> > >> > and running at 54Mbps.
> > >> >
> > >> > So now I'm left thinking that either I have a defective WG602, or this
> > >> > as as good as it gets. I'm finding it hard to accept the latter, yet
> > >> > it's equally hard to believe that the WG602 would sort of work, but
> > >> > just go slowly for no obvious reason. I have upgraded the firmware to
> > >> > 1.7.15, which seems to be the latest.
> > >> >
> > >> > Can anybody else comment on tested throughput for the WG602, please?
> > >> > Thanks.
> > >> >
> > >> > Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Looks like nobody else is having problems with a WG602? Just in case
somebody stumbles across this thread who does, here's the outcome.

Netgear have acknowledged that my WG602 is defective and will be
replacing it, so that's good.

I have borrowed a D-Link DI-724 and run exactly the same tests. It's
much more acceptable, although still not brilliant - average both ways
with the DWL-G520 is about 11-12Mbps, average with the WG121 is
receiving at about 10Mbps and sending at about 4-5Mbps. Bearing in
mind that both are in the same PC, it would seem that the WG121 is not
quite right either. We'll see what Netgear think about that.

Phil

philthym@yahoo.com (philthym) wrote in message news:<3c7692f6.0409201559.779d217b@posting.google.com>...
> OK, I have an update...
>
> I've tried testing for most of the day. The bottom line is whether
> using the WG121 or the DWL-G520, I can get about 1.2Mbps receiving and
> about 350Kbps transmitting. So I'm not getting anywhere near 11b
> speeds, let alone 54g speeds. The results were fairly consistent over
> the whole day (copying a single 50MB file backwards and forwards).
>
> Has anybody else actually tested a PC to PC copy across similar kit to
> see how they stack up?
>
> Thanks
>
> Phil
>
> philthym@yahoo.com (philthym) wrote in message news:<3c7692f6.0409190202.3a34101d@posting.google.com>...
> > Hi Jeff, already set to 54g only. As I understand it supporting 11b
> > only slows it down if there is an 11b device actually connected - a
> > moot point for me either way!
> >
> > This thing's really got me stumped, I might just have to get a new
> > access point.
> >
> > Phil
> >
> > "Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Ri43d.58889$787.16000@fe2.columbus.rr.com>...
> > > Can you configure your access point to support just "g" connections? I have
> > > read that if it is in mixed mode, that can slow things down as it has to
> > > support "b" connections. I cannot say I have confirmed that for myself.
> > > Just a thought.
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > >
> > > "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3c7692f6.0409181259.6c62f912@posting.google.com...
> > > > Thanks Jeff, but as I said in my original post...
> > > >
> > > > "While I've been testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121
> > > > have all been within a foot or two of each other, so you'd think
> > > > it would not be an interference problem. Certainly there's not
> > > > huge error rates in either direction. Frustratingly everything
> > > > reports as full strength signal and running at 54Mbps."
> > > >
> > > > So it is definitely not a signal strength/distance issue.
> > > >
> > > > I've since spent half the day testing and all I can see is that
> > > > throughput varies greatly, in some ways almost opposite to what you'd
> > > > think. Right now I've got one PC with both the Netgear WG121 and a
> > > > D-Link DWL-G520 installed for testing. Both are 54g with the latest
> > > > drivers. The only problem is that the WG121 is so unreliable that the
> > > > transmit test fails altogether so I can't even do a simple looping
> > > > test. I'll have to work on that!
> > > >
> > > > Anyway the tests so far seem to indicate that the speed can vary
> > > > greatly and suddenly, for no obvious reason. I can be copying a file
> > > > from one machine to both the Mac and PC via 54g and they're going
> > > > (sort of) OK at about 10-15Mbps to the Mac and about 8-10Mbps on the
> > > > PC. Suddenly both will slow to an absolute crawl, around 300-500Kbps.
> > > > They'll run this way for minutes and then may just come back again,
> > > > other times that's it, they seem to be locked in at the slow slow slow
> > > > transfer rate. Throughout this, both the Mac and PC show excellent
> > > > signal strength and 54Mbps connections.
> > > >
> > > > What's somewhat surprising is that if I have a file transfer running
> > > > between my server and the Mac, then start a second one to the PC, the
> > > > Mac transfer speeds up by a factor of two or three. The same happens
> > > > if I'm running a transfer from the server to the PC then start a
> > > > transfer to the Mac, the PC goes four to five times faster. Why would
> > > > adding to the load cause transfers to go much faster? I'm sure there's
> > > > a rational explanation there somewhere!
> > > >
> > > > Phil
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Jeff Durham" <jdurham.outdoor.life@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:<T%V2d.19407$_z4.18045@fe1.columbus.rr.com>...
> > > >> What is your signal strength? If not is not above 85%, get closer to
> > > >> your
> > > >> access point and try the test again. Not sure if that is the culprit,
> > > >> but
> > > >> it is one possibility.
> > > >>
> > > >> Jeff
> > > >>
> > > >> "philthym" <philthym@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > >> news:3c7692f6.0409171306.3f667d79@posting.google.com...
> > > >> > Hi all
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
> > > >> > PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
> > > >> > look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I've now gone to add a second station, a Wintel box, using a Netgear
> > > >> > WG121 USB-54g adaptor. It seemed sluggish, so a few quick tests
> > > >> > revealed that it was doing about 6-7Mbps receiving and about 1Mbps
> > > >> > transmitting - disappointing to say the least!
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I then went back and measured my PowerBook and it's better, with about
> > > >> > 20Mbps receiving and about 8-10Mbps transmitting, but still not
> > > >> > brilliant.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I should mention that I have performed the same tests on both via the
> > > >> > wired NIC and they'll each do 70-80Mbps in both directions. I'd have
> > > >> > to conclude that there's nothing in the file transfer itself that's
> > > >> > causing slowness. Also I have tested the same USB 2.0 port with an
> > > >> > external hard drive and it's doing about 200Mbps so in the case of the
> > > >> > WG121 it's not a USB bottleneck.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I have tried all manner of changes, with and without WEP,
> > > >> > auto-selection versus 54g-only, swapping channels etc. While I've been
> > > >> > testing, the WG602, the PowerBook and the WG121 have all been within a
> > > >> > foot or two of each other, so you'd think it would not be an
> > > >> > interference problem. Certainly there's not huge error rates in either
> > > >> > direction. Frustratingly everything reports as full strength signal
> > > >> > and running at 54Mbps.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > So now I'm left thinking that either I have a defective WG602, or this
> > > >> > as as good as it gets. I'm finding it hard to accept the latter, yet
> > > >> > it's equally hard to believe that the WG602 would sort of work, but
> > > >> > just go slowly for no obvious reason. I have upgraded the firmware to
> > > >> > 1.7.15, which seems to be the latest.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Can anybody else comment on tested throughput for the WG602, please?
> > > >> > Thanks.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Phil

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> On 17 Sep 2004 14:06:02 -0700, philthym@yahoo.com (philthym) wrote:

>>Hi all

>>I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
>>PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
>>look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.

> I have had a WG602 (v1.x) for about a year and a half. I noticed it
> had a tendency to run hot - too hot to comfortably touch. I also
> noticed that I was getting intermittent (but increasingly frequent)
> bouts of throughput problems. I upgraded it to the latest firmware -
> no improvement. I did some checking and the link between my wireless
> PCs and the AP was fine, but the hardwire ethernet interface was
> experiencing HELLACIOUS packet loss. If I unplugged it and let it cool
> down, it would be fine for a while (until it got too hot again). I
> chalked it up to some kind of heat-related failure.
>
> I dumped that bitch and replaced it with a Linksys wireless-G which
> has been running cool and fast ever since.
>
Hm, that could explain what I'm seeing now:
% ping 192.168.1.8
PING 192.168.1.8 (192.168.1.8): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=37.5 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=1000.4 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=1.2 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=1000.4 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=1.2 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=255 time=1000.3 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=255 time=1.2 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=7 ttl=255 time=1000.3 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=8 ttl=255 time=1.1 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=1000.3 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=10 ttl=255 time=1.1 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=11 ttl=255 time=1000.3 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=12 ttl=255 time=1.1 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=13 ttl=255 time=1000.4 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=14 ttl=255 time=1.2 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=15 ttl=255 time=1000.3 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=16 ttl=255 time=1.1 ms

--- 192.168.1.8 ping statistics ---
17 packets transmitted, 17 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 1.1/473.4/1000.4 ms

That's the ping time over my wired port to the WG602 (Also version 1,
with 1.7.15 firmware). This thing is a total pig, I never realized how
bad it was until I noticed I was getting better performance using other
people's 802.11*b* routers. Not to mention that I was duped by Netgear's
promise on the box "upgradable to 802.11x support!" which they
subsequently failed to honor. We should start a class action lawsuit
against them for their poor support, false advertising, and shoddy
merchandise.

Hm... Linksys is sounding pretty good now. I'm glad these posts were
here to confirm the poor behavior I was witnessing.

--
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun
http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc
Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Howard Chu wrote:
> Scott en Aztlán wrote:
>
>> On 17 Sep 2004 14:06:02 -0700, philthym@yahoo.com (philthym) wrote:

>>> I have a Netgear WG602 that I have been using for a while with my Mac
>>> PowerBook. It's set to 54g only and I've never really had cause to
>>> look to closely at speed, as it's mainly for web browsing.

>> I have had a WG602 (v1.x) for about a year and a half. I noticed it
>> had a tendency to run hot - too hot to comfortably touch. I also
>> noticed that I was getting intermittent (but increasingly frequent)
>> bouts of throughput problems. I upgraded it to the latest firmware -
>> no improvement. I did some checking and the link between my wireless
>> PCs and the AP was fine, but the hardwire ethernet interface was
>> experiencing HELLACIOUS packet loss. If I unplugged it and let it cool
>> down, it would be fine for a while (until it got too hot again). I
>> chalked it up to some kind of heat-related failure.
>>
>> I dumped that bitch and replaced it with a Linksys wireless-G which
>> has been running cool and fast ever since.
>>
> Hm, that could explain what I'm seeing now:
> % ping 192.168.1.8
> PING 192.168.1.8 (192.168.1.8): 56 data bytes
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=37.5 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=1000.4 ms

> --- 192.168.1.8 ping statistics ---
> 17 packets transmitted, 17 packets received, 0% packet loss
> round-trip min/avg/max = 1.1/473.4/1000.4 ms
>
> That's the ping time over my wired port to the WG602 (Also version 1,
> with 1.7.15 firmware). This thing is a total pig, I never realized how
> bad it was until I noticed I was getting better performance using other
> people's 802.11*b* routers. Not to mention that I was duped by Netgear's
> promise on the box "upgradable to 802.11x support!" which they
> subsequently failed to honor. We should start a class action lawsuit
> against them for their poor support, false advertising, and shoddy
> merchandise.
>
> Hm... Linksys is sounding pretty good now. I'm glad these posts were
> here to confirm the poor behavior I was witnessing.
>
Strangely enough... I just took a look at it, it is warm but not hot. I
pulled the power on it and then plugged it back in again, and now my
wired ping times are down to 1ms. I think this firmware revision has a
memory leak and needs to be rebooted periodically to recover its senses.

--
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. Director, Highland Sun
http://www.symas.com http://highlandsun.com/hyc
Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support