I have owned all three WD streamers (WDTV, Live & Plus). Currently I use the plus. I have a wired 10/100 network with 5 connected devices: Actiontech (FIOS) router, SMC 105DT 10/100 switch, Computer 1: XP, Computer 2: Win7 & WD Live Plus. I’m using FW 1.03.49 since 1.04.xx causes extreme stuttering and audio problems when streaming HD .mkv files via network shares.
I am considering upgrading to a gB Network by adding a D-Link DIR-655 gB router and a gB switch but don’t know if that would help when streaming hi-bitrate files. Most (not all) of my HD files (mkv and TS) play fine with an occassional hiccup. I’m wondering if the people here using 1.04.xx firmware with no issues have gB networks.
I’m not a network guru, so here’s my second question. I’m assuming your computer’s activity affects network performance when it comes to streaming HD files, so would using NAS (network attached storage) alleviate any issues due to your computer hoging network resources ? Sorry if it’s a stupid question but I really want to learn.
Upgrading to a Gig Router and Switch likely wouldn’t help at all because the Live Plus is only a 10/100 device.
The exception might be based in your second question… If your PC is ALSO gigabit capable, and it’s busy pushing data out to some devices OTHER than the WD, then gigabit MIGHT help, but probably not much…
Upgrading to a Gig Router and Switch likely wouldn’t help at all because the Live Plus is only a 10/100 device.
The exception might be based in your second question… If your PC is ALSO gigabit capable, and it’s busy pushing data out to some devices OTHER than the WD, then gigabit MIGHT help, but probably not much…
Not sure if I totally agree with the above. This all depends upon how much traffic is on the network, the bit rate of the videos being streamed and the capability of the server.
As for the WDTV live (plus) being only 100Mb/s, that’s ok since all it has to worry about is receiving data at or below that (100Mb/s) rate. An uncompressed BR video+audio is at best 50Mb/s (I think it’s spec), so it’s ok that the device interface be capable of about twice the capability of the data it has to receive. One can read the specs on ethernet and will understand that it will never perform at it’s stated theoretical speed, but a 2X capability at the receiving end is sufficient - as in this case.
That’s different from the network though! In my case, all of my BR rips are at full bitrate. Therefore, if I only had100Mb/s network, then my streams would most certainly choke if there was an attempt to stream much of anything else across the net, or even access the internet (we have a 25Mb/s dn cable service). So, it gets back to what’s being streamed, the capability of the server and traffic on the network.
My NAS is cabable of streaming out ~400Mb/s, and my switches are gigabit for this reason.
No. That was a problem with old Gb HW. New devices (as in the last year or so) will not drop the network to the lowest level connected. For instance, I have D-link switches and router connected to mostly Gb devices except for a printer (which is only at 100Mb/s for instance) and the network still operates at Gb speed. Also have a WDTV Live Plus, Samsung TV and BR player connected (which also are at 100 Mb/s) and network still ops at Gb speed between those devices that support it.
So in my case, I prove this out everytime I transfer large files to my NAS from my PC (on the same network) and get ~45MB/s (360 Mb/s) write speed to my NAS. In this case, my PC (Gb), printer (100Mb) and NAS (Gb) are connected to the same Gb switch. No way I’d acheive even a third of that if the network was dropped down to 100Mb/s because of the 100Mb/s devices.
