Network Speed

I’m copying files to my WDTV Live Hub, and it’s going at about 12 MB/sec which is 96 Mbps

I thought this device had gigabit ethernet? I’m aware I won’t get anywhere near 1000Mbps but I should at least be getting 300-500Mbps on a gigabit connection.

PC and Hub are both on same gigabit switch. PC can copy at 40-60MB/sec to another PC on the same switch.

Have tried different cables / shorter cables, makes no difference.

Well as far as I know…  using 100/10 ethernet which the HUB has, the max you can go is 100Mbps which is 12.5 MB/sec … so you are right on target for what the HUB and probably your modem/switch can handle. 

I use MoCA adapters to stream and the most I get is about 68Mbps or 8.5MB/sec…

It’s listed as a Gigabit adapter

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=570

Interface Gigabit Ethernet

It is a gigabit port, but OG’s info is still correct…

The PC has a gigabit port.

I have a gigabit switch.

The WD Live Hub is a gigabit port.

Please explain to me why it doesn’t run at a gigabit.

Feedidy wrote:

The PC has a gigabit port.

I have a gigabit switch.

The WD Live Hub is a gigabit port.

 

Please explain to me why it doesn’t run at a gigabit.

Hey… I clicked that link and noticed the feature listing Gigabit.  I guess I never looked at that feature because I assumed from discussions and standard home-network’s were running 100/10 ethernet.  But if WD is advertising gigabit ethernet as a feature and with the hardware you have all you can actually get is 12.5MB/sec…lol then WD has a bit of explaining to do!!

NO appliances with a Gigabit port runs at Gigabit, unless you paid a lot of money for it.   Even my $1000 NAS doesn’t run at a full 1000 megabits per second.

CPUs are the limiting factor…   Same on the WDTVs.


TonyPh12345 wrote:

NO appliances with a Gigabit port runs at Gigabit, unless you paid a lot of money for it.   Even my $1000 NAS doesn’t run at a full 1000 megabits per second.


Please read my original post - I made it clear that I’m well aware of this fact.

I’m not even getting reasonable Gigabit speeds.

Well, if you thought you’d get 500 megabits per second, then quite frankly, you’re nuts…   A single SATA hard drive can’t even come close to that!

TonyPh12345 wrote:

Well, if you thought you’d get 500 megabits per second, then quite frankly, you’re nuts…   A single SATA hard drive can’t even come close to that!

Thanks, I ask for help and you insult me and treat me like I’m an ■■■■■.

SATA is up to 300  Megabytes per second, not 300 Megabits

From a gigabit connection I expect 300-500Mbps which is 37.5-62.5 MB/sec

Sorry, no insult was intended.    Just a poke in the ribs.  ;)

No, SATA/3 is 3 GIGABITS per second, not 300 megabytes.

And that’s just the performance of the SATA interface, not how fast a disk can actually get bits off and on the platters.

You do get SOME advantage of having a Gig interface.   12.5Megabytes per second, given the overhead involved, would not be possible on a 100 megabit connection.   So you actually get about a 15% to 25% performance boost with a Gig interface.

Speaking Reasonably…

GB Ethernet refers more to bandwidth on your network as supposed to speed.  With 10/100/100, you have lots more lanes of traffic to work with, but the equipment/hardware you use has to be able to keep up…(hard drive speeds.Modem capacity)etc…

For instance… how fast can your HD transfer? are you using Internal/external drives(USB 2.0 or ESATA)?..  all factors!

I thought the big difference in the 10/100/1000T standards was moving from a 2 copper wire protocol to a 4 copper wire protocol.

More relevant to the discussion is that the Hub cpu only runs at 500Mhz. So there is no way you would get anything near gigabit performance.

Its because even though the hub has got a gigabit connection its limited internally.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3990/western-digital-wdtv-live-hub-review/4

This review makes the comment:

GbE port seems more like a marketing gimmick, rather than actually adding to the performance