Slow 54Mbps G network - what are typical speeds?

Hi, i have recently purchased a D-Link DWL-2100ap access point and a
DWL-G520+ PCI card.

When i first setup the network the pci card kept droping the link,
despite having 90%+ signal and 90%+ link quality. I moved the pc into
the same room as the access point and got 100% signal, yet it still
dropped the connection and i still had bad transfer speeds (around
300kbps). Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a good
quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?

I have changed channels, and found that i get the highest speed on
channel 11. I read on forums to try us robotics drivers (and yes they
work! - they are the same card with a different badge on), and are far
more stable than the D-Link drivers.

I have now got the speed upto around 14,000kbps peak. To do this i had
to disable the D-Link "Super G mode". Before i disabled this mode (it
was in Dynamic turbo mode) i only got ~6,000kbps.

However, despite having 90%+ signal and link quality i am not
approaching the 54Mbps limit of the g standard. I appreciate there
will be some overhead for the network protocols which will take away
from this theorectical maximum, but over 50% overhead i find extremely
harsh. I am much happier with this higher speed, but anymore would be
great.

Can anyone give me some tips to try to increase the speed? D-Link have
just released a new set of drivers for the card which i will try. I
dont want to decrease the encryption length (it is currently WEP
128bit cypher).

What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates. Has
anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
actually increase the performance?

Many thanks in advance,

Chris

Hi.
Dropping the signal might be due to environmental Noise 2.4GHz phones etc.

First make sure that you get a stable connection without WEP(or WPA) and
only then attend to the security issues.

The following page (in the middle) contains the info that you asked for.

http://www.ezlan.net/Wireless_Hardware.html

As for security: http://www.ezlan.net/Wireless_Security.html

Jack (MVP - Networking).


"Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Hi, i have recently purchased a D-Link DWL-2100ap access point and a
> DWL-G520+ PCI card.
>
> When i first setup the network the pci card kept droping the link,
> despite having 90%+ signal and 90%+ link quality. I moved the pc into
> the same room as the access point and got 100% signal, yet it still
> dropped the connection and i still had bad transfer speeds (around
> 300kbps). Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a good
> quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?
>
> I have changed channels, and found that i get the highest speed on
> channel 11. I read on forums to try us robotics drivers (and yes they
> work! - they are the same card with a different badge on), and are far
> more stable than the D-Link drivers.
>
> I have now got the speed upto around 14,000kbps peak. To do this i had
> to disable the D-Link "Super G mode". Before i disabled this mode (it
> was in Dynamic turbo mode) i only got ~6,000kbps.
>
> However, despite having 90%+ signal and link quality i am not
> approaching the 54Mbps limit of the g standard. I appreciate there
> will be some overhead for the network protocols which will take away
> from this theorectical maximum, but over 50% overhead i find extremely
> harsh. I am much happier with this higher speed, but anymore would be
> great.
>
> Can anyone give me some tips to try to increase the speed? D-Link have
> just released a new set of drivers for the card which i will try. I
> dont want to decrease the encryption length (it is currently WEP
> 128bit cypher).
>
> What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
> networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates. Has
> anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
> actually increase the performance?
>
> Many thanks in advance,
>
> Chris

>What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
>networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates. Has
>anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
>actually increase the performance?

6Mb and 20Mb respectively.
Get the XP update package:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/rema...3601~mode=flat
Use DrTCP to change the MTU on your cards to 1492.
http://www.dslreports.com/drtcp



-----------------------
All lower case to respond by mail.
If you give a little they give a lot
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/disco

On a good day, with a clean signal with little or no interference, you can
expect to get 22 to 25 Mbps for Super-G and 14 to 18 Mbps with regular 54G.
In general practice, you will most likely get nowhere near that level of
performance. the 54Mbs/108Mbs rating is for a "canned" network...two units
in an electromagnetically sealed room, with xmitter and rcvr only 1 meter
apart. The numbers are a marketing ply...not what you can expect to ever
get on your LAN.

Bobby

"Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Hi, i have recently purchased a D-Link DWL-2100ap access point and a
> DWL-G520+ PCI card.
>
> When i first setup the network the pci card kept droping the link,
> despite having 90%+ signal and 90%+ link quality. I moved the pc into
> the same room as the access point and got 100% signal, yet it still
> dropped the connection and i still had bad transfer speeds (around
> 300kbps). Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a good
> quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?
>
> I have changed channels, and found that i get the highest speed on
> channel 11. I read on forums to try us robotics drivers (and yes they
> work! - they are the same card with a different badge on), and are far
> more stable than the D-Link drivers.
>
> I have now got the speed upto around 14,000kbps peak. To do this i had
> to disable the D-Link "Super G mode". Before i disabled this mode (it
> was in Dynamic turbo mode) i only got ~6,000kbps.
>
> However, despite having 90%+ signal and link quality i am not
> approaching the 54Mbps limit of the g standard. I appreciate there
> will be some overhead for the network protocols which will take away
> from this theorectical maximum, but over 50% overhead i find extremely
> harsh. I am much happier with this higher speed, but anymore would be
> great.
>
> Can anyone give me some tips to try to increase the speed? D-Link have
> just released a new set of drivers for the card which i will try. I
> dont want to decrease the encryption length (it is currently WEP
> 128bit cypher).
>
> What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
> networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates. Has
> anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
> actually increase the performance?
>
> Many thanks in advance,
>
> Chris

For SuperG at say 24Mbps (3 MB/sec), is this the speed at which you are
actually transferring data? Or is it measured otherwise?

Brian


"NoNoBadDog!" <mysocks_bjsledge_AT_pixi.com> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On a good day, with a clean signal with little or no interference, you can
> expect to get 22 to 25 Mbps for Super-G and 14 to 18 Mbps with regular
54G.
> In general practice, you will most likely get nowhere near that level of
> performance. the 54Mbs/108Mbs rating is for a "canned" network...two
units
> in an electromagnetically sealed room, with xmitter and rcvr only 1 meter
> apart. The numbers are a marketing ply...not what you can expect to ever
> get on your LAN.
>
> Bobby
>
> "Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> > Hi, i have recently purchased a D-Link DWL-2100ap access point and a
> > DWL-G520+ PCI card.
> >
> > When i first setup the network the pci card kept droping the link,
> > despite having 90%+ signal and 90%+ link quality. I moved the pc into
> > the same room as the access point and got 100% signal, yet it still
> > dropped the connection and i still had bad transfer speeds (around
> > 300kbps). Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a good
> > quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?
> >
> > I have changed channels, and found that i get the highest speed on
> > channel 11. I read on forums to try us robotics drivers (and yes they
> > work! - they are the same card with a different badge on), and are far
> > more stable than the D-Link drivers.
> >
> > I have now got the speed upto around 14,000kbps peak. To do this i had
> > to disable the D-Link "Super G mode". Before i disabled this mode (it
> > was in Dynamic turbo mode) i only got ~6,000kbps.
> >
> > However, despite having 90%+ signal and link quality i am not
> > approaching the 54Mbps limit of the g standard. I appreciate there
> > will be some overhead for the network protocols which will take away
> > from this theorectical maximum, but over 50% overhead i find extremely
> > harsh. I am much happier with this higher speed, but anymore would be
> > great.
> >
> > Can anyone give me some tips to try to increase the speed? D-Link have
> > just released a new set of drivers for the card which i will try. I
> > dont want to decrease the encryption length (it is currently WEP
> > 128bit cypher).
> >
> > What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
> > networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates. Has
> > anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
> > actually increase the performance?
> >
> > Many thanks in advance,
> >
> > Chris
>
>

Brian;

Your transfer speeds will vary dramatically from moment to moment. For
short periods you may get a sustained transfer of 15Mbs, and in short
periods your transfer might rise to 21-24Mbps. You must keep in mind that
the traffic has to be monitored and controlled, and even though the LAN is
technically asynchronous, packets must be handled so that they are moved
efficiently. The overhead inherent in the broadcast signal also plays a
role in how fast your true LAN speed is, as well as the hardware that is
being used.

I realize that you are probably concerned with getting the maximum
transfer speed on your LAN, but please be aware that you can NEVER expect to
use the full bandwidth all the time.

There are so many factors that can affect signal transfer rates that it
would in literal truth fill a nice sized book. I would not sweat over my
network running 18Mbps and try to get 20Mbs. It is just not worth it.
Unless you are streaming audio and/or video over the LAN, just be happy with
what you have.

Bobby


"Brian K" <iibntgyea4_ remove_this_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f_9Ec.69819$(E-Mail Removed)...
> For SuperG at say 24Mbps (3 MB/sec), is this the speed at which you are
> actually transferring data? Or is it measured otherwise?
>
> Brian
>
>
> "NoNoBadDog!" <mysocks_bjsledge_AT_pixi.com> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On a good day, with a clean signal with little or no interference, you
>> can
>> expect to get 22 to 25 Mbps for Super-G and 14 to 18 Mbps with regular
> 54G.
>> In general practice, you will most likely get nowhere near that level of
>> performance. the 54Mbs/108Mbs rating is for a "canned" network...two
> units
>> in an electromagnetically sealed room, with xmitter and rcvr only 1 meter
>> apart. The numbers are a marketing ply...not what you can expect to ever
>> get on your LAN.
>>
>> Bobby
>>
>> "Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
>> > Hi, i have recently purchased a D-Link DWL-2100ap access point and a
>> > DWL-G520+ PCI card.
>> >
>> > When i first setup the network the pci card kept droping the link,
>> > despite having 90%+ signal and 90%+ link quality. I moved the pc into
>> > the same room as the access point and got 100% signal, yet it still
>> > dropped the connection and i still had bad transfer speeds (around
>> > 300kbps). Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a good
>> > quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?
>> >
>> > I have changed channels, and found that i get the highest speed on
>> > channel 11. I read on forums to try us robotics drivers (and yes they
>> > work! - they are the same card with a different badge on), and are far
>> > more stable than the D-Link drivers.
>> >
>> > I have now got the speed upto around 14,000kbps peak. To do this i had
>> > to disable the D-Link "Super G mode". Before i disabled this mode (it
>> > was in Dynamic turbo mode) i only got ~6,000kbps.
>> >
>> > However, despite having 90%+ signal and link quality i am not
>> > approaching the 54Mbps limit of the g standard. I appreciate there
>> > will be some overhead for the network protocols which will take away
>> > from this theorectical maximum, but over 50% overhead i find extremely
>> > harsh. I am much happier with this higher speed, but anymore would be
>> > great.
>> >
>> > Can anyone give me some tips to try to increase the speed? D-Link have
>> > just released a new set of drivers for the card which i will try. I
>> > dont want to decrease the encryption length (it is currently WEP
>> > 128bit cypher).
>> >
>> > What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
>> > networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates. Has
>> > anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
>> > actually increase the performance?
>> >
>> > Many thanks in advance,
>> >
>> > Chris
>>
>>
>
>

On my wired network I get transfers of 240 MB/min for large files like drive
images. What can I expect (as an average) with Wireless G?

Brian


"NoNoBadDog!" <mysocks_bjsledge_AT_pixi.com> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Brian;
>
> Your transfer speeds will vary dramatically from moment to moment. For
> short periods you may get a sustained transfer of 15Mbs, and in short
> periods your transfer might rise to 21-24Mbps. You must keep in mind that
> the traffic has to be monitored and controlled, and even though the LAN is
> technically asynchronous, packets must be handled so that they are moved
> efficiently. The overhead inherent in the broadcast signal also plays a
> role in how fast your true LAN speed is, as well as the hardware that is
> being used.
>
> I realize that you are probably concerned with getting the maximum
> transfer speed on your LAN, but please be aware that you can NEVER expect
to
> use the full bandwidth all the time.
>
> There are so many factors that can affect signal transfer rates that it
> would in literal truth fill a nice sized book. I would not sweat over my
> network running 18Mbps and try to get 20Mbs. It is just not worth it.
> Unless you are streaming audio and/or video over the LAN, just be happy
with
> what you have.
>
> Bobby
>
>
> "Brian K" <iibntgyea4_ remove_this_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f_9Ec.69819$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > For SuperG at say 24Mbps (3 MB/sec), is this the speed at which you are
> > actually transferring data? Or is it measured otherwise?
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> > "NoNoBadDog!" <mysocks_bjsledge_AT_pixi.com> wrote in message
> > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> On a good day, with a clean signal with little or no interference, you
> >> can
> >> expect to get 22 to 25 Mbps for Super-G and 14 to 18 Mbps with regular
> > 54G.
> >> In general practice, you will most likely get nowhere near that level
of
> >> performance. the 54Mbs/108Mbs rating is for a "canned" network...two
> > units
> >> in an electromagnetically sealed room, with xmitter and rcvr only 1
meter
> >> apart. The numbers are a marketing ply...not what you can expect to
ever
> >> get on your LAN.
> >>
> >> Bobby
> >>
> >> "Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> >> > Hi, i have recently purchased a D-Link DWL-2100ap access point and a
> >> > DWL-G520+ PCI card.
> >> >
> >> > When i first setup the network the pci card kept droping the link,
> >> > despite having 90%+ signal and 90%+ link quality. I moved the pc into
> >> > the same room as the access point and got 100% signal, yet it still
> >> > dropped the connection and i still had bad transfer speeds (around
> >> > 300kbps). Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a good
> >> > quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?
> >> >
> >> > I have changed channels, and found that i get the highest speed on
> >> > channel 11. I read on forums to try us robotics drivers (and yes they
> >> > work! - they are the same card with a different badge on), and are
far
> >> > more stable than the D-Link drivers.
> >> >
> >> > I have now got the speed upto around 14,000kbps peak. To do this i
had
> >> > to disable the D-Link "Super G mode". Before i disabled this mode (it
> >> > was in Dynamic turbo mode) i only got ~6,000kbps.
> >> >
> >> > However, despite having 90%+ signal and link quality i am not
> >> > approaching the 54Mbps limit of the g standard. I appreciate there
> >> > will be some overhead for the network protocols which will take away
> >> > from this theorectical maximum, but over 50% overhead i find
extremely
> >> > harsh. I am much happier with this higher speed, but anymore would be
> >> > great.
> >> >
> >> > Can anyone give me some tips to try to increase the speed? D-Link
have
> >> > just released a new set of drivers for the card which i will try. I
> >> > dont want to decrease the encryption length (it is currently WEP
> >> > 128bit cypher).
> >> >
> >> > What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
> >> > networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates. Has
> >> > anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
> >> > actually increase the performance?
> >> >
> >> > Many thanks in advance,
> >> >
> >> > Chris
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>

winME laptop in g only, early dlink router/ compex card.
usually du-meter will say 16 - 18 mbps on large files.
best ever was a tad over 20mb

"Brian K" <iibntgyea4_ remove_this_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xmcEc.70041$(E-Mail Removed)...
> On my wired network I get transfers of 240 MB/min for large files like
drive
> images. What can I expect (as an average) with Wireless G?
>
> Brian
>
>
> "NoNoBadDog!" <mysocks_bjsledge_AT_pixi.com> wrote in message
> news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Brian;
> >
> > Your transfer speeds will vary dramatically from moment to moment.
For
> > short periods you may get a sustained transfer of 15Mbs, and in short
> > periods your transfer might rise to 21-24Mbps. You must keep in mind
that
> > the traffic has to be monitored and controlled, and even though the LAN
is
> > technically asynchronous, packets must be handled so that they are moved
> > efficiently. The overhead inherent in the broadcast signal also plays a
> > role in how fast your true LAN speed is, as well as the hardware that is
> > being used.
> >
> > I realize that you are probably concerned with getting the maximum
> > transfer speed on your LAN, but please be aware that you can NEVER
expect
> to
> > use the full bandwidth all the time.
> >
> > There are so many factors that can affect signal transfer rates that
it
> > would in literal truth fill a nice sized book. I would not sweat over
my
> > network running 18Mbps and try to get 20Mbs. It is just not worth it.
> > Unless you are streaming audio and/or video over the LAN, just be happy
> with
> > what you have.
> >
> > Bobby
> >
> >
> > "Brian K" <iibntgyea4_ remove_this_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:f_9Ec.69819$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > For SuperG at say 24Mbps (3 MB/sec), is this the speed at which you
are
> > > actually transferring data? Or is it measured otherwise?
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > >
> > > "NoNoBadDog!" <mysocks_bjsledge_AT_pixi.com> wrote in message
> > > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > >> On a good day, with a clean signal with little or no interference,
you
> > >> can
> > >> expect to get 22 to 25 Mbps for Super-G and 14 to 18 Mbps with
regular
> > > 54G.
> > >> In general practice, you will most likely get nowhere near that level
> of
> > >> performance. the 54Mbs/108Mbs rating is for a "canned" network...two
> > > units
> > >> in an electromagnetically sealed room, with xmitter and rcvr only 1
> meter
> > >> apart. The numbers are a marketing ply...not what you can expect to
> ever
> > >> get on your LAN.
> > >>
> > >> Bobby
> > >>
> > >> "Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > >> news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> > >> > Hi, i have recently purchased a D-Link DWL-2100ap access point and
a
> > >> > DWL-G520+ PCI card.
> > >> >
> > >> > When i first setup the network the pci card kept droping the link,
> > >> > despite having 90%+ signal and 90%+ link quality. I moved the pc
into
> > >> > the same room as the access point and got 100% signal, yet it still
> > >> > dropped the connection and i still had bad transfer speeds (around
> > >> > 300kbps). Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a
good
> > >> > quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?
> > >> >
> > >> > I have changed channels, and found that i get the highest speed on
> > >> > channel 11. I read on forums to try us robotics drivers (and yes
they
> > >> > work! - they are the same card with a different badge on), and are
> far
> > >> > more stable than the D-Link drivers.
> > >> >
> > >> > I have now got the speed upto around 14,000kbps peak. To do this i
> had
> > >> > to disable the D-Link "Super G mode". Before i disabled this mode
(it
> > >> > was in Dynamic turbo mode) i only got ~6,000kbps.
> > >> >
> > >> > However, despite having 90%+ signal and link quality i am not
> > >> > approaching the 54Mbps limit of the g standard. I appreciate there
> > >> > will be some overhead for the network protocols which will take
away
> > >> > from this theorectical maximum, but over 50% overhead i find
> extremely
> > >> > harsh. I am much happier with this higher speed, but anymore would
be
> > >> > great.
> > >> >
> > >> > Can anyone give me some tips to try to increase the speed? D-Link
> have
> > >> > just released a new set of drivers for the card which i will try. I
> > >> > dont want to decrease the encryption length (it is currently WEP
> > >> > 128bit cypher).
> > >> >
> > >> > What real-world speeds have people obtained with their wireless
> > >> > networks? I would be interested in both 11mpbs and 54mpbs rates.
Has
> > >> > anyone got these 'proprietry' enchancements working, and do they
> > >> > actually increase the performance?
> > >> >
> > >> > Many thanks in advance,
> > >> >
> > >> > Chris
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

"Brian K" <iibntgyea4_ remove_this_@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xmcEc.70041$(E-Mail Removed):

> On my wired network I get transfers of 240 MB/min for large files like
> drive images. What can I expect (as an average) with Wireless G?

~3 mb/s - Wired networks are still the way to go for file transfers.
Wireless is fine for work away from the desk or causal surfing.

--
Lucas Tam ((E-Mail Removed))
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

"Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Why does it transfer so slowly even though there is a good
> quality link? Surely speed should be relative to signal strength?

Signal strength mainly matters relative to "noise," other signals that
interfere with the desired signal. You don't need a lot of strength if
there's little interference. Strength can even work against you if you're
getting echoes or ghost signals.

Ron Bandes, CCNP, CTT+, etc.