so it kinda feels like having a cable connection to my crosscable networked box which is actually a few feet away.
lol
Well here's how it works,it beats me,i have tryed anything-everything but the speed simply wont budge;
ok
One laptop-pIII 500 with a 10/100mbps pcmcia NIC
one box-normal,perfectly ordinary pII 266 with a 10/100mbps NIC
they are connected w/o a hub by a crossover cable(which is nno more than 10 meters..doesnt matter anyway)
OSes:well im almost ashamed but hell with it;w98s on both boxes
ok.Now lets test the awesome gigabit ethernet of mine on a fresh clean format on both machines.Not touching anything else except that transferring a 0.99gb vob file from the dvd-rom to the HD(which is to be transferred over the ethernet oooonly for testing purposes..now whatever.)nad lets give IPs to the boxes.
Than after a reboot,to start "benchmarking",locate the other box from network and simply drag&drop.
Wowzers,w98 is actually telling the exact time thats left,of course after testing it indeed turns out to be 28minutes by the fastest.So a whole chunk of gig goes through the pipes in 28,and that,in my book adds up to 2mbps!
pissed off we try a diffrent quality cable;hmm still 2mbps.
Pissed off i try a longer cable;hmm 2mbps max.
pissed off i try a eany weeny tiny lille cable;hmm 2 whole huge mbps!max!
ok still pissed off i optimise the current procotols in use so that ooonly tcp/ip is left with IPs on both machines.Wheeeeee we ARE GONNA FLYY!I bet it was those protocols that where cloging up my bandwith aaaand the result;still 2mbps...amazing!
Pissed off mad this time i get a MTU tweaker and,beliave or not,i try EVERY POSSIBLE COMBINATION of MSS/RWIN/TTL and MTU settings
YES I DID IT!ITS A GIG IN 27 MINUTES THIS TIME!
wow thats like 0.1mbps speed increase for a weeks work!
well finally i realisee that im not a network dude i suck and all and i should go kill my self and stuff i suddenly thought it might have been the cpu barrage that might have been clogging it up?
going all yippie,i carry my laptop to another friend of mine who has a laptop,and we sit,in the exact middle of a road and plug each others boxes so we come make a perfect 10/100 ethernet.
But to my suprise,both boxes being 500mhz,the-speed-wont-pass-the-2-mbps-mark.
let alone 10mbps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>anyone< any ideas whats wrong?!?!

i believe that your thinking you will get 10 megs, when you will actually only get 10 mbit.
That is about 1-2megs.
Then again it might be cause you are using a crossover, and those speeds tend to be low.

10mbps -> 1.25 megabytes per second
100mbps -> 12.5 megabytes per second
1000mbps (gigabit) -> 125 megabytes per second.

I think that your are doing fine.

Actually the speeds mentioned above are even better than you will really get. Each packet has headers and footers that get transferred (the data uses up some of that space. Even of you have 100 Bits of information transferred, not all of that is actual data). Also you would only really have 100 Mbps of data transferred (inculding headers) if you ran at 100% efficency. Ive read reviews stating that the best 100Mbps cards were really getting 70Mbps.

Finally, Win9x isnt the best network os. To get faster network performance WinNT, 2k, or XP would be a better choice (and Linux or Unix is likely the best choice).

It could be worse, I understand that for Gigabit ethernet cards you really get around 200Mbps performance (at least currently).

quote:Originally posted by jchalos:
i believe that your thinking you will get 10 megs, when you will actually only get 10 mbit.
That is about 1-2megs.
Then again it might be cause you are using a crossover, and those speeds tend to be low.

it my bad if i told i was expecting 10megs,but of course im not..i probably meant 10mbps wherever i said that,sorry.
and if my math is right
100megabits would equal;
100x1000000/8bits per a byte/1024bytes for a kb/1024 kb for a mb=which would actually equal to

quote:Originally posted by slavik:
10mbps -> 1.25 megabytes per second
100mbps -> 12.5 megabytes per second
1000mbps (gigabit) -> 125 megabytes per second.

I think that your are doing fine.

however,i personnaly beelieve that im not doing fine cuz i should be hitting somewhere 'round 11mbytes with my 10/100mbps connection.(although,its true that im getting,to what i have calculated,somewhere around 8mbps..and i think thats because the headers etc. causing it not to run @ 10mbps..again,i repeat,that thats not the problem..i would be happy if i had a 8mbps conn over a 10mbps ethernet,not a 10/100mbps ethernet)

quote:Originally posted by Nabu_the_Wise:
Actually the speeds mentioned above are even better than you will really get. Each packet has headers and footers that get transferred (the data uses up some of that space. Even of you have 100 Bits of information transferred, not all of that is actual data). Also you would only really have 100 Mbps of data transferred (inculding headers) if you ran at 100% efficency. Ive read reviews stating that the best 100Mbps cards were really getting 70Mbps.

Finally, Win9x isnt the best network os. To get faster network performance WinNT, 2k, or XP would be a better choice (and Linux or Unix is likely the best choice).

It could be worse, I understand that for Gigabit ethernet cards you really get around 200Mbps performance (at least currently).

True that,w9x sux for networking but i have no choise currently,and you really cant get a 100mbps connection even if you cooled the CAT5's to the absolute 0(super conducting network haha)because of all the header etc. crap.however,im getting 8mbps over a 100mbps conn.(im teriblly sorry to say it was 2mbps over a 100mbps in the heading of the post,just my bad).
lets assume that the the both NIC's were dandy(which i believe not) i should have been getting atlest 40 or 50 mbps or so!
dont you think??
A final note,i would like to thank anybody who cared to respond,thanks alot.

OH yeah i forgot to mention it could have been because of the crosscable but
1)do you thing that it would affect this much?(like 70mbps to 8mpbs!)
2)i have also tried it w/ a router on diff. cat5s..
still a stiff 8mbps

Actually, a crossover cable is the fastest you can go. With a switch, theres still a little bit of buffering that happens (a few microseconds perhaps? Still it has to take some time to read the mac address before it can determine which port to send the singnal out of. So its at least buffered for the the amount of time it takes to send out a preamble and the first 48 bits.) You can still run full duplex with both methods after all.

No matter what, you're probably not going to get more than about 20% thoroughput over any kind of ethernet.

Even microsegmentation with switches can only improve things so far.

Since you were copying files from a DVD drive to hard drive, you were limited by the DVD read speed.

On average, 100Mb network provides a throughput around 60Mb under good conditions, 40Mb under normal conditions. So you will more than likely get 5-8MByte per second.

quote:Originally posted by coolent:
so it kinda feels like having a cable connection to my crosscable networked box which is actually a few feet away.
lol
Well here's how it works,it beats me,i have tryed anything-everything but the speed simply wont budge;
ok
One laptop-pIII 500 with a 10/100mbps pcmcia NIC
one box-normal,perfectly ordinary pII 266 with a 10/100mbps NIC
they are connected w/o a hub by a crossover cable(which is nno more than 10 meters..doesnt matter anyway)
OSes:well im almost ashamed but hell with it;w98s on both boxes
ok.Now lets test the awesome gigabit ethernet of mine on a fresh clean format on both machines.Not touching anything else except that transferring a 0.99gb vob file from the dvd-rom to the HD(which is to be transferred over the ethernet oooonly for testing purposes..now whatever.)nad lets give IPs to the boxes.
Than after a reboot,to start "benchmarking",locate the other box from network and simply drag&drop.
Wowzers,w98 is actually telling the exact time thats left,of course after testing it indeed turns out to be 28minutes by the fastest.So a whole chunk of gig goes through the pipes in 28,and that,in my book adds up to 2mbps!
pissed off we try a diffrent quality cable;hmm still 2mbps.
Pissed off i try a longer cable;hmm 2mbps max.
pissed off i try a eany weeny tiny lille cable;hmm 2 whole huge mbps!max!
ok still pissed off i optimise the current procotols in use so that ooonly tcp/ip is left with IPs on both machines.Wheeeeee we ARE GONNA FLYY!I bet it was those protocols that where cloging up my bandwith aaaand the result;still 2mbps...amazing!
Pissed off mad this time i get a MTU tweaker and,beliave or not,i try EVERY POSSIBLE COMBINATION of MSS/RWIN/TTL and MTU settings
YES I DID IT!ITS A GIG IN 27 MINUTES THIS TIME!
wow thats like 0.1mbps speed increase for a weeks work!
well finally i realisee that im not a network dude i suck and all and i should go kill my self and stuff i suddenly thought it might have been the cpu barrage that might have been clogging it up?
going all yippie,i carry my laptop to another friend of mine who has a laptop,and we sit,in the exact middle of a road and plug each others boxes so we come make a perfect 10/100 ethernet.
But to my suprise,both boxes being 500mhz,the-speed-wont-pass-the-2-mbps-mark.
let alone 10mbps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>anyone< any ideas whats wrong?!?!

quote:Originally posted by cz:
Since you were copying files from a DVD drive to hard drive, you were limited by the DVD read speed.

On average, 100Mb network provides a throughput around 60Mb under good conditions, 40Mb under normal conditions. So you will more than likely get 5-8MByte per second.

No,if you had read my post properly,you would have noticed that i copied vobs to the hd FIRST,so there was no limitations other than the HD throughput,which is way higher than the 100mbit ethernet anywway..Secondly i personally dont believe there any way of achieving(horibble spelling sorry)60megabytes over a 100/10mbit conn. since the part you are really getting wrong is that thinking those mbps is megabytesperseconds which is most obviously not.

quote:Originally posted by Nabu_the_Wise:
Actually, a crossover cable is the fastest you can go. With a switch, theres still a little bit of buffering that happens (a few microseconds perhaps? Still it has to take some time to read the mac address before it can determine which port to send the singnal out of. So its at least buffered for the the amount of time it takes to send out a preamble and the first 48 bits.) You can still run full duplex with both methods after all.

I perfectly agree with you by the way.

i have a home network and have used both.

With my old 10mbit HUB i'd max at about
700-950 kilobytes per second.

When I upgraded to 100mbit SWITCH (and all ethernet cards to 100mbit) my local transfers hit about 3,500 - 7,500 kilobytes a second.

With the 100mbit switch I have no problems burning CD's with files on other local computers. However, just about any other bandwidth processes running at the same time could result in a stressful to watch cd-writer memory bar in my burning program.