USB ?

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 9:21 pm

Ok !
the debate about USB versus Nic's has been done to death.
Let's poll a real question.
Company's that sell USB ethernet adapters claim the USB adapter CAN DOWNLOAD AT 1.5MB SPEEDS.
My Question is this! "who beside me has a USB ethernet adapter and anyone of you getting anywhere near 1.5MB ?
Don't be chicken now!

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 9:26 pm

Yes it is possible to reach that, but you are hooked up for cable modem service, so

Gandalf · Post by **Gandalf** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 9:29 pm

Agreed.

SPEeD

damaged · Post by **damaged** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 9:35 pm

Go ahead and give it a try if you want. I guarantee that at some point, your wrist will fall off after all of the re-setting it requires in order to maintain a connection.

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 9:36 pm

Sure you can get that, no doubt about it

But if you have other USB devices hooked up there will be some speed degredation and perhaps pauses

Plus you are either on Cable or DSL so you won't be getting 1.5MB/sec! lol

Yes this has been beaten to death and each time the NIC wins over USB

Perhaps USB 2.0 will be nice, and of course FireWire will MUCH better but for now nothing beats a hardware NIC

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 9:37 pm

Testify brother

ZenOps · Post by **ZenOps** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 9:51 pm

I dont think 'USB vs actual NIC' is so much a question of throughput as it is CPU utilization.

Makers of NIC's like 3COM and Intel have spent years on the NIC chipsets trying to reduce the strain on the CPU when up/downloading. EG: Parallel tasking and CPU offload features.

Then comes USB which essentially dumps all of the overhead tasks back on the CPU.

They would probably be bandwidth equivalent in current Cable/DSL modems but USB takes a huge chunk out of the CPU to do it.

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:03 pm

Speak it brother ZenOps!

That's it exactly!

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:20 pm

The botton line is Get a NIC

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:21 pm

There you go again!
The OP was not to compare USB against NIC !
READ IT AGAIN!
You people got something against USB?
remember! It's the way of the future.
Beside's
I said I have one!
It works
It's on cable
It still works.
No it not sharing ports with another USB device
Sounds to me like when USB ethernet adapters over take the market. Nic's will be history!
Is the USB 2.0 the answer?

Here! have a pizza and think about it!

OH! by the way!
CPU's are MUCH larger these days heh?
1.2 gigs and growning. What a USB gonna do to hurt it? hummmm?

[ 02-09-2001: Message edited by: Buggyman ]

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:24 pm

Is there a Doctor in the house

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:29 pm

Yeah!
He's outback making Pizza's

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:35 pm

Come on Guys!
Don't be chicken!

The Forum says DSL & Cable.
It doen't say for NIC users only!
Think of the fortune you'd make if you can tweak a USB adapter!
Mr. Brent!
I'm not trying to offend anybody. I just asked an honest question.

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:40 pm

I'll be back in about an hour!
I HOPE someone has a real answer.
But the reason USB does so poorly is because of the lack of knowlege of them.
NIC users!
Beware of the future.
USB's are knocking on the door!
are you ansering it?

damaged · Post by **damaged** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 10:41 pm

It is probably safe to say that nobody here is getting close to 1.5 MB/sec d/l.

Most cable systems are maxed out at 10 Mb/sec.

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 11:29 pm

Then translate this.AT&T Broadband
To save you time here's what it said:
With AT&T Road Runner, you get what you want in a flash. Download at speeds up to 1500 kbps*, 50 times faster than a 28.8 modem! And upload at speeds up to 300 kbps*.
Now my translation is 50x28.8 = 25x56k
Hello?
Let's have some facts here ok?
I currently get around 170 Kb on my download.
and I didn't need no nic to get that!
Facts people Facts!
None of this says only with NIC's

glc1 · Post by **glc1** » Fri Feb 09, 2001 11:46 pm

Originally posted by Buggyman:
Then translate this.AT&T Broadband
To save you time here's what it said:
With AT&T Road Runner, you get what you want in a flash. Download at speeds up to 1500 kbps*, 50 times faster than a 28.8 modem! And upload at speeds up to 300 kbps*.

I would disregard that. When I had ATT@Home, I got up to 100 times faster than 56k even though their site clearly stated "up to 50 times faster than 28.8".

Originally posted by Buggyman:
But the reason USB does so poorly is because of the lack of knowlege of them.

Not quite. USB adapters are inferior to NICs b/c they utilize more CPU cycles and have more stability/compatibility problems due to drivers.

[ 02-09-2001: Message edited by: glc1 ]

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 12:03 am

So you think my speed at what I said and I quote myself:
I currently get around 170 Kb on my download.
and I didn't need no nic to get that!
Some of the reports I see I'm doing better than half the NIC's around here!
Gee!
where'd all these's bigshot Nic lovers go?

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 12:10 am

BTW,
Here's what A USB rep said!
You are never bothering me. The problem you describe is one inherent in USB 1.x design not the adapter. When they designed the USB spec the had no idea people would want to use it for high bandwidth applications. You should however be able to stream at least 1.5MB through the USB Adapter. The bandwidth pipe available is approx 12 MB If you need more than this I would recommend using an internal nic card. As soon as MS/Intel releases the new USB 2.0 Standard we will have a USB Adapter with full 100MB streaming capability.
Note that last sentence?
USB will Rule over nic real soon!

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 12:28 am

first of all Buggyman, calm down, nobody is arguing that you aren't getting the speeds you say you are getting

I fully belive that you are getting what you say you are getting through your usb adapter

for some USB works perfectly, ISP's really push them because they are the Easiest to install, no need to crack the pc open and install a new pci device, they are much simpler for novice customers no doubt, and for some it works PERFECTLY

However most of us that also have Cable or DSL also have LAN's in our house, so we already have 10/100 NIC's and such, and of course we all want our LAN at 100Mbps so we just use our NIC, a switch or a router and share the Internet connection etc....

And for some users using USB is a nightmare, as someone stated Device drivers and compatibility is an issue, along with as you stated USB design, it's just not intended for broadband connections, Where as NIC's ARE they are built for network communication from the ground up.

I have no doubt USB 2.0 and FireWire will have a BIG market place for networking, it's MUCH easier then having to install a NIC cause you don't have to crack the case etc... But RIGHT NOW at this particular time on this Planet NIC's are a better option because of stability/drivers/speed and cpu utilization.

NIC's from 3Com have some interesting features such as Parellel Tasking and Wake on LAN and such, and have very powerfull processors on them themselves.

USB uses your CPU for processing, and in intense multiplayer games and such it's better to have all the cpu power you can have, therefore using a NIC where it does everying on the NIC gives you some free resources for whatever you are doing.

They both have plusses and Minusses

Right now NIC's are better

In the future? I can't say, cause we aren't there yet

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 12:37 am

I guess the Rooster chase the hens out of the nest!
Sorry Mr. Brent.
I agree that Nic's are the way to go on cable or whatever.
But here is my message.
NOBODY SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT USB'S
What what proven here tonight is that if you have a USB ethernet adapter. it can't be tweaked.
all that tweaking you guys talk about is for nic's only.
You need to make that known on the Speedguide homepage.
This is not like compareing a FORD against a Chevy.
They are two differance types of adapters.
I'm done with this so good night all!
think about this.
Rather than knocking down USB adapters.
Just point out that technology has not made USB ethernet Adapters good enough for cable or DSL servive YET!

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 12:49 am

acutally that's not true buggyman

tweaking all those settings, MTU, MSS all those options in the Registry are directly related to the TCP/IP stack, so yes they effect your speed weather you are on a USB adapter or a NIC, they are NOT just for people that use NIC's, it's tweaking the actually TCP/IP stack which is what the protocol that is used to communicate over the Internet...

your statement is incorrect

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 8:04 am

You are wrong Bug man, NIC's rule now, if in the future something better comes along then we'll have to see, you say you are getting 170Kb s, kilobits or KB kilobytes,
Even if it is Bytes your speed will double with a NIC, I'd bet your ranch,hehe

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 10:51 am

KB's or Kb's
The truth as I see it this.
When I ran tests the other night (and I'm not advertising)came up with this.
645kbps download
285kbps upload.
That download number has touch 1Gb on some tests during wee hours. (we all have that).
Now all you fancy translaters and figure out KB or Kb what that is.
I have witnesses that will tell you that none of the tweakings has not made any impacts on my speed.
They have however impact how My PC handles it WHEN IT GETS IT.
That's not download speed. that's processing speed.
So I will repeat myself here. In the main paragraph of any of you guys who do patches. you need to let them know that theses patches don't deal with speed like I was under the impression they were.
Improve my PC? yes. Improved my speed? NO
Make my USB adapter work better? NO there are NO software that makes the USB adapters work any better.
(I might add here that Microsoft has a patch for those who uses a AMD processor that's over 350 mhz and your hub controller is VIA base. seems there were numbers problems with those two. I'll find that patch and post it later. It did impact mine)
In the making as I stated earlier is USB 2.0 due out anytime. will it work? I don't know.
But from what they are advertising. it's gonna run all over nics. But HEY! Look at what Cable companies are saying now.
They have that fancy little word in there they use. They say UP TO. Not WILL!
I had Fun guys!
I've got a list of who know's what now!

Later!

[ 02-10-2001: Message edited by: Buggyman ]

Aaladar · Post by **Aaladar** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 10:59 am

Dude, you didn't get 1GB.

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:08 am

Really, 1 Gig, are you nuts, do speed patchs work, again, yes, wake up and smell de tolit,
hehe, Daytona Qualifying today from noon till 3 so, and futher more NIC rules

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:13 am

Originally posted by Aaladar:
Dude, you didn't get 1GB.

How do you know?
You think that because I'm on USB? or what?
Don't come in here telling me what I got and didn't get!
That test was done 3AM eastern time.
But then again! I don't have to prove nothing to you!
One figure you people seem to forget is node's.
These cable companies put caps on node's. Mine has it at 500. yes it's a killer at prime time. but during slack time I can fly!

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:16 am

Originally posted by Lobo:
Really, 1 Gig, are you nuts, do speed patchs work, again, yes, wake up and smell de tolit,
hehe, Daytona Qualifying today from noon till 3 so, and futher more NIC rules

Hummmm
me think Dale Earnhart is gonna do some smelling!

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:27 am

I think you meant MB not Gig or do you know de diffeence, I say you did not get 1 Gig, hehehehehehehehehehehe

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:29 am

lol Buggyman sorry to tell ya but there is no way you got 1Gb speeds, don't even try to pull that one over on us.

Who is your ISP again?

It is true that the patches will effect us all in different ways, this can't be helped as the nature of everyone's computer is different. It may increase your speed, it may not, it may not even do anything, ESPECIALLY if your already maxed out on your download speed. That may be your capped download speed and aint NO patch gonna make you go faster then your cap.

As for your claims of 170KB or kbps I DO believe that you can get that on USB, i'm not Doubting it! As far as adding a NIC and getting that speed doubled, I don't think so tim! Maybe in a very lucky instance, but for the most part adding a NIC won't double your speed, ESPECIALLY if that's your capped speed adding a NIC aint gonna increase yoour speed.

But what a NIC helps with is CPU utilization, it decreases it a lot. This is good for intense multiplayer games or a LOT of multitasking while downloading things. It will make your computer faster in other words by taking the load OFF your cpu. NIC's for Network communication are just flat out better at this presnet time then USB is.

The patches effect and tweake TCP/IP not the adpaters themselves, since ALL Internet communication is handled over TCP/IP regardless of adapter type the Patches have the Potential to effect your speed, that is considering you are not capped on the download and you aren't at the cap yet.

Startin to get this yet?

any questions?

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:34 am

If you got a gig then I am moving in with you, gettin one of those USB things, staying up late and flying, your plain and simple, nuts, hehe, sill trying to find out what a Gig is

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:37 am

a USB adapter can only do 1.5MB/sec MegaBytes a second

so there is no way you can get a Gb through it haha

maybe you did mean 1MB/sec which would be a burst speed i'm sure, not sustained, or possibly cached...

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:40 am

He don't understand Mr. Brent, he's up there in de clouds with de birds, heheheheheeh

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:44 am

Don't forget to rate me Mr Buggyman,heheheheheheheheheheheheheheheheeh

Brent · Post by **Brent** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 11:48 am

I only have 3 stars

guess some people didn't like my answers

[ 02-10-2001: Message edited by: Brent ]

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 2:09 pm

Mr. Brent!
you could never offend me. I'm a wise old man who has learned how to stir things up ! LOL
as I did in this post heh?
That 1G deal was from our Good? freinds at DSL. and I promise you that's what it said.
anyway,
the worst you could do to me is bann me form this.
But I don't think you will because I kept it clean (stepped on a few toes) but kepted it clean.
Anyway
It was fun on my part.
I'm off dreaming up another way to fire up a post again!
Beware LOL
Later

Lobo · Post by **Lobo** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 2:51 pm

Oh no, your not getting off that easy, I had dslr all wrong, 1 gig, wow, are you sure it did not say 1 pig, you gotta tell me de tweaks you use, you de fast man on the block now, so give up the secret.

glc1 · Post by **glc1** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 2:53 pm

1GB is not possible, you must have misread the results. Run the test again and post the results here.

If you are on cable, the max you could get, barring a download cap, is 10mbps (megaBITS per sec) (1.2MBps (megaBYTES per sec)). If you are on DSL, the max you can get is your cap. This is true for NICs AND USB network adapters.

[ 02-10-2001: Message edited by: glc1 ]

Buggyman · Post by **Buggyman** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 4:37 pm

Well how about this one?

Roadrunner Bandwidth Results
Loaded 1349385 bytes in 8.52 seconds.
Your throughput is 1267 kilobits per second.

glc1 · Post by **glc1** » Sat Feb 10, 2001 4:39 pm

1267 kilobits per second = ~158KBps (kiloBYTES per sec)

How does that come anywhere near "1GB"?

[ 02-10-2001: Message edited by: glc1 ]