FIbre Support

Get expert support with your Fibre connection.

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

WiFi Hub Stats & Performance.

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 94 of 94

My wifi hub has now been installed and running for a few days with DLM making no changes, so some sort of interesting stats from the gui that an OCE may want to feed back to the development team.

 

Downstream noise margin is being reported as 0.00 dB.

 

Upstream attenuation is being reported as 0.00 dB.

 

Downstream attenuation is being reported as 25.90 (usually been in the 19-21 range with previous TalkTalk super routers).

 

Upstream max rate exactly 6000 Kbps, actual upstream rate exactly 6000 Kbps, upstream noise margin exactly 6.0 dB. Now these numbers could be correct, but they do look unusually rounded. With HG633 and HG635 my max. upstream was just short of 8 Mbps, so lost performance.

 

But the thing that concerns me is the performance of this "best ever" modem-router.

 

I have listed the upstream performanc loss already.

 

With an HG635 my max. downstream was around 49 Mbps to 50 Mbps. With an actual line rate of 40 Mbps (on the 40/10 package).

 

With an HG633 my max rate dropped to around 43 Mbps, with an actual of around 38 Mbps.

 

With this new wifi hub my max. rate has dropped to 35 Mbps with an actuall of 32 Mbps. This unexpectedly large drop in downstream performance could be linked to the unexpected rise in the downstream attenuation.

 

But having spoken to someone in the faults team they are happy with this performance level as it is still within my predicted range (but massively less than I used to get). It would appear that everytime TalkTalk introduce a "new, improved" router that my performance levels go south.

 

But the wifi is better, although I never had any wifi issues, and this new router didn't resolve the issues I was having with the HG633 with V2.00t firmware.

93 REPLIES 93

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 41 of 94

OK, many thanks.

 

Will the credit show up fairly quickly in "transaction history" or do I have to wait until my next bill ?

0 Likes

Message 42 of 94

Hi iefbr14,

 

I'm happy to honour OCE_Ady's offer, I've ordered a returns bag it should be with you whithin a couple of days. if you could bump the thread three or four days after you return the router we'll check that it's back. 

 

Chris

0 Likes

lancia
Super Duper Contributor
Message 43 of 94

I think I may be doing the same thing. Can someone confirm what chipset this router is based on, is it a broadcom? I'm glad I paid £30 for this and not the £120 asking price...

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 44 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk

 

It looks like DLM did not make any changes last night and this morning's stats. and speed tests are consistant with those reported yesterday. So potentially I may be right back to where I was a month and a half ago with degraded performance and a stuck profile following my initial move to V2.00t firmware on an HG633, but early days yet for DLM to react.

 

The one thing that is clear from the last few weeks of testing is that my HG633 and HG635 both have the capability to outperform the FAST5364. So any claims that the new wifi hub is one of your best yet appears to be misleading. Apart from the lack of performance I haven't even seen any improvements in wifi signal quality (which was always quite good in my property as evidenced by the speed tester results that I shared yesterday).

 

The wifi hub was arranged for me via the CEO's office to allow me to test if the new router correctly recognised the availability of vectoring (or not) on my line. I agreed a payment of £30 based on the theory that if it worked great, but if it didn't at least I would still have the "latest and greatest" router. Vectoring was not recognised, and my performance demonstrated a fairly significant lose of capability.

 

The FAST5364 did not resolve the vectoring issue, it did not improve my wifi performance and it degraded my broadband by an unacceptable margin - I would class that as a fairly epic fail.

 

I would like to return this wifi hub for a refund, as offered by OCE_Ady last week (and previously accepted).

 

If you (or @Debbie-TalkTalk) can confirm the refund and forward a returns bag I will despatch the router to you as soon as practical (and continue to use my HG633).

Message 45 of 94

"30.2 Mbps at a wireless device on a 30.7 download figure would be very surprising.

 

Or is this yet more TT inconsistant stats. ?"

 

I agree (30.2 over wi-fi with a 32.4Mbps sync speed is also very high) - the sync speed is from Openreach stats not ours and it's still showing at 30.7Mbps

 

(thanks for returning the router)

Chris

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 46 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk

 

I have just posted back the second wifi hub that @Debbie-TalkTalk had kindly provided for testing.

 

The two hubs reported identical stats (high attenuation and low SNRs etc. etc.) so were equally dubious.

 

No point in keeping two.

 

 

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 47 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk

 

A little surprised by your statement that I am now in sync at 30.7 Mbps.

 

My router stats are showing 32.2 Mbps (only 150 Kbps different) and two speedtests done via a wifi attached pc are indicating 30.2 Mbps (TT's own tester) and 29.5 Mbps (ThinkBroadband).

 

Given the usual loss between router and any device (particularly wifi attached) the numbers I am seeing are more consistant with the router's reported 32 Mbps download.

 

30.2 Mbps at a wireless device on a 30.7 download figure would be very surprising.

 

Or is this yet more TT inconsistant stats. ?

0 Likes

Message 48 of 94

Hi iefbr14,

 

There was a profile change in the early hours of the Saturday morning, but it only made slight adjustment. Line test is showing your current sync speed is 30.7Mbps so little bit down with the HG633 compared to Wi-Fi hub

 

Chris

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 49 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk

 

So after 8 or 9 days of continuous use up to last Friday, a quick router swap (Fast5364 for Fast5364) then running all weekend, here are the stats. from 08:00 this morning :-

Fast5364.jpg

 

 

It seems that DLM may have attempted some sort of reset around 04:30 this morning, but it has made no significant difference to any stat. - so very much a spot the difference competition from all my previous wifi hub stats.

 

So after  around 40 minutes down, I have now swapped back to my "old" HG633 running V2.00t firmware :-

HG633.jpg

 

 

Things to particularly notice :-

 

Down stream attenuation now back to my "normal range" - 20.9 dB.

Max. downstream has now risen to 41 Mbps - around 6 Mbps more than the wifi hub was reporting.

Downstream SNR now 7.2 dB - as opposses to the 0.00 reported by the FAST5364.

 

The upstream max. rate (8.5 Mbps) and noise margin (10.7 dB) have also significantly increased.

 

I will now leave this configuration running for a few days and see if DLM does anything positive.

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 50 of 94

@AldridgeAndy

 

Ok, thanks.

 

Looks like you also have some dubious attenuation and SNR gui stats there from your wifi hub, which again do appear to be reflected in the performance oriented stats. Because your 40/10 package appears to have lots of headroom I'm guessing you aren't experiencing any actual impact.

 

But I will continue to bang my head on the wall that is TalkTalk.

 

 

0 Likes

Message 51 of 94

@Anonymous

 

Apologies for my post but I have been following your topic with interest.

 

For comparison my TalkTalk 3782 Router reported familiar (very close to HG633) line stats as below...

 

dlink vdsl.JPG

 

But the new TalkTalk Hub reports the following...

 

wifi hub vdsl.JPG

 

Note the 0db noise margin on the download just like yours.

0 Likes

Message 52 of 94

Sorry, never heard of soft and hard banding, the band cap is set based on connections drops and/or the number of errors, measured again predefined limits as per the algorithm. If the connection remains stable with a low error count then DLM should move you to a faster profile (higher band cap), that's why we ask you to leave new equipment connected for a few days, to give DLM chance to monitor the line make any adjustements.

 

Chris

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 53 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk

 

One question.

 

You say my line has been banded to around 32 Mbps.

 

Is this a normal "soft banding" that DLM should adjust over time based on line statistics and performance or a "hard banding" based on very poor stability that is fixed and requires BTOR intervention to remove ?

0 Likes

Message 54 of 94

"The max. downstream as being reported by the wifi hub appears to be consistant with the reported attenuation."

 

That may well be the case as the estimated max downstream may be estimated based on the attenuation reported by the router, but if the attenuation is being reported incorrectly this would mean that the estimated max downstream is being reported incorrectly and wouldn't restrict the speed that you could actually achieve. Anyway I've asked our product team to take a look at this


Thanks
Chris

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 55 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk wrote:

Hi iefbr14,

 

Thanks for the information. Just to clarify (so that I can feed this back to our product team) as the actual sync speed of the wifi hub doesn't appear to be any different to the HG635, is your only concern the actual difference in the router stats (attenuation, SNR, potential maximum speed) rather than a difference in real world performance?


Chris


Sorry @Chris-TalkTalk just seen this post, didn't seem to get any notification.

 

No I am not specifically concerned about the difference in the router stats. I am very concerned by the massive drop in performance I have suffered in the last month or so. Which are evidenced in the router gui stats.

 

In particular there is a significant difference in the reported  attenuation figures. This is also reflected by the difference in the max. downstream speeds. This is a visable symptom of the issue..

 

You have previously informed me that my line is being banded to around 32 Mbps, so that will be overriding other parameters. It would not matter that the HG635 gives me far better downstream speed than the wifi hub if the line is banded to below that level (and would potentially take a few days to recover).

 

From the unbanded HG635 and HG633 values from a couple of months ago I have lost nearly 30% of my downstream speed (max and actual) - that is what concerns me.

 

And I paid £30 to degrade my system !

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 56 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk wrote:

Hi lancia,

 

If the attenuation is higher then this can affect speed but if the attenuation is the same but the wifi hub is just reporting it incorrectly (don't know if it is or not) then I can't see how this would affect the speed


Chris


The max. downstream as being reported by the wifi hub appears to be consistant with the reported attenuation.

 

I currently plan to leave the wifi hub connected over the weekend (as requested). If nothing significant happens then I will swap back to my old HG633 router to see how that reacts.

0 Likes

Message 57 of 94

Hi lancia,

 

If the attenuation is higher then this can affect speed but if the attenuation is the same but the wifi hub is just reporting it incorrectly (don't know if it is or not) then I can't see how this would affect the speed


Chris

0 Likes

lancia
Super Duper Contributor
Message 58 of 94

I would have thought the DLM was limiting his sync speed at the moment, however as he's stated the new hub is not calculating attenuation and missing other stats altogether. If it's not calculating properly he's not going to move off his DLM profile, or have i got this wrong? This will effect his real world performance as the stats are incorrect and showing him further away from the cab. My hub is exactly the same, i left it 30 minutes before installing and it sync's lower than the HG635. My stats are also dubios, I do think this leans toward a firmware issue.

0 Likes

Message 59 of 94

Hi iefbr14,

 

Thanks for the information. Just to clarify (so that I can feed this back to our product team) as the actual sync speed of the wifi hub doesn't appear to be any different to the HG635, is your only concern the actual difference in the router stats (attenuation, SNR, potential maximum speed) rather than a difference in real world performance?

Chris

0 Likes

Anonymous
Not applicable
Message 60 of 94

@Chris-TalkTalk

 

As there was no significant difference between the old and new routers I have reverted to the originally supplied router so that I could return a "pristine" router, if you would handle that any differently to normal returns. Also customising (SSID's) etc. on the "new" router would have been an unnecessary effort.

 

It is unlikely that DLM will make any significant changes whilst the wifi hubs are reporting such an unusually high downstream attenuation.

 

All my previous routers calculate a downstream attenuation of around 19 dB to 21 dB. These wifi hubs are calculating just under 26 dB. My understanding is that attenuation can (all things being equal) be roughly taken as a measure of distance from source (cabinet for fibre). And distance is associated with downstream speed capability. My house has not moved.

 

Although I appreciate that you personally ignore the max. value, but this increase in downstream attenuation has cause the reported max. downstream speed to my router to be significantly depressed, thereby also reducing throughput. The relationship between attenuation and speed is well documented (e.g. Kitz) and IMO cannot be ignored.

 

Whilst my max. downstream is set around 35 Mbps DLM's ability to increase my actual line speed is fairly well non-existant.

 

I suspect that this potential miscalculation in the negotiated attenuation between my router and local fibre cabinet is a significant factor contributing to the poor performance I am experiencing (with both wifi hubs, but not HG based routers). And that together with the other stats being produced by the router (SNR of zero etc.) would tend to indicate a potential firmware issue.

 

 

 

 

0 Likes