Jump to content

lilstone87

Clubhouse Member
  • Content Count

    279
  • Joined

About lilstone87

  • Rank
    Dedicated

Basic Info

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Virginia
  1. I understand. However I'm not putting a unstable build on my XR500. I have seen many of complaints with this build. I appreciate you mentioning this though.
  2. Exactly the reason we need Ping Assist. Servers being mislocated is a far to common issue.
  3. Well it seems this current official build has been problematic for some people. I guess I will stay away from it till a new firmware comes out. Mines still on the older build from 3-5 months back. Version I think 2.3.2.22.
  4. Well you could connect the R1 to the verizon router, and just run your gaming devices thru the R1. You will need to give the R1 a static IP on the verizon router, and then DMZ the static IP you gave the R1. So that will keep your gaming devices running thru the R1 with proper ports being opened for certain games. If you need help with that... There's info posted somewhere on here to help you with that.
  5. Well it comes down to this. With the R1 running the new DumaOS, if you're planning to use the QoS feature. You will be limited to around 200mbps with it enabled. With the XR500 you will be able to get up to gigabit speeds, if that's something you're getting from your ISP. So if I was to put a list together for each router this is how I would list things. R1: + You will get all features of the DumaOS, and you will get them faster then on the XR500 - It's a older router. So it has a slower less cores CPU, and only supports 2.4GHz wireless Due to its slower CPU, when using a feature like QoS. You will be limited to around 200mbps WAN<->LAN speeds XR500: + It's a newer router, with better hardware So you will be able to use all its features, and not be WAN<->LAN speed limited One gigabit WAN<->LAN speeds supported, no limits using all its features Dual band Wireless supported - It's indeed a router by Netgear with Netduma's DumaOS software, so firmware updates will be done by Netgear So you can expect slower firmware updates by Netgear for the XR500 Ultimately if you want to have new features ASAP, stick with the R1, and Netduma's own support channel for their router
  6. Want a honest answer? When netgear decides to make it available. The XR500 will continue to be slower with the newer features being added, due to this. I'm in no way saying this to bash Netgear, just speaking truth on the subject. As for Netgear, I will say with the XR500 they have been a bit disappointing. I expected netgear to have a beta team for this router, in which they reached out to some of the owners of it on here. To help test earlier builds. Because when it comes to official builds. Netgear has a history of maybe a new build every 3-6 months, most the time the later. Ultimately I know some will take my post as bashing Netgear, not my intent at all. I was actually a beta tester for their R9000 router a while back, and still to this day I receive early builds for it regularly. But official builds are another thing, and it sucks for customers not involved in such a program with netgear. To top this post of mine off. I wouldn't be shocked when the official build is ready for the XR500 with the new features, there will be a little delay to its launch. So Netgear can get their marketing team to draw up some stuff promoting the new features. Which in the past hasn't been a thing with router companies. However we're talking about a router for "gamers". So I would be shocked if they don't promote software updates like this, which includes a couple new gaming related features. Just know this will likely cause a bit of a delay getting these types of releases public.
  7. I'm here, and no you can't take over my computer LUL kidding...
  8. Good to hear Alex. I spent a couple days messing around with things on my end, and finally on the test's end with settings. Plus i overlooked many test result's, before i decided to post these findings. I'm not one who will post about something, unless i feel 100% confident it's true. So like i said i took my time on this, and honestly probably burnt threw 10-15gb of data over a couple day period, just running this test repeatedly. Ultimately i'm happy you were able to take the info i provided, put it to use, and get the same kind of results i got. Which are what people want to see, if their connection is running optimally. Finally i hope others who are having trouble getting results they want with this test, see my earlier post, and are able to put my suggestions to good use. As i think the test can be good to use, it just isn't optimized to provide accurate results, when using its default settings.
  9. Here's a test I just did, to show I'm not just posting what I feel might be right. I forgot to attach it to my post from a few minutes ago. EDIT: Here's another test I just did from a minute ago, where I severely limited my speeds, I still got "A" for bufferbloat. Before best I seen was "B" for bufferbloat. Disregard the "F" for speed, as that's based off my average which would normally be 330/30. But I limited my speed for this test, and a little bit for the test above as well.
  10. Well I have did more testing, and digging on this, the last couple days. I noticed a couple things, and I'm gonna share my findings below. 1. Oddly at times I noticed my result's were not the best while using google chrome. I used firefox, and things seemed more steady. I have been able to get some good result's with chrome as well though. So I wouldn't say not use it. I tried using windows 10 built in IE browser, however I tried a couple test's, all failed when trying to do the upload side of the test. So I say stay away from IE for testing. 2. When running this test, I strongly suggest cutting all bandwidth usage on the device you're testing on. So if you're on your pc, which you shouldn't be testing over a wifi device anyways. So testing while on a PC/Laptop. Close any apps/browser tabs that are using active bandwidth till testing is over. Also I highly recommend when testing on dslreports.com, try to only have it open within the browser you're using. I feel that will minimize any other tabs within the browser somehow causing the test an issue. 3. Do yourselves a favor, and create an account on dslreports.com, will only take a short time to do so. Reason being, you can configure your "Preferences" settings for the speedtest, once saved, they will stay linked to your account. I feel configuring the preference settings is VERY important with this speedtest. I will explain more below. 4. Reason to setup preference settings. First you can select the servers you want to use, for the test. At the top you have a option to let it pick some servers for you based off of either Latency, or Bandwidth. I suggest using the "Latency" option. After that's done running, it will have the servers it picked with a check on them. After that, you can look at the one's it picked, and unselect some of them if you want. I did a couple for myself, pick the ones closest to me. After this, make sure to hit the save button at the bottom. However I'm not done with the preference settings yet... After getting a small number of servers picked based off latency by it's own testing, and also checking over them yourself. I wouldn't have no more then 8-10 servers selected. Now scroll down a little, and you will see "No. download streams" with a box beside it. You can pick between 1-32. I honestly think for most of us "4" will be enough. That will be the amount of servers it will use while testing. Do the same for the upload side, which is right below it. For awhile I was using 16+ for each test I done, and I now don't recommend using that high of a number of servers for each test. Reason being, your overall result's will depend on all the servers used during that test. For me, I'm on the east coast of the US, and when I'm doing one of these test using 16+ servers. I'm likely using several servers on the west coast of the US. With a mixature of servers all over, there's so many things that can affect your routing from one minute to the next. So my final opinion on this, keep the number of servers used for the test low, and use servers close to you. Because this to me will give you more accurate result's, when it comes to the bufferbloat part of this test. Finally make sure after any preference setting changes, you make sure to click the "save" button at the bottom. 5. After doing the stuff above, I have been seeing more steady result's with the dslreports.com speedtest, in terms of bufferbloat, and my overall results. I don't feel the current default settings used for their speedtest, is optimized very well for testing, and getting the most accurate results. Ultimately I think by default they're running the test using to many servers, which can be from far away. With that, comes a lot of possible routing issue's. Some of them you have no control over, and isn't an issue with your connection. However whatever each server is reporting back, ultimately is included at the end of the test, and will factor into your final result.
  11. Fraser, I will get back to you as soon as I can. But until then, I plan to dig into this more from my end as well. This has me very curious as to why it's happening. dslreports speedtest bufferbloat part of the test depends on result's it collects while stressing your bandwidth. Oddly for the upload side, as you have seen... The result's are worst while Anti-BB is enabled. Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, as I'm only using 25% of my upload with it enabled, vs 100% without it. I'm very curious why its shows latency average higher, and with higher spiking. With Anti-BB enabled, is the router cpu strictly doing all the processing? I know often times certain features being enabled, disables other stuff, which normally keeps the cpu load down.
  12. Well I have had the XR500 for well over a month now, and I have waited till now to mention it. As I wanted to test over a period of time, and see what result's I come up with. I have noticed when using the dslreports speedtest, my result's are better without "Anti-Bufferbloat", then with it enabled. Which honestly is a bit backwards, and should be the opposite. I have run many of tests the past month, or so, and everytime my bufferbloat results are better when I leave my speeds uncapped. I plan to post the results of two recent tests in this post. One without it, and the other with my speed's capped to 25% of my overall total bandwidth. As you will see bufferbloat isn't exactly improving "bufferbloat" when enabled. I actually recently been paying close attention to the test being run, and with Anti-bufferbloat enabled. During the upload side of the testing, the latency average increases, spikes a lot more often, and higher. Which when you think about it.. With me having my limit's set to 25%, I can only use a max of 7.5-7.75mbps of upload bandwidth. I actually get 30-32mbps by my provider. So overall, latency, and ping spikes should stay very low, and consistent. Currently that isn't the case, and I feel whatever the issue is, it's router side. Because testing without it, latency, and spikes, are much less. This is while maxing out my upload at 30-32mbps, which would be the time for my latency to be at its highest, and spike the most. However that isn't the case. So at this point in time, I feel using "Anti-Bufferbloat" is a waste, and isn't doing exactly what it's designed to do. Here's a test done without Anti-Bufferbloat: Here's a test done with Anti-Bufferbloat, with my limits set at 25% of my total bandwidth: As you see Anti-Bufferbloat isn't exactly making things better. Now I will show you the "Grades" graph the test gives you for each test. Without Anti-Bufferbloat: With Anti-Bufferbloat: Overall this isn't what I would consider result's you should be seeing with a feature that's considered to help with this. These result's, show it isn't helping at all, only making it worst. Finally here's direct links to both of these test's, for the ones who are curious... I have nothing to hide, and so I will provide the links to show you all, nothing is being doctored on my end. I want to see what the netduma guys have to say about this, and why it's happening. Because currently.. This isn't helping, and I'm better off not using "Anti-Bufferbloat". Without Anti-Bufferbloat test link: https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/31992941#share With Anti-Bufferbloat test link: https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/31993024#share
  13. Fraser, using this option even for the PS4 works. I don't own a xbox, but I would bet using the "Unreal Engine" option will work to prioritize for all systems. As I think they use the same ports, or whatever is used within that option, for both consoles, and PC.
  14. Yeah whenever my router is rebooted, I have to re-setup admin/password settings, wifi settings, and such. So pretty much what I would consider a factory reset type state.
×
×
  • Create New...