xymox

LOL... Wow.. Your not the brightest bulb in the shed.. You know right im guy who forced Intel to admit there are still issues right, developing tests with pingplotter no one had done before ? You know im the guy quoted in press on this issue right  https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/03/intel_puma_chipset_firmware_fix/Im the guy in the class action lawsuit who did the tests, you know that right ? http://badmodems.com/Files/arriscomplaint.pdf
 
You know Intel has OFFICIALLY acknowledged there is still a issue with Puma 5/6/7 right https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31122204-SB6190-Puma6-TCP-UDP-Network-Latency-Issue-Discussion~start=5788
 
Im not sure you could find anyone on the internet more versed on this issue besides me. WELL,, Its been a team effort of course with a core set of people on DSLR.
 
And NOOOO to answer your question, ONLY Intel modems have issues with .3.. I do all my testing at 0.05. 100 pings a second is a good temporal resolution. I have chart after chart showing modems going back 15 years that do this just fine..
 
Here im doing a direct A/B with a 14 YEAR OLD DOCSIS 2 modem at 0.1 THREE TIMES FASTER THEN .3. I swap modems in the middle of the graph.

The fix you got WAS significant however. It fixed DNS lookups. Your old version of firmware lost 7-15% of ALL dns look ups. This was terrible. Thats fixed now.
 
What this update did tho was HIDE the spikes so you cant see them with ICMP Ping and common tools based on ping.
 
You need a Broadcom based modem.

I would call it cosmetic. I would know.
 
You have your Pingplotter set for ICMP.. This is a mistake.. It needs to be set for TCP. AIm it at google.com and set the interval for 0.05... And the spike will be very clear indeed..
 
You see... There is no Intel Puma, 5,6 or 7 that has been fixed in any country in the world on any ISP..
 
The press looks to me for updates on this matter. So I can be considered a verifiable reference.
 
For gaming, EVERY MODEM ON THIS LIST SHOULD BE CONSIDERED CRAP UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. http://badmodems.com/Forum/app.php/badmodems
 
I have a web site and it has a "is it fixed" link I will update once a version of firmware is available that might, or might not, fix the issue. http://badmodems.com/
 
This video shows the most recent firmware and has TCP and ICMP pingplotters running at the same time.

Your very welcome. I will send you my email in PM if you want to discuss any subject

I respect your decision. But from a testing standpoint, the SB8200 *might* be one of the best gaming modems ever made. I stress *might*..

Intel Puma based devices are currently crap. They *might* be fixable. However thats looking pretty doubtful. Would I personally EVER use them for gaming - hellz no..
 
I do, respectfully, disagree with some of the modems listed on this site as bad however. But. I defer to someone who has direct testing experience with the device being used, the Netduma. So I am staying neutral. This is a list of known good modems, tested and supported with the Netduma. Im great with that approach. However I think the list could well expand to include Arris devices Like the SB8200. The SB8200 has the lowest latency ive ever tested and the lowest jitter. However, I suppose there might be some weirdness with the Netduma and the modem. However I use Mikrotik CCR1036 so I use RouterOS and it works awesome with the SB8200.

Or maybe you prefer to look at a mode modern modem test... Here is a SB8200. TCP. at 0.1 for 12 hours... Not a spike in sight.
 

LOL... Wow.. Your not the brightest bulb in the shed.. You know right im guy who forced Intel to admit there are still issues right, developing tests with pingplotter no one had done before ? You know im the guy quoted in press on this issue right  https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/03/intel_puma_chipset_firmware_fix/Im the guy in the class action lawsuit who did the tests, you know that right ? http://badmodems.com/Files/arriscomplaint.pdf
 
You know Intel has OFFICIALLY acknowledged there is still a issue with Puma 5/6/7 right https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31122204-SB6190-Puma6-TCP-UDP-Network-Latency-Issue-Discussion~start=5788
 
Im not sure you could find anyone on the internet more versed on this issue besides me. WELL,, Its been a team effort of course with a core set of people on DSLR.
 
And NOOOO to answer your question, ONLY Intel modems have issues with .3.. I do all my testing at 0.05. 100 pings a second is a good temporal resolution. I have chart after chart showing modems going back 15 years that do this just fine..
 
Here im doing a direct A/B with a 14 YEAR OLD DOCSIS 2 modem at 0.1 THREE TIMES FASTER THEN .3. I swap modems in the middle of the graph.

LOL... Wow.. Your not the brightest bulb in the shed.. You know right im guy who forced Intel to admit there are still issues right, developing tests with pingplotter no one had done before ? You know im the guy quoted in press on this issue right  https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/03/intel_puma_chipset_firmware_fix/Im the guy in the class action lawsuit who did the tests, you know that right ? http://badmodems.com/Files/arriscomplaint.pdf
 
You know Intel has OFFICIALLY acknowledged there is still a issue with Puma 5/6/7 right https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31122204-SB6190-Puma6-TCP-UDP-Network-Latency-Issue-Discussion~start=5788
 
Im not sure you could find anyone on the internet more versed on this issue besides me. WELL,, Its been a team effort of course with a core set of people on DSLR.
 
And NOOOO to answer your question, ONLY Intel modems have issues with .3.. I do all my testing at 0.05. 100 pings a second is a good temporal resolution. I have chart after chart showing modems going back 15 years that do this just fine..
 
Here im doing a direct A/B with a 14 YEAR OLD DOCSIS 2 modem at 0.1 THREE TIMES FASTER THEN .3. I swap modems in the middle of the graph.

LOL... Wow.. Your not the brightest bulb in the shed.. You know right im guy who forced Intel to admit there are still issues right, developing tests with pingplotter no one had done before ? You know im the guy quoted in press on this issue right  https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/03/intel_puma_chipset_firmware_fix/Im the guy in the class action lawsuit who did the tests, you know that right ? http://badmodems.com/Files/arriscomplaint.pdf
 
You know Intel has OFFICIALLY acknowledged there is still a issue with Puma 5/6/7 right https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31122204-SB6190-Puma6-TCP-UDP-Network-Latency-Issue-Discussion~start=5788
 
Im not sure you could find anyone on the internet more versed on this issue besides me. WELL,, Its been a team effort of course with a core set of people on DSLR.
 
And NOOOO to answer your question, ONLY Intel modems have issues with .3.. I do all my testing at 0.05. 100 pings a second is a good temporal resolution. I have chart after chart showing modems going back 15 years that do this just fine..
 
Here im doing a direct A/B with a 14 YEAR OLD DOCSIS 2 modem at 0.1 THREE TIMES FASTER THEN .3. I swap modems in the middle of the graph.