Jump to content

Bat 'n' Ball

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bat 'n' Ball

  • Rank

Basic Info

  • Gender
  • DumaOS Routers Owned


  • Gamer Type
    PC Gamer
    Console Gamer
  • Favourite Genres
  • Connection Speed

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I seem to have sorted my problem 😀 I posted over in the Netgear forum but got no suggestions so I created a ticket. The guy’s in telephone support were good and methodical at trying to resolve the issue but suggested nothing which I hadn’t tried thus far. I’ve spent many hours trying to get this sorted so I just gave up and decided to suffer the relatively slow transfer speeds... Then, one day (I’m not trying to make this sound like a story, honest), I was pottering around on the PC and remembered there were some under-the-bonnet settings for my ethernet adapter which I could try. In Windows 10, it is: Right click Start Device Manager Network adapters Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller Advanced tab In the Property list, I selected Speed & Duplex. My Value was on Auto Negotiation. I assumed this was the default setting and it meant my devices would talk to each other and ‘negotiate’ the highest possible speeds. But I tried changing this to 1.0 Gbps Full Duplex and clicked OK. Guess what? Yup, speeds with my NAS connected directly to my XR500 went up to a, not too shoddy, 904Mbps down (0.904 Gigabit) and 875 up. Previous readings were 605Mbps down, 215 up. I then put Speed & Duplex back to Auto Negotiation and my speeds were still high! I presumed it was a driver glitch and looked on t' internet for a more recent driver. My old driver was released 2015 but I found a more recent ‘signed’ one for 2017 and installed that. What threw me is the fact that when I plugged my NAS directly into the PC, I got great speeds so why would I suspect the driver was to blame? Whether this was Auto Negotiation failing to ‘negotiate’ or not, I have no idea but I now have a shiny new driver installed and speeds are great. The real test was over Wi-Fi - my original dilemma... Speeds over 5GHz Wi-Fi are now 782Mbps down, 443 up. Previous readings were 400Mbps down, 45 up. To conclude, Wi-Fi write speeds have increased by almost half a Gig and read speeds are now approaching a Gig! Not bad for Wi-Fi 😎 The End.
  2. Hi Fraser, Thanks for your reply. I tried toggling the ‘Disable IGMP Proxying’ setting but no change. I’ve seen the setting before but am not particularly familiar with it. If my Google searches are correct, wouldn’t that setting just have an effect on WAN traffic? Would you happen to know what the default setting is for ‘Disable IGMP Proxying’? I can’t remember but I would like to put it back to the default checked/unchecked setting? Anyhoo, I’ll get in touch with Netgear and see what they have to say. I’ll point them towards this thread so they can brief themselves on the problem. If I get a resolution, I’ll post back to this thread for future reference.
  3. Hi Fraser, Thanks for your input. That seemingly simple test took three hours! Anyway, to cut a long story short, the results for the NAS connected directly to the XR500 via Cat7 cable in AP Mode are in! [drum roll and ridiculously long talent-show-type-wait…] 168mbps write / up 560mbps read / down I used Google for the MB - Mb conversions. Worse figures than when the NAS was connected directly to the XR500 and not in AP Mode! I’ll add that result onto the bottom of this table… NAS connected to XR500 via X4S D7800 in 5GHz Bridge Mode 45mbps up 400mbps down A difference of 355 NAS wired directly to XR500 215mbps up 605mbps down A difference of 390 NAS wired directly to PC 864mbps up 880mbps down A difference of 16 NAS wired directly to XR500 in AP Mode 168mbps up 560mbps down A difference of 392 Note, I did a factory reset of the XR500 prior to putting it into AP mode to avoid any existing configuration interfering with the tests but there seems to be a pattern emerging here… In all but one of those results, there ia a fairly steady difference between the up & down speeds of 350’ish to 390’ish. The only exception is when the XR500 is not in the loop. Then, there is only a negligible difference of 16mbps between the upload and download speeds. Even when my NAS directly wired to the XR500 with Cat 7 cable (and not in AP Mode), transfer speeds only ever achieved 605mbps download. Disappointing, considering all the ethernet ports are supposed to be 1 Gig 😐 Connected directly to the PC, I get speeds approaching 1 Gig either way, confirming my PC and NAS are both capable. But why do I never come close to those speeds when the XR500 is in the loop?
  4. Yes, as I mentioned in my original post, the bridge router (and the NAS connected to it) is approximately 8 meters away from the XR500. The Wi-Fi signal goes through a plasterboard partition wall, not brick. Brick might degrade the signal quite a bit but tests through the partition wall using a geeky Android app give very favorable results. Generally speaking, I know 5GHz is high throughput and short distance and 2.4GHz is high distance and low throughput but I’m not sure Wi-Fi is the real issue now… In a previous post, I noted that when I connect the NAS directly to the XR500, (thus removing Wi-Fi from the equation), i.e., PC <Ethernet cable> XR500 <Ethernet Cable> NAS There’s still a huge discrepancy with up/down speeds, even though everything is wired. If I go one step further and remove the XR500 from the link, i.e., PC <Ethernet cable>NAS I get pretty much 1 Gig speeds either direction.
  5. Hi Alex, Thanks for your reply. I have my XR500 set up with 2 specifically different SSID's so I can select the Wi-Fi band I want to use when connecting a new device. My Nighthawk X4S D7800 (the bridge router) is connected using the XR500's 5GHz SSID. i.e. 'mynetwork' (for2.4GHz) & 'mynetwork-5GHz' (for, err... 5GHz) 😀
  6. Hi Netduma Admin & acoop133, Thanks for your replies & happy new year! A few workstation specs: OS: Win 10 Pro Version 10.0.18363 Build 18363 Motherboard: GIGABYTE X58A-UD3R (rev. 2.0) SSD: OCZ Vertex3 240GB Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 950 @ 3.07GHz, 3060 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 8 Logical Processor(s) Ethernet: Realtek PCIe GbE Family Controller Not the newest of components but still very capable. Just tried the NAS connected directly to the PC with a Cat 7 cable. The transfer speeds with the same 1GB file are: Read 880mbps (about 10 seconds) Write 864mbps (about 10 seconds) Just short of 1 gig speeds both ways. Used Google for the conversions. So, NAS connected via 5GHz Bridge Mode - 45mbps up - 400mbps down - a difference of 355 NAS connected directly to XR500 - 215mbps up - 605mbps down - a difference of 390 NAS connected directly to PC - 864mbps up - 880mbps down - a difference of 16 I know this isn’t a controlled laboratory experiment, but from these figures I can see that there are big differences when the XR500 is in the loop (EDIT: Even when Wi-Fi is not being used). Generally this isn't a big issue for me, but it would be nice to get the same write speeds as I get with the read speeds over 5GHz Wi-Fi Bridge Mode, considering two high-end routers are being used.
  7. Hi Bert, Thanks for your reply. The two 4TB WD40EFRX drives I have inside the NAS are good for their intended purpose, i.e., NAS storage, but they are not the quietest drives in the world. The ‘ticking’ sound of the actuator arms moving back and forth would be a constant source of irritation to me in the living room (where my XR500 is), hence the NAS's exile to the spare bedroom. I paid around £200 GBP for 8TB of HDD storage. SSD’s would be nice because they are silent but I would need to sell a kidney to afford 8TB of SSD technology. Hard wiring my entire apartment with high-category cable is a project I have been contemplating for a while now and may come to fruition next year. But, for the time being, my only option for the NAS is Wi-Fi. In answer to your question, I’ve just tested the NAS plugged directly into my XR500 and the speeds I get with the same 1GB file as before are: 1GB file download, 605mbps, 15 seconds (notably not 1 Gig speeds) 1GB file upload, 215mbps, 50 seconds Predictably, the throughput speeds to the NAS are better when connected directly to the XR500, but there’s still a clear discrepancy between the up/down speeds. So, my assumption that Wi-Fi was to blame for slow upload is, (ahem!), wrong. Dependent on the 2020 hangover / consciousness, I will tomorrow try taking the XR500 out of the equation altogether and test the transfer speeds directly from PC to NAS. Hic…
  8. Hello, I have a Nighthawk XR500 router and a Nighthawk X4S D7800 router. For ease of reading, I’ll call the Nighthawk XR500 router ‘Router 1’ and the Nighthawk X4S D7800 router ‘Router 2’. Router 1 is my main router and handles pretty much all of my devices, including my Win 10 Desktop PC which is connected to it via ethernet cable. Router 2 is connected to Router 1 via its [5GHz] Wireless Bridge Mode feature. Router 2’s Link Rate (as reported by the Advanced >> Status page), is 1559mbps. Router 2 is approximately 8 meters away from Router 1 and the Wi-Fi signal goes through a plasterboard partition wall. Connected to Router 2 via an ethernet cable is a WD PR2100 NAS storage device. The files on the NAS are available on my PC from a mapped network drive. PC <Ethernet> Router 1 <5GHz> Router 2 <Ethernet> NAS Question: When transferring files to and from my NAS, why do I get massively different send and receive rates from my PC? Two examples are below: Downloading a 1GB file from my NAS to my PC comes through at a rate of 400mbps and takes about 25 seconds. Uploading a 1GB file back to the NAS from my PC sends at a rate of 45mbps and takes 3 minutes 50 seconds. Router 1’s 5GHz channel is 100(DFS) but I have tried other channels and also tried the 2.4GHz band with pretty much the same results. I realise a lot of stated Wi-Fi throughputs are theoretical figures. Router 2’s Link Rate is 1559mbps yet the most I can achieve is 400mbps. Don’t get me wrong, I’m very happy with 400mbps over Wi-Fi, but why can I not achieve the same rate when I send a file? Am I missing a blindingly obvious setting somewhere? Of course I'm assuming that Wi-Fi is the issue when it might not be, but I can't think of anything else. My PC ethernet has a 1Gig link to Router 1 and QoS is turned off. This isn’t a game-specific issue so I’m not sure whether to hop over to the Netgear forums or not, but it does involve the XR500 router so I’ll try here first. Thank you in advance for any suggestions and happy new year’s eve to all – fssst, glug 🍻
  9. It would be nice to see a Pinned [Sticky] post, through which the Admin's can mention when there was an update to the cloud last. It doesn't have to be open to discussion; just somewhere where we can look and check when the last update was. Like a firmware update Pinned post. As things stand, we have no idea if the cloud was last updated in the last day, week, month...
  10. I still have misplaced servers and dedicated servers showing as peer servers etc. I have reported a few via the mis located server form but things don't seem to be improving for COD MW at all. Today alone I found 13 mislocated servers!! All showing as central America but with a ping of 15 here in the UK. Central America would be more like 80 - 120'ish to me. ID Domain Name 961832fdb5356469 97189b66b5366469 9718d7a2b5366469 96180fdab5356469 9618efbab5356469 96187641b5356469 9618834eb5356469 9618dca7b5356469 9618c691b5356469 9618a873b5356469 961804cfb5356469 9718410cb5366469 96184611b5356469
  11. Hello, Do you know what your 'base ping' is? Or to put it another way, your lowest ping to the internet. If not, I'd suggest PingPlotter software (free), and ping to a server near you. If you don't know which servers are near you, just try pinging google.com and you should ping to the closest Google server for your location. Ping a few different locations near you to get a better idea of how low your ping can get. You can also just use the command prompt in Windows (click Start and type CMD), then enter: ping -n 10 bbc.co.uk Change 'bbc.co.uk' to a known server near you. The '-n 10' means ping the server 10 times - change the 10 to however many times you want to ping the server. Internet based ping utilities are available but the accuracy of them can be a bit dubious. The speedtest site https://www.speedtest.net/ is possibly about as accurate as you can get for an internet based ping test - just run a speed test and it should report your ping to a server (possibly) near you. If your lowest base ping to a server near you is, say 50ms, then you are unlikely to ever get lower than 50ms in the game. My base ping is around 10ms and the lowest in-game ping I get (as reported by my DumaOS router) is 11ms. But the Modern Warfare net-code/lag-compensation is a bit broken at the moment in my opinion. Lots of players are having a bad time. You could also try what I do and place your DumaOS home location in a different country altogether! Sometimes having a higher ping can give you a better gaming experience if the net-code goes in your favour. You'll need to restart the game every time you change your location. That's just a general observation I've made. If you test your internet connection on the PS4 and it says NAT Type 2, then that's good. All that means is that your PS4 is connecting to the internet via a router. A NAT Type 1 would mean your PS4 is connected directly to your modem. Ideally, in-game (bottom-left of the screen), your NAT Type should be reported as being Open, but not Moderate or Strict.
  12. The net-code/lag-comp in MW is broken in my opinion. You can have the best connection in the world and still have an infuriating online gaming experience. But the Geo-Filter is a selling feature of these routers. It is not working in MW at the moment, with little mention of updates or when it will be fixed.
  13. Good morning, It's been over a month since COD MW was released and there doesn't seem to be any change to the cloud as far as an update is concerned. I still have misplaced servers, dedicated servers showing as peer servers etc. I have reported a few via the mis located server form. While I’m on the subject, isn’t there a more elegant solution to this problem rather than relying on users having to report server inaccuracies? Servers with the domain names vultr.com, choopa.net, gameservers.com and amazonaws.com are four I have come across which seem to be dedicated servers being hosted from professional data centers. Can’t the cloud updates be tuned in some way to automatically identify a dedicated server by means domain name filtering?
  14. Before adding an XR500 to my hardware collection, I used to use HMA VPN to connect to US servers across the pond (via a DD-WRT-flashed router), primarily because EU servers tended to match me with continental European players who did not speak English - I like to communicate with players and I only speak English, hence the VPN usage. The chances of English-speaking players on an east coast US server was maybe 95%, as opposed to maybe 50-50 when playing on a European/UK server. I’ve generally been playing over a VPN for nearly 10 years! My ping to a US VPN server on the east coast from the UK was around 72ms; not bad at all considering the distance. The in-game ping would generally go up due to the extra hop from the VPN server to the game server but despite the relatively high latency of 72ms and above, vs a closer European server, I found that the lag comp generally went in my favor. I now use my XR500 to change my home location rather than use a VPN but if anyone is interested, ProtonVPN is free and works with the Hybrid VPN feature of DumaOS. You need to paste your credentials into the Advanced tab of your router VPN section. https://protonvpn.com/ After many, many tests over the years, some quite complicated ones involving Windows ICS and specialised Connection Emulator software to artificially invoke lag to the connection etc., as with you ‘ugotstretched’, I tend to have the opinion that the better my connection, the worse my gaming experience is. This is not definitive; it’s just a general observation which I’ve made over the years of playing COD. Most serious gamers pay for the best connection they can afford and therefore this is fundamentally wrong. Lag compensation algorithms/netcode should not chastise a gamer with an excellent connection. I’m a fair player BTW and I never ‘tinker’ with my connection in order to gain an unfair advantage. I’m quite satisfied to lose to a better team, but when I am going game after game with hardly any kills and I see a player on the other side seemingly in ‘god mode’ whom nobody can touch, with 30/0 KD, I will go out of my way to figure out what is going on. I never used to take much notice of the kill-cam replay’s because what you see on your screen and what the other player sees on their screen are two different things. But what you do see with the replay, is what the server itself saw, not what you or the other player saw. It can sometimes hint as to what is going on with the lag comp. Online gaming can seem infinitely complicated sometimes if you are an avid gamer. I often spend more time changing settings than I do playing. I don’t mind experimenting but wouldn’t it be nice to just sit down and have a fair game without having to worry about settings!?
  15. I've just checked this a few times... Blocking a dedicated server with a peer icon and a peer host type during a MW game does nothing at all. I can continue to play the entire session. There is no 2 minute delay. Blocking a dedicated server with a dedicated square icon during a game boots me out of the game within about 5 or so seconds.
  • Create New...