The results are not at all invalid, but it should be noted that the reviewer's SMB tests were performed using a third party (i.e., not Microsoft) implementation of SMB, and is using the older SMB 1 protocol, when we know that SMB 2.0 offers vastly improved performance, especially over links with latency or packet loss.
SMB 1.0 is certainly inefficient, but SMB 2.0 is much improved. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin > Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [H] Building a wireless network to support video streaming > > yep. Kinda sad for SMB, though. Why not go NFS? 300% is pretty serious. > > On 6/13/2011 8:59 AM, Brian Weeden wrote: > > A lot depends on the protocol. Check out the stats posted in the most > > recent Amazon review for this Netgear powerline adapter: > > > > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004DVEW8I/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?i > e=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER > > > > Quite a huge difference between file transfers using SMB and NFS. It is > > really making me consider going with NFS when I rebuild my media server. > > > > > > --- > > Brian > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Anthony Q. > Martin<[email protected]>wrote: > > > >> I'm currently copying a 13GB recording of Dancing with the Stars that I > >> grabbed off of my TIVO. I'm just doing a file copy in windows, mind you, > >> from my PC upstairs to my laptop downstairs. The laptop is on the > powerline > >> network. > >> > >> I'm getting a sustained 5.67 MB/s...roughly 45 Mbps file copy. > >> > >> I believe that most HD streaming can be done with that > bandwidth....anyone > >> know for sure? I'm not sure that HD streaming is the same as a simple file > >> copy, also. > >> > >> > >> On 6/13/2011 7:56 AM, Anthony Q. Martin wrote: > >> > >>> Simple. Use a port of the back of your router...cable from there to an > >>> adapter...plug into a power socket...now your network is put into the > power > >>> lines in your house...then plug another adapter near the location where > you > >>> need Ethernet connectivity...then use a cable from that adapter to your > >>> device. Bingo. > >>> > >>> The netgear AV kit i mentioned gives you a little box that has 4 ports on > >>> the back...so, with that, you can connect upto four devices on that one > >>> line...so you are in effect sharing that pipe...not a problem in a living > >>> room as you typically only use one or two devices at a time. WD kits are > a > >>> bit different in terms of how they make the adapters and port > arrangements, > >>> but they work the same way. Since they devices are Homeplug > compatible (the > >>> homeplug spec), you can use them together. So right now, I have a > netgear AV > >>> kit (with the 4-port in downstairs at the other end of the house). And > I'm > >>> using one adapter from the WD kit upstairs in another room. I just plug > the > >>> adapter into a power socket and plug an Ethernet cable into the device > and > >>> am good to go. > >>> > >>> All of your wireless stuff exists outside of this...this is just an > >>> extension of your Ethernet over the powerlines inside your house. Dirt > >>> simple. > >>> > >>> The gotchas are 1) you probably wont' get the speed ratings listed on > the > >>> box. But as others has said, if your house wiring is ok you can stream > >>> 1080p. 2) It is possible that other devices that hook into your power > system > >>> could spew crap onto your powerlines and thus ruin your data rates. I > have > >>> not noticed this in my house, but it might be possible. 3) your house > might > >>> have crappy powerlines...or things on different circuits that so that > there > >>> isn't a good signal path between your sockets, so you might have to > >>> experiment with which sockets you use. Also, the instructions all say > never > >>> to plug the adapter into a powerstrip or surge protector. I have ignore > >>> that and have always found it to work. Oh, one more advantage of > powerline > >>> is that it is travel friendly...when I go to my mom's house I take my WD > >>> powerline kit because her wireless wont reach from front to back of her > >>> house. Powerline solves this instantly and they don't even know I > plugged it > >>> in. > >>> > >>> The netgear and WD kits I have now claim 200 Mbps, but I think those > are > >>> bi-directional rates, so expect 100 Mbps (max) one way. That's like 12 > >>> MB/s. So, in terms of bytes, expect that to be best case, ideal world > >>> performance. If you can get 4 or 5 MB/s, then you should be good. The > main > >>> advantage over wireless is that once you determine that this system > works in > >>> your house, you get consistent performance...no drop outs, no weather > >>> related slow downs, no competition from neighbors, etc. > >>> > >>> I just ordered netgear's 500 Mbps kit. I want it has fast as possible > >>> because that is shared bandwidth to that box...and I might later want to > add > >>> a new receiver with networking features and Google TV is supposed to > upgrade > >>> to Honeycomb this summer, so I want all the goodness I can get. So, one > I > >>> get this, I'll test it out hard...they have 30-day return with a restock > >>> fee, so if I see no speed increase I will send it back. I think paying the > >>> restock fee is worth it. > >>> > >>> BTW, downstairs I have Tivo, two Blu-ray players, and google TV all > >>> connected up with the AV kit. It's a good think my TV down there > doesn't do > >>> internet, or I'd have to get some other port. Of course, I don't really > need > >>> all that, as a lot of functionality is duplicated (how many different ways > >>> can you watch netflix???). > >>> > >>> Aside: BTW, how many different ways can list members stream netflix? > >>> Anyone ever done a count like that? > >>> > >>> Anyway, you can read up a bit and add to the collective knowledge. As I > >>> said, I posted on this list the kinds of transfer rates I was getting when I > >>> first when powerline. Before that, folks here were a bit indifferent to > >>> powerline. the tech has improved (thank goodness). Running real > Cat5/6 is > >>> still your best option, but this is becoming a close second and in terms > of > >>> ease of use& WAF in an existing house, might be best. > >>> > >>> On 6/13/2011 2:32 AM, Brian Weeden wrote: > >>> > >>>> So how does the powerline stuff work? Do you need a special > powerline > >>>> router that does both wireless and the wired? Can you have > everything on > >>>> the same network? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --- > >>>> Brian > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 9:07 PM,<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I would definitely do powerline. It I've used the wd av, and handled > >>>>> bd > >>>>> iso. No way will that happen over any wireless > >>>>> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: Brian Weeden<[email protected]> > >>>>> Sender: [email protected] > >>>>> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 21:06:21 > >>>>> To:<[email protected]> > >>>>> Reply-To: [email protected] > >>>>> Subject: Re: [H] Building a wireless network to support video > streaming > >>>>> > >>>>> Completely agree that wired is better. But as I said, in this case I > >>>>> probably don't have a choice. With two toddlers running around (1 > and 3 > >>>>> years old) I can't really afford to have cables lying around everywhere. > >>>>> So > >>>>> it's either powerline or Wifi. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks for the tips on the Powerline - I'll look into it. You say you > >>>>> have > >>>>> had good experience with it? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> Brian > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Anthony Q. > Martin<[email protected] > >>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Here is the Amazon product: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.amazon.com/review/R1RFORI4QGV7UE/ref=cm_cr_dp_cmt?ie= > UTF8&ASIN=B004PA9PBQ&nodeID=172282&tag=&linkCode=#wasThisHelpful > >>>>> > >>>>>> Note the reviewer claim they stream HD (whatever that means). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 6/12/2011 6:45 PM, Brian Weeden wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Next month we're moving to a new house, one that we will be > renting > >>>>>>> for > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> few years. I'm looking at how to stream content from our home > media > >>>>>>> server > >>>>>>> around the house. It looks like running LAN cables will not be an > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> option > >>>>>> so > >>>>>>> we will have to do it wirelessly > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> We will be streaming everything from 480p xvid to 1080p Blu Ray > rips, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> but > >>>>>> generally to no more than one device at a time (perhaps worst case > two, > >>>>>>> although not likely both 1080p). My initial thought is to setup two > >>>>>>> separate Wifi networks - one on 5 Ghz dedicated to the HTPCs and > media > >>>>>>> server, and a separate 2.4 Ghz network for everything else. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Has anyone tried that before and run into problems? I think I can > >>>>>>> still > >>>>>>> have all the devices on both networks on the same LAN as long as > they > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> are > >>>>>> all on the same subnet, right? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>> Brian > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>
