# It's WAY past time for a Wireless 802.11n adapter!!



## routerspecialist (Jun 19, 2008)

After all, it's 2008 (almost 2009)! If you try and transfer an HD recording via even the fastest speeds with the existing Tivo adapter, it's a nightmare.....it takes longer than it would take to record the show on the second Tivo.

How do we get Tivo to realize that it's time to release a 802.11n wireless adapter?

BTW, the standard is only months from approval....the Intel 802.11n wireless chip is standard in most laptops, nics, etc., and has been out for a year....


----------



## lofar (Mar 21, 2008)

routerspecialist said:


> After all, it's 2008 (almost 2009)! If you try and transfer an HD recording via even the fastest speeds with the existing Tivo adapter, it's a nightmare.....it takes longer than it would take to record the show on the second Tivo.
> 
> How do we get Tivo to realize that it's time to release a 802.11n wireless adapter?
> 
> BTW, the standard is only months from approval....the Intel 802.11n wireless chip is standard in most laptops, nics, etc., and has been out for a year....


I don't think it has anything to do with your wireless speed. The tivo transfers are just slow... I have my tivos connected via 100mbps LAN and HD recordings baerly transfer in real time.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

S3 & THD unit transfers are limited more by CPU than by ethernet speeds, especially for TTG. TTG on THD units seem to max out close to 10-12 Mbps even on wired Gigabit networks, S3 units are a little better. Having said that transitioning away from wireless in favor of MOCA was a big improvement for me for MRV. I can get 30+ Mbps between S3 units that I was never able to achieve with wireless.


----------



## routerspecialist (Jun 19, 2008)

Are you talking about something using coax of some sort? Or do you mean wired ethernet?

Quote:
_...Having said that transitioning away from wireless in favor of MOCA...._


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

routerspecialist said:


> Are you talking about something using coax of some sort? Or do you mean wired ethernet?
> 
> Quote:
> _...Having said that transitioning away from wireless in favor of MOCA...._


 IP over coax. Where I live there is coax wired pretty much to every room but not cat5, so MOCA is the next best thing to wired ethernet for my situation. See the following thread for many more details:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=379206&highlight=nim100
For my network testing between 2 comptuers I got 90 Mbps over ethernet vs. 80 Mbps using MOCA and less than 25 Mbps using 802.11g. An Apple Airport 802.11n bridge actually turned out worse than my 802.11g tests so I ended up giving up on wireless for good performance.
More details can be found in the above thread.


----------



## DallasFlier (Jan 23, 2003)

routerspecialist said:


> It's WAY past time for a Wireless 802.11n adapter!!
> 
> BTW, the standard is only months from approval....


Look closely at those two statements of yours in juxtaposition. That just might explain why TiVo hasn't introduced one yet, and why its not WAY past time, when the standard isn't even finalized yet! 

I'm sure, with a name like "routerspecialist" that you're fully equipped at home with (Pre)802.11n, but I bet the penetration of (Pre)802.11n in the market is still very low.


----------



## TishTash (Jan 24, 2008)

routerspecialist said:


> After all, it's 2008 (almost 2009)! If you try and transfer an HD recording via even the fastest speeds with the existing Tivo adapter, it's a nightmare. ... It takes longer than it would take to record the show on the second adapter.
> 
> How do we get Tivo to realize that it's time to release a 802.11n wireless adapter?


I don't believe the bottleneck is the 802.11g wireless adapter; I think the bottleneck is the TiVo. I say this because I used to have two HDs _hardwired_ into the router, and it did little to improve transfer rates; in fact, 802.11g transfer rates were so close to comparable that it was the main reason I went wireless with both HDs.

Given this, I don't think 802.11n would improve things much. I do know the defunct Series 3 did transfer at a significantly higher rate, so 802.11n may benefit that (rare) setup, but it probably wouldn't help out with the HD or HD XL.

Now if you want to bark about TiVos not transferring things--esp. HD material--fast enough themselves, I concur wholeheartedly.


----------



## socrplyr (Jul 19, 2006)

First off, don't take from what I am posting that I don't think that Tivo should come out with an 802.11n adapter, because I do. I just think that it is unlikely for the following reasons.

1) You will likely not see any increased performance from an 11n adapter, unless you currently have a weak signal. The current adapter is capable of running at very close to the speeds available to the ethernet port, when there is a good signal.
2) 802.11n is not a complete standard yet. I am sure Tivo is likely to stay out of it until it is, that way they don't have to waste time changing the code for it later.
3) 802.11n isn't really all that it is cracked up to be. In general it gives faster speeds when you are close (might as well of wired in then). And it does allow an extension of range a bit as well. But you will not get anywhere near the faster speeds at a distance.
4) Tivo is picky about the chipset for the wired adapters in order to offload as much work as possible. Maybe they haven't found one that meets their requirements yet.

Down the road for all electronics manufacturers, I think the best thing that the can do is powerline ethernet. Think if the Tivo had an adapter built in you wouldn't have to have any extra adapters or cables and worry as much about distance and such. In this fantasy world your router would have one built in as well. So can your computer and stereo. And heck your refrigerator could have it too (if you could come up with a viable reason why you would want that).


----------



## routerspecialist (Jun 19, 2008)

So, after I posted a while back about pushing Tivo to get out a 802.11n adapter, I finally just gave up and worked it out to get some Ethernet drops.

I think you all might want to know the results.

With hard wired Ethernet, I CAN access another Tivo not in the same room, watch a show, blip past the commercials with no lags. I was NEVER able to do this with 802.11g. My Ethernet drops cost $120 for two, and I sold my two Tivo wireless adapters for ~$70.

I'm getting about 32 Mb transfer rate between the two Tivos, which is just fast enough to do this.

As for 802.11n: all of my network is 802.11n now, and I'm getting transfer rates far above 802.11g. But not from Tivo to Tivo, of course, as Tivo does not produce a 802.11n adapter. It is true, at least from my experience, that Tivo HDs and Series 3s don't have the ability to transfer much above ~32 Mb, which is too bad. 

But still, it is possible to get to what I really wanted all along; a real non-lag ability to view shows in the bedroom from a living room Tivo.

My take on this as well is that a well configured 802.11n network and well designed Tivo 802.11n adapter WILL provide enough bandwidth to do this kind of viewing. Non-lag real time viewing remotely, with commercial skips.


----------



## fyodor (Sep 19, 2006)

You could also just get an 802.11n ethernet bridge/gaming adapter. I think that there are a few on the market.

I have MoCA adapters, which are perfect for Tivos, since you have to have coax in the room anywhere. I even added one to my home office, which doesn't really need super-fast access, because the convenience and reliability are so high.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

routerspecialist said:


> After all, it's 2008 (almost 2009)! If you try and transfer an HD recording via even the fastest speeds with the existing Tivo adapter, it's a nightmare.....it takes longer than it would take to record the show on the second Tivo.
> 
> How do we get Tivo to realize that it's time to release a 802.11n wireless adapter?
> 
> BTW, the standard is only months from approval....the Intel 802.11n wireless chip is standard in most laptops, nics, etc., and has been out for a year....


Maybe when they officially ratify 802.11n. The last I heard they were looking at the end of 2009 for ratification.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

fyodor said:


> You could also just get an 802.11n ethernet bridge/gaming adapter. I think that there are a few on the market.
> 
> I have MoCA adapters, which are perfect for Tivos, since you have to have coax in the room anywhere. I even added one to my home office, which doesn't really need super-fast access, because the convenience and reliability are so high.


You can get a Dlink DAP-1522. It can be used as a wirless bridge with 4 gigabit ports available for devices or as an access point with three gigabit ports available for devices. I have three of these now and they work very well.
Plus they will work with either 2.4Ghz or 5Ghz(although not concurrently)


----------



## routerspecialist (Jun 19, 2008)

Well, for others, they might want to consider that, or a MoCA adapter. I've got what I needed by using hard wired Ethernet.

I think, as I stated when I posted originally, that it's way past time for Tivo to release a 802.11n wireless adapter. For pete's sake, it ain't rocket science.



aaronwt said:


> You can get a Dlink DAP-1522. It can be used as a wirless bridge with 4 gigabit ports available for devices or as an access point with three gigabit ports available for devices. I have three of these now and they work very well.
> Plus they will work with either 2.4Ghz or 5Ghz(although not concurrently)


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

routerspecialist said:


> Well, for others, they might want to consider that, or a MoCA adapter. I've got what I needed by using hard wired Ethernet.
> 
> I think, as I stated when I posted originally, that it's way past time for Tivo to release a 802.11n wireless adapter. For pete's sake, it ain't rocket science.


In the context of tivo applications there is little evidence a 802.11n adapter would provide any improvements (other then some potential range/interference issues).

The tivo adapter actually does some processing on the adapter. The tivo CPU isn't very powerful.

Many (most?) adapters don't even offer linux drivers. Companies have been known to change their chipset. Meaning tivo would have a driver that works with some versions of an adapter but not others. That means tivo would have to design a new adapter, for a standard that's not even official. An adapter that would be more expensive then a G. An adapter that will show little or no improvement with transfers.

You're right. It's not rocket science. This is a no go (for now). It might make more sense to build a unit with built in MoCa.

People who want wireless n can just purchase a wireless game adapter/bridge.


----------



## JoeTaxpayer (Dec 23, 2008)

moyekj said:


> I can get 30+ Mbps between S3 units that I was never able to achieve with wireless.


Indeed, I just moved a 2.0GB show from one S3 to the other to test the speed. 8 minutes. That divides to 33Mbps, wired. So I'm right with you. This was a 2 hour low def show. With one hour high def maxing at about 8GB, it would take 32 min or so to move, so still faster than real time. Not bad.


----------



## bkdtv (Jan 9, 2003)

JoeTaxpayer said:


> Indeed, I just moved a 2.0GB show from one S3 to the other to test the speed. 8 minutes. That divides to 33Mbps, wired. So I'm right with you. This was a 2 hour low def show. With one hour high def maxing at about 8GB, it would take 32 min or so to move, so still faster than real time. Not bad.


Note recent versions of the TiVo software have a transfer history screen with details on the last last programs transferred to and from the DVR. This can be found under Messages & Settings -> Settings -> Phone & Network -> View network diagnostics -> Transfer history.


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

If you really wanted the absolute fastest speed then the best bet would be a recipe including -
ax88178 Wired USB adapter 
enabled jumbo frames
Backport drivers to support the previous two items
Kernel with netfilter turned off
Jumbo frame enabled switch

If you don't want to hack the TiVo and insist on wireless then a DD-WRT capable 802.11N router configured as a bridge would be the next step though you are still CPU bound on the TiVo. 802.11G wireless will probably restrict the speed unless you have 100&#37; signal strength at both ends.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

JoeTaxpayer said:


> Indeed, I just moved a 2.0GB show from one S3 to the other to test the speed. 8 minutes. That divides to 33Mbps, wired. So I'm right with you. This was a 2 hour low def show. With one hour high def maxing at about 8GB, it would take 32 min or so to move, so still faster than real time. Not bad.


 One lesser known fact about Tivo MRV is that with optimum network configuration (wired) HD video transfer rates are slower than SD video transfer rates, so when testing speeds it's important to know/specify what kind of program was transferred.
i.e. If you transfer a 2 GB HD program it will transfer slower than a 2 GB SD program. Not exactly sure why that is the case for MRV.


----------



## JoeTaxpayer (Dec 23, 2008)

moyekj said:


> One lesser known fact about Tivo MRV is that with optimum network configuration (wired) HD video transfer rates are slower than SD video transfer rates, so when testing speeds it's important to know/specify what kind of program was transferred.
> i.e. If you transfer a 2 GB HD program it will transfer slower than a 2 GB SD program. Not exactly sure why that is the case for MRV.


I just moved a 10 minute 2GB (HD of course) show and it transfered in under 4 minutes. I need to run some more experiments to see what's up, this went a bit more than twice as fast as the other file.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

routerspecialist said:


> It is true, at least from my experience, that Tivo HDs and Series 3s don't have the ability to transfer much above ~32 Mb, which is too bad.


Then again, maybe not:


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> Then again, maybe not


Do it again but use a cross over cable this time!


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

My guess is there aren't enough tivo's being sold to justify having a g and a n adapter. I suspect tivo will replace the existing g adapter with a n adapter. That will only happen when the chipset is cheap enough so tivo can market the adapter for a similar price to the current adapter. Maybe a chipset that's close enough to the current chipset so a major driver rewrite isn't needed. There is only a real need when a significant number of tivo customers have upgraded to n.

Those people who want to use n NOW can purchase a n bridge or gaming adapter.


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

lew said:


> That will only happen when the chipset is cheap enough so tivo can market the adapter for a similar price to the current adapter.


Or when 802.11n is ratified. I doubt they want to support a "beta" network standard.


----------



## JoeTaxpayer (Dec 23, 2008)

lrhorer said:


> Then again, maybe not:


I just found that page, My incoming is 41.5Mbs, Outgoing 32.61Mbs. Either way, much faster than real time.


----------



## steinercat (Nov 16, 2007)

I just want N for the simple reason that I can get my entire wireless network on N, without having to go "N & G" just because of the TiVO.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

ciper said:


> Do it again but use a cross over cable this time!


Huh? I don't follow.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

JoeTaxpayer said:


> I just found that page, My incoming is 41.5Mbs, Outgoing 32.61Mbs. Either way, much faster than real time.


Yep. It's odd the two are not closer to being symmetrical, though. Are the two TiVos different models?


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> Huh? I don't follow.


Transfer the shows again using a cross over cable and take a screenshot.



steinercat said:


> I just want N for the simple reason that I can get my entire wireless network on N, without having to go "N & G" just because of the TiVO.


OCD much?


----------



## JoeTaxpayer (Dec 23, 2008)

lrhorer said:


> Yep. It's odd the two are not closer to being symmetrical, though. Are the two TiVos different models?


No, they are both S3 units, both hardwired ethernet. Could have been other stuff going on at the time, the lower speed may have been when something else was happening.

This would be an interesting experiment:
Restart both boxes to wipe transfer history.
Transfer from A to B with 
1) nothing else happening
2) one show recording
3) two recording
4) two recording plus one being watched

I don't know how involved the processor is in reading data, is there a separate chip that reads/writes to the drive to insure no missed data? Or does my experiment (4) really tax the main CPU and slow stuff down?

And a restart in between to keep the reports clean. When I'm very bored I'll try this.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

lrhorer said:


> Yep. It's odd the two are not closer to being symmetrical, though. Are the two TiVos different models?


 Not really odd as different programs transfer at different rates. HD transfers have a slower transfer rate than SD in my experience.
JoeTaxpayer, you should add SD vs HD testing to your list.


----------



## steinercat (Nov 16, 2007)

ciper said:


> Transfer the shows again using a cross over cable and take a screenshot.
> 
> OCD much?


Sure..whatever.

Transfer speeds on my router take a hit when I have to use a mixed G and N environment.

2 Macs and 2 Pcs.

Transfer rates are always better if I'm only on N.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

ciper said:


> Transfer the shows again using a cross over cable and take a screenshot.


Why would I use a crossover cable? At 100M speeds, the Gig switch I am using will produce the same throughput as a crossover cable. In any case, I do not have a crossover cable anywhere nearly long enough, and since I am partially disabled, moving one of them is far too much trouble for the minuscule benefit. More importantly, the significant metric is not how fast the units can transfer under laboratory conditions but rather how fast they transfer under real world conditions.


----------



## ciper (Nov 4, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> Why would I use a crossover cable?


For fun? To set the bar at its highest point? No other reason


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

steinercat said:


> I just want N for the simple reason that I can get my entire wireless network on N, without having to go "N & G" just because of the TiVO.


I would want everything wirless N at 5Ghz. I currently run wireless G at 2.4Ghz and wireless N at 5Ghz. But I also have a Wii and a couple of Zunes that require wireless G.
The Wireless N at 5Ghz is much faster than when I was using it at 2.4Ghz.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

cipher said:


> Transfer the shows again using a cross over cable and take a screenshot.


I haven't used a device that needed a crossover cable since the last century. Speeds would be the same anyway whether using a crossover or straight through cable since the device will auto negotiate for either one.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> I haven't used a device that needed a crossover cable since the last century. Speeds would be the same anyway whether using a crossover or straight through cable since the device will auto negotiate for either one.


I suspect the poster was suggesting using a crossover cable to connect directly from the tivo to a computer (bypassing the router).


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

lew said:


> I suspect the poster was suggesting using a crossover cable to connect directly from the tivo to a computer (bypassing the router).


Well, none of the devices attach to a router, in any case. All of them attach to Gigabit switches with Gig links between the 2 outboard switches and the main switch in the server room. Transferring a 12.04 Mbps 10801i HD program 2 hours 32 minutes long from the Video Server to one of the S3 TiVos averaged 19.64 Mbps. Transferring between the two S3 TiVos came in at 45.11 Mbps. That's nearly a 17% improvement in the TTCB speeds and over a 12% improvement on the MRV speed compared with pre-V11 speeds.


----------



## candewish (Jan 26, 2009)

1) Does anyone have experience with tivo-tivo transfers via
802.11n bridges (tivo ethernet<-->wireless n, e.g. D-link DAP-1522s)?
If so, what sort of transfer rates do you get and what bridges
do you use?

2) Fundamental 802.11 question - is it possible to use 802.11n
routers to do P2P between the routers yet also access
a WAN (Internet) through a third 802.11n router? (related
to question 1, in the event the tivo-tivo transfer through
a central access point significantly slows communications)


----------



## CuriousMark (Jan 13, 2005)

candewish said:


> 2) Fundamental 802.11 question - is it possible to use 802.11n
> routers to do P2P between the routers yet also access
> a WAN (Internet) through a third 802.11n router? (related
> to question 1, in the event the tivo-tivo transfer through
> a central access point significantly slows communications)


If the routers provide a Wireless Distributed System (WDS) mode, then yes. I don't know of any N equipment that offers such, save possibly the Apple units, but my old Belkin G units do and wireless between my computer and one DVR goes through one of the WDS bridges without even going to the main router, so it works the way you would want and expect it to.


----------



## candewish (Jan 26, 2009)

CuriousMark said:


> If the routers provide a Wireless Distributed System (WDS) mode, then yes. I don't know of any N equipment that offers such, save possibly the Apple units, but my old Belkin G units do and wireless between my computer and one DVR goes through one of the WDS bridges without even going to the main router, so it works the way you would want and expect it to.


Terrific info. If you discover this capabililty in any 802.11n routers,
please post it here. It would take a major remodel for many TiVo
users to run Cat5 or -6 wire to all of the rooms that may involve
computers and AV equipment, so our only hope is wireless. With
802.11n currently being boosted to 450 Mbps, it holds great hope
for timely transfers of HD video files.


----------



## bohbot16 (Sep 22, 2008)

All of the latest Apple equipment (Express, Extreme, Time Capsule) offers WDS over 802.11n.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

bohbot16 said:


> All of the latest Apple equipment (Express, Extreme, Time Capsule) offers WDS over 802.11n.


 I think at least for early versions of firmware if you used WDS then it would revert to 802.11g, but hopefully that is no longer the case.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

candewish said:


> Terrific info. If you discover this capabililty in any 802.11n routers,
> please post it here. It would take a major remodel for many TiVo
> users to run Cat5 or -6 wire to all of the rooms that may involve
> computers and AV equipment, so our only hope is wireless. With
> ...


MoCA is an alternate solution.


----------



## routerspecialist (Jun 19, 2008)

candewish said:


> 1) Does anyone have experience with tivo-tivo transfers via
> 802.11n bridges (tivo ethernet<-->wireless n, e.g. D-link DAP-1522s)?
> If so, what sort of transfer rates do you get and what bridges
> do you use?
> ...


Well, sure. With wireless you could do what's called ad-hoc mode, which would essentially be p2p, but not with the current Tivo wireless adapters (they're really weak in terms of functions). However, with wireless protocols they're still going to communicate as if they are on shared media, and that means lower throughput.

You can do this adhoc mode with most wireless adapters. But not on Tivo's wireless adapters.

But my throughput with 802.11n is well over 40 Mbs two way, 802.11n to 802.11n device. That's pretty decent, especially so given that all wireless protocols share collision and broadcast domains....(wireless devices also use csma/ca which is slower than standard shared media ethernets csma/cd). If you want faster than that, you need to do wired media, as in regular wired ethernet (which typically requires running cable) or MOCA, which uses the existing cable wiring to get ethernet speeds.

As for your second question, if your router supports a default route, then it's easy. This is also called the all-zeroes route.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

I suppose I could start another "why is it slow"-type thread, but give the level of discussion in this one I thought I'd start here.

I've got two TiVo HDs. I routinely see much higher transfer speeds -- almost twice as fast -- when going from one to the other than vice versa. Trying to understand why.

The pieces:

TiVo HD #1 is wired to the network (gigabit backbone, not that it matters for this). 

TiVo HD #2 is wired to a wireless bridge, which in turn is connected to the network via 808.11n.

The majority of my transfers are from #1 to #2. Less frequently from #2 to #1.

I've tried different combinations of network equipment in the last year or so, and the speed from #1 to #2 has varied slightly, but generally is in the range of 11-14 Mbps. On my current 802.11n wireless network (5Ghz band only), #1 transfers to #2 pretty consistently in the low 11 Mbps range. Not very good, but I've gotten sort of used to it.

That's for transfers from #1 to #2. The odd thing? Transfers from #2 to #1 are typically in the low 20 Mbps range. Obviously the speed in either direction will vary a bit depending on what either box is doing at the time, but overall, #2 to #1 is a good 10 Mbps faster than the other way, #1 to #2.

Can anyone suggest what might account for such a big difference in transfer speed depending on the direction of transfer?


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

lew said:


> MoCA is an alternate solution.


I ditched wireless altogether and went with a cheap 200 Mbps powerline network.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

cmontyburns said:


> I suppose I could start another "why is it slow"-type thread, but give the level of discussion in this one I thought I'd start here.
> 
> I've got two TiVo HDs. I routinely see much higher transfer speeds -- almost twice as fast -- when going from one to the other than vice versa. Trying to understand why.
> 
> ...


Are you running your wireless network in 20/40Mhz mode instead of 20Mhz mode only?
I have several Dlink DAP1522 units. One is an access point and a couple are in bridge mode. When I have a TiVo connected to the bridge, the performance is identical to when it's connected to my wired gigabit network.
When I connect a laptop(with a gigabit ethernet port) to the gigabit ports on the Bridge, I get consistent, 100mbs+ speeds from the bridge.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

aaronwt said:


> Are you running your wireless network in 20/40Mhz mode instead of 20Mhz mode only?
> I have several Dlink DAP1522 units. One is an access point and a couple are in bridge mode. When I have a TiVo connected to the bridge, the performance is identical to when it's connected to my wired gigabit network.
> When I connect a laptop(with a gigabit ethernet port) to the gigabit ports on the Bridge, I get consistent, 100mbs+ speeds from the bridge.


Hmmmm. I'm not sure why I don't know the answer to your question. It's a dual-band access point so I've got both b/g and n networks running. But I'm not sure which frequency the n network is on. Also, it occurs to me that I'm not sure which network the bridge is grabbing onto. I'm going to have to check that. Also, I haven't done a raw bandwidth test (not using the TiVo, which will be comparatively pokey regardless) across that link. I need to do that.

Regardless of all that, it's still puzzling why the TiVo transfer speeds are so different each way.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

So I did some further testing, which kind of confirmed my suspicion that my house is painted with lead and insulated with kryptonite. I tested the bandwidth between two computers at the same points on the network, transferring a large file between them.

In the baseline case, with both computers wired directly to the router, the transfer went at about 90 Mbps. This makes sense, as one of them is an older computer (a laptop) with a slower disk and 100 Mbps Ethernet.

Test #2, with the laptop connected to the G wireless (it doesn't have N), and sitting a few feet from the router, resulted in about a 20 Mbps transfer.

Then it gets depressing.

Test #3, with the laptop still on the G network, but in the room where the remote TiVo is, resulted in a 12 Mbps transfer. This is roughly what I see on the TiVo in that room, at least inbound.

Test #4, with the laptop wired to the wireless bridge, which is on the N network, gave the same result as the G network: about 12 Mbps.

Test #5, with wide channels turned off on the N network but otherwise the same as #4, was the worst, at about 7 Mbps.

So basically I get the same result in the room with the inbound TiVo regardless of whether I'm using G or N wireless (and only if N is using wide channels). I should note that while there are two walls between the router and the bridge, the total distance is less than 25 feet and there is a hallway that connects both rooms, so there is a signal path that doesn't involve going through walls.

Lead and kryptonite. I suck at pulling cable or I'd wire it.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

cmontyburns said:


> So I did some further testing, which kind of confirmed my suspicion that my house is painted with lead and insulated with kryptonite. I tested the bandwidth between two computers at the same points on the network, transferring a large file between them.
> 
> In the baseline case, with both computers wired directly to the router, the transfer went at about 90 Mbps. This makes sense, as one of them is an older computer (a laptop) with a slower disk and 100 Mbps Ethernet.
> 
> ...


http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7277283#post7277283


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

orangeboy said:


> http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7277283#post7277283


I've considered Powerline, but my house and wiring are so old I'm skeptical that I'd actually get the benefit.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

cmontyburns said:


> I've considered Powerline, but my house and wiring are so old I'm skeptical that I'd actually get the benefit.


When I was shopping for mine, I asked specifically about the store's return policy. They said I could return the opened or unopened product at no charge within 14 days if I wasn't satisfied. I figured I would know immediately if it would work or not well before the 14 days were up. It did.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

Also consider MoCA. Check your local pennysaver. You may be able to hire someone to snake the cat-5 wire.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

lew said:


> You may be able to hire someone to snake the cat-5 wire.


It would be a cinch to do for anyone more skilled at it than I. Problem is, I can't find anyone local that would do it (who, I should add, I would trust). One of the regional electrician companies around here used to have a data cabling arm, and they wired my house for satellite several years ago and did a beautiful job. Unfortunately, they dropped the data cabling arm in the Houston market a while back and their regular electrical service won't take the work. Nor will any other electrician I've called. I'm sure I could find some kind of local independent installer to do it (although I've come up surprisingly dry on a few searches) but would rather go with someone who pulls wires for a living.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

orangeboy said:


> When I was shopping for mine, I asked specifically about the store's return policy. They said I could return the opened or unopened product at no charge within 14 days if I wasn't satisfied. I figured I would know immediately if it would work or not well before the 14 days were up. It did.


I guess I could take the buy-to-try approach. Probably my biggest problem with Powerline is that I don't have spare outlets (other than power strip receptacles) at either end. I imaging that this stuff works best (or at all) when plugged directly into the wall.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

cmontyburns said:


> It would be a cinch to do for anyone more skilled at it than I. Problem is, I can't find anyone local that would do it (who, I should add, I would trust). One of the regional electrician companies around here used to have a data cabling arm, and they wired my house for satellite several years ago and did a beautiful job. Unfortunately, they dropped the data cabling arm in the Houston market a while back and their regular electrical service won't take the work. Nor will any other electrician I've called. I'm sure I could find some kind of local independent installer to do it (although I've come up surprisingly dry on a few searches) but would rather go with someone who pulls wires for a living.


Call the company that wired your house for satellite and ask if any of the electricians do work "on the side". By any chance do you remember the name of the electrician who actually did the work? Ask any contractor you've used. They may either snake wires, or know someone who does.


----------



## orangeboy (Apr 19, 2004)

cmontyburns said:


> I guess I could take the buy-to-try approach. Probably my biggest problem with Powerline is that I don't have spare outlets (other than power strip receptacles) at either end. I imaging that this stuff works best (or at all) when plugged directly into the wall.


Yep. The box instructs to NOT plug it into a UPS or power strip, but directly into the outlet.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

orangeboy said:


> Yep. The box instructs to NOT plug it into a UPS or power strip, but directly into the outlet.


Eh, what the heck. $100 from Amazon for a pair of Netgear Powerline adapters. I might be able to make the outlet thing work. Certainly worth testing. They should be here Thursday.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> Eh, what the heck. $100 from Amazon for a pair of Netgear Powerline adapters. I might be able to make the outlet thing work. Certainly worth testing. They should be here Thursday.


Well, I guess I'm about done trying. The PowerLine adapters work fine (a bit to my surprise, given my old house and wiring). They report an 80+ Mbps connection. One TiVo stays wired to the router; the other to the PowerLine network and... 16Mbps transfers. Only 3-4 Mbps better than what I was seeing on my weak N network. Still really not enough to watch in real-time, let alone with commercial skipping.



lrhorer said:


>


I've got absolutely no idea how anyone gets those kinds of transfer speeds. It's depressing. Unless maybe that's SD content... mine's all HD.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

moyekj said:


> Not really odd as different programs transfer at different rates. HD transfers have a slower transfer rate than SD in my experience.
> JoeTaxpayer, you should add SD vs HD testing to your list.


No they don't. HD is *bigger* than SD, so per-minute viewing it's slower, but the transfer rates are the same.

Bits are bits.


----------



## fyodor (Sep 19, 2006)

I've had great success with the NIM-100 MoCA adapters. I don't know of anyone who has had bad experiences with them.

F



cmontyburns said:


> Well, I guess I'm about done trying. The PowerLine adapters work fine (a bit to my surprise, given my old house and wiring). They report an 80+ Mbps connection. One TiVo stays wired to the router; the other to the PowerLine network and... 16Mbps transfers. Only 3-4 Mbps better than what I was seeing on my weak N network. Still really not enough to watch in real-time, let alone with commercial skipping.
> 
> I've got absolutely no idea how anyone gets those kinds of transfer speeds. It's depressing. Unless maybe that's SD content... mine's all HD.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> No they don't. HD is *bigger* than SD, so per-minute viewing it's slower, but the transfer rates are the same.
> 
> Bits are bits.


 No you are wrong. Look at the network diagnostics following a MRV SD transfer and then again for a MRV HD transfer. You will notice SD content transfer rates are quite significantly faster than HD. For Tivo To Go it's even worse as there is demuxing and re-encryption going on which really taxes the limited resources on the Tivos. There's a lot more happening behind the scenes than raw bits transfer...


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

moyekj said:


> No you are wrong. Look at the network diagnostics following a MRV SD transfer and then again for a MRV HD transfer. You will notice SD content transfer rates are quite significantly faster than HD. For Tivo To Go it's even worse as there is demuxing and re-encryption going on which really taxes the limited resources on the Tivos. There's a lot more happening behind the scenes than raw bits transfer...


Okay, and they're nearly identical for me for both. (Obviously PC transfers are slower for the reasons you mention.)


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

fyodor said:


> I've had great success with the NIM-100 MoCA adapters. I don't know of anyone who has had bad experiences with them.
> 
> F


Thanks, but at this point I don't think the issue is with my network. The PowerLine setup is plenty fast and hardly makes a different in the transfer rates I'm seeing. Maybe my expectations are just too high. I really did expect, though, that 12-15 Mbps transfer speeds were at the low end of what I would experience (again, for HD), not at the high.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> Thanks, but at this point I don't think the issue is with my network. The PowerLine setup is plenty fast and hardly makes a different in the transfer rates I'm seeing. Maybe my expectations are just too high. I really did expect, though, that 12-15 Mbps transfer speeds were at the low end of what I would experience (again, for HD), not at the high.


Um, the only thing left is your network. Either your switches, or your router, or some other device on your network.

All things being equal, we should all see the same peak speeds. You see significantly less, ergo, something in your environment is causing it.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

AbMagFab said:


> Um, the only thing left is your network. Either your switches, or your router, or some other device on your network.
> 
> All things being equal, we should all see the same peak speeds. You see significantly less, ergo, something in your environment is causing it.


I see your point, but if I switch out the endpoints -- meaning, measure throughput between two computers on either end, rather than the TiVos -- I see the speed I would expect to see. It's only between the TiVos that the speed is curtailed significantly.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

cmontyburns said:


> I see your point, but if I switch out the endpoints -- meaning, measure throughput between two computers on either end, rather than the TiVos -- I see the speed I would expect to see. It's only between the TiVos that the speed is curtailed significantly.


Are the computers 100mbit or gigabit?


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

AbMagFab said:


> Are the computers 100mbit or gigabit?


One's gigabit, and the other's 100 megabit -- it's a 5-year old laptop with a slow drive. And even with that, I see file transfer speeds to it of 40-50 Mbps or greater.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

AbMagFab said:


> Okay, and they're nearly identical for me for both. (Obviously PC transfers are slower for the reasons you mention.)


 For me SD MRV transfers under normal conditions (S3<->S3) are in the 40 Mbps range while 720p transfers are typically 25-30Mbps range and 1080i a little slower than that. That has consistently been the case for quite a while now. (This is with original S3s not THDs). That has changed with software updates. For S3s I think they were actually better prior to the 11.x software days.
If you tune both units to channels you don't receive to minimize the activity level of your Tivos it can make quite a significant impact on transfer speeds, so MRV speeds are not just purely determined by your network configuration.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

cmontyburns said:


> It would be a cinch to do for anyone more skilled at it than I. Problem is, I can't find anyone local that would do it (who, I should add, I would trust). One of the regional electrician companies around here used to have a data cabling arm, and they wired my house for satellite several years ago and did a beautiful job. Unfortunately, they dropped the data cabling arm in the Houston market a while back and their regular electrical service won't take the work. Nor will any other electrician I've called. I'm sure I could find some kind of local independent installer to do it (although I've come up surprisingly dry on a few searches) but would rather go with someone who pulls wires for a living.


How far is the run? How many floors? Just curious...


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

DCIFRTHS said:


> How far is the run? How many floors? Just curious...


It's embarrassingly minor. One-story house. Up one wall, across the attic, down another wall. Probably about 50 feet in total. It's the up and down part that I'm terrible at.

I did talk to a local shop today about doing the run for me. They seem pretty respectable. He ballparked it at $400, though, so I'm going to think about how badly I want it for a bit. At a minimum I'll run a cable down the hall and test fully-wired transfer speeds before I commit.


----------



## cmontyburns (Nov 14, 2001)

moyekj said:


> If you tune units to channels you receive to minimize the activity level of your Tivos it can make quite a significant impact on transfer speeds, so MRV speeds are not just purely determined by your network configuration.


This is obviously true. Just tried a 1080i transfer with both boxes tuned to nothing and picked up ~5 Mbps (to about 20).


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

cmontyburns said:


> One's gigabit, and the other's 100 megabit -- it's a 5-year old laptop with a slow drive. And even with that, I see file transfer speeds to it of 40-50 Mbps or greater.


Even a drive at the turn of the century would have no problem with those transfer rates. They were still many, many times faster writing and reading. I went gigabit with my network in 2001 and had no problem doing PC to PC transfer rates over 600mbs throughput then.


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

TiVo's AN0100 802.11n WiFi adapter hits the FCC


----------

