If You Use A Router . . .

L

Landis82

Remember that you might need to change it out every now and then just to keep up with better technology . . . even if you have a very basic 4-port "wired" Router.

For Example, today I just found out that my Belkin 4-port Cable Gateway Router that is 4-5 years old is Version 1033. I am told that Version 1033 is actually Version 1000 by one of their techs.

Believe it or not, the EXACT same model number is now on Version 4000. And low and behold, this unit is no longer "capped" at lower download speeds.

Yeah, I know it says 10/100 base T.
And, yeah, it doesn't matter what "Firmware" you have downloaded on your Router over the years . . .

But believe it or not, the download speed ( for some unknown reason ) on Model F5D5231-4, Version 1000 was "capped" at 7.4 mb on the download and 6.7 mb on the upload.

The Version 4000 ( of the exact same model number ) now gets 63.1 mb on the download and 71.5 mb on the upload!

Obviously, the latest VERSION is able to capture the potential of higher and higher broadband speeds, unlike the version 1000 of 4-5 years ago.

You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming.
This has been a Public Service Announcement for all of you remote traders out their on the Internet Superhighway.

:p
 
Quote from gnome:

Where do you get access to such high speeds, both up and down?
More...

I am using the "Blast" service from Comcast for $52.95 per month. This service just came out this month and offers "Up To 16MB" of download speed per second.

The key for me was switching out to a new Router. For some reason, my Belkin was capped at 7.4MB on the download. It was 4-5 years old when speeds weren't very high to begin with.

The D-Link EBR-2310 Router that I just picked up at Fry's yesterday for $39.95 now allows me download speeds of 10.3MB back to the Speakeasy server in NYC. I also get 15.1MB to Chicago and 17.1MB to Dallas, and 10.4MB to Washington, DC.

Inside of California ( on my local Comcast fiber-optic network ) I am getting 33MB on the download to Los Angeles and San Francisco!

Too bad my trading platform server is not located in SF or LA. It's back in NYC.

Again, word for the wise . . . don't always ASSUME that your Router is the latest version or is running in tip-top shape!

A big "shout-out" to Dustin for pointing this out to me, otherwise I would have still been crawling around with my old Berlkin router and speeds well below what I am getting now.

:cool:
 
Quote from Landis82:

Remember that you might need to change it out every now and then just to keep up with better technology . . . even if you have a very basic 4-port "wired" Router.

For Example, today I just found out that my Belkin 4-port Cable Gateway Router that is 4-5 years old is Version 1033. I am told that Version 1033 is actually Version 1000 by one of their techs.

Believe it or not, the EXACT same model number is now on Version 4000. And low and behold, this unit is no longer "capped" at lower download speeds.
More...
Are you sure it was capped or was it just an issue of the cpu not being able to deliver more throughput then that?

Linksys is famous for changing the innards of their routers while keeping the same model name/number - they (sometimes) just change the rev number. Changing the processor can make a huge difference in performance

Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_WRT54G_series
 
Quote from GTS:

Are you sure it was capped or was it just an issue of the cpu not being able to deliver more throughput then that?
More...


Not sure.
All I know is that the Belkin tech told me that they were now on their 4th version of the SAME model number Router, and that my Version only had a download speed capability of 7.4 MB

I found this surprising.
 
Quote from Landis82:

Not sure.
All I know is that the Belkin tech told me that they were now on their 4th version of the SAME model number Router, and that my Version only had a download speed capability of 7.4 MB

I found this surprising.
More...
Ok, there is a difference between capped (which implies an artificially imposed constraint) and hardware-limited.

Here's a good comparison chart of many models: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_chart/Itemid,189/
 
Quote from Landis82:

Excellent reference.
Thanks!
More...
Sure, these days wireless is so popular that you can usually do better (performance+features per $) if you pick a wireless router and just disable the wireless portion of it (assuming you dont want wireless connectivity)..
 
But let's remember one important point of the article . . .

"As long as a router has throughput higher than what your ISP provides, you're fine.

If a router's throughput is lower than the speed that your ISP provides, the connection will still work, but you won't be getting the bandwidth you're paying for since the router will limit the speed.

On the other hand, if your router's throughput is higher than your ISP bandwidth, getting an even faster router won't add any value. The exception is for heavy P2P / filesharing use. In that case, purchasing a router that can handle a larger number of simultaneous connections could help, if you're having problems with your current router."
 
It is interesting to note that "SmallNetBuilders" article shows the Linksys Gigabit Security Router with VPN ( the RVS4000 ) as by far and away the leader in "Total Simultaneous Throughput" at 526.

But take one look at the "reviews" on NewEgg for this router and you will more often than not, hear people that are totally disgusted by this piece of equipment and have turned it into a "paperweight" after about one week of service.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_chart/Itemid,189/chart,121/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top