Post your performance results

For system specs see signature....

LAPTOP 1 to DESKTOP over wireless 36MBps via DGN2000.
127.81372 Read IOps
129.222126 Write IOps
31.95343 Read MBps
32.305532 Write MBps

With Jumbo Frames enabled on DUO
LAPTOP 1 to DUO over wireless 36MBps via DGN2000.
4.832635 Read IOps
5.954474 Write IOps
1.208159 Read MBps
1.488619 Write MBps

DESKTOP to DUO wired 100MBps via DGN2000.
4.832635 Read IOps
5.954474 Write IOps
1.208159 Read MBps
1.488619 Write MBps

With MTU set to 1470 on DUO
LAPTOP 1 to DUO over wireless 36MBps via DGN2000.
5.419162 Read IOps
5.091369 Write IOps
1.354791 Read MBps
1.272842 Write MBps

DESKTOP to DUO wired 100MBps via DGN2000.
1.331405 Read IOps
1.033258 Write IOps
0.332851 Read MBps
0.258315 Write MBps

wired XP transfer speeds are closer to 10MBps

Clearly there is an issue with the DUO!

solved this by connecting my Duo and Desktop to a gigabit swtich and powerline between the switch and my router.

100 mb file


1000 mb file

Performance results from my ReadyNAS NV+:

My laptop w/ Windows 7 Ultimate and an OCZ SSD
Tests run using a 1.5GB video file and a Netgear DGN3500 w/ gigE and Wireless N
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wireless read: 8MB/s
Wireless write: 12MB/s
Wired read: 15-20MB/s
Wired write: 15-17MB/s

I'm disappointed with the wireless rates. I really figured I would have gotten faster than that. Wired is so-so, but not great.

I ran a couple of tests with my wife's iMac (OSX Tiger) and she got roughly the same speeds wirelessly (maybe a bit slower, even) but absolutely blew my laptop away on wired speeds. Roughly 26-28MB/s read and 18MB/s write.

Should I be disappointed or is this about what I can expect out of my hardware?

How's this?

Setup: PC with Intel GT1000 adapter > D-Link DGS-2208 switch > Cat5e > HP ProCurve 1810G-24 (J9450A) Switch > ReadyNAS Pro w/teamed ports (Round-Robin). Jumbo frames disabled because it boggles up my old Linksys WAP for some reason. Getting a new "N" AP soon.

Z:\Word is a folder on the ReadyNAS which is mapped to my PC "Antec".

Running "Lan Speed Test".

100 megabyte file:



1000 megabyte file:

Jetlag wrote:
How's this?

I wouldn't be happy with it.

Milhouse wrote:
Jetlag wrote: How's this? I wouldn't be happy with it.

Would you care to expand on that? It might be a bit more helpful.

Jetlag wrote:
Milhouse wrote: Jetlag wrote: How's this? I wouldn't be happy with it. Would you care to expand on that? It might be a bit more helpful.

I support you could actually try reading the thread to see what others consider to be "good" results.

To save you the trouble, here's my results obtained using much cheaper equipment than yours (a cheap GigE switch, a ReadyNAS NV not ReadyNAS Pro etc.).

Roughly 3-4 times better than your writes, double the speed of your reads.

As I say, I wouldn't be happy with your results, they should be much, much better.

I wasn't aware that this was a competition. (?)

These results are slower than what I was getting at my previous residence where I was able to run lots of dedicated Belden Cat6 lines everywhere before the sheet rock went up. Those cables were run optimally; no kinks, tension or tight corners and they were kept away from line voltage wiring and other potential interference. All terminations were also Cat6. In my new residence my PC now shares a single ~60 foot Home Depot quality Cat5e with my laptop, a printer, an IP Camera and a Slimdevices music streamer. These are all plugged into an inexpensive D-Link switch. An electrician without any apparent network training installed the Cat5e wire, and based upon his horrible terminations (all of which I had to re-terminate) I assume these cables were not run with much attention to detail. Here is an example of his work:



One other issue with this single cable is that it and two other network cables accidentally got cut while work was being done in the utility room. Since it was impossible to replace the cable runs in the finished house I fixed them using Cat5e junction boxes. Not an optimal solution by any means. This single cable then connects to my HP switch which is also connected to my Pro. So yes, I have some nice gear but I am obviously running the speed test over marginal cabling.

I also cannot enable jumbo frames. For some reason my old Linksys AP stops working if I enable JF on the rest of the network. I plan to replace it soon with a new HP V-M200 AP, just waiting for some reviews to get posted first. I even tried flashing my old AP with Tomato and DD-WRT with the same results.

If you have any suggestions as to how I can improve my results on this setup I am open to suggestions. Yes I would love to run new cables, simply not an option unfortunately.

Jetlag wrote:
I wasn't aware that this was a competition. (?)

Competition? No, but it was you that asked the question "How's this?" so presumably you wanted to be compared with how others are performing, and my assessment of your figures is that they're not very good (and you could have worked that out for yourself by reading the other posts in this thread).

Jetlag wrote:
So yes, I have some nice gear but I am obviously running the speed test over marginal cabling.

Perhaps you should have made that clear in your original post - those cables do look shocking, can't imagine untwisting all those twisted pairs is going to help the signal quality much.

If you want to test your raw performance, plug your PC directly into your Pro using a patch cable (preferably one that still has twisted pairs) - once you have determined a baseline, any deviance from that is almost certainly due to your cabling, or your D-Link router. Jumbo Frames may help a bit, but it's no big deal if your network won't support them.

Readynas NV+. 4x 1TB 7200 RPM Samsung disks.
Switch is capable of Jumbo frames

Without Jumbo frames, 1GB file


With Jumbo frames, 2GB file


Around 35 MB/s is rather nice for a NAS with a price of 240 euro (excluding the drives). Problem is that it's also running quite a lot of Torrents (seeding, most of them idle). This tends to drop the read speed to an average of 23 MB/s. Still not bad though :-)