aquarius wrote:Hi , if the PC directly wired with Ethernet cable is ok in your configuration ?
Yes, it runs faster if I hard wire it (as did my previous configuration).
In light of that, I have also tried a different wireless router which gave me about 11-12MB/s. This is probably the limit of SMB v1. My previous NAS (Synology) used an updated SMB v2, which gave me good speeds (22-24MB/s) even on my old wireless router.
aquarius wrote:Hi , if the PC directly wired with Ethernet cable is ok in your configuration ?
Hi aquarius
As I have reported in anoher post, I connected my PC directly to my router, with Cat6 cable. Gigabit connection both ends. NAS says connected at Gigabit speed too.
Using a simple Copy/Paste function from my PC to the NAS, using a 400MB and a 7GB file, I get around 11-14MB/s. Basically the same as my wireless connection.
Using FTP, I get around 90-100MB/s. However, it seems erratic, varying from 50 to 110MB/s. Nevertheless, much faster.
Just a thought.. you think you might have any programs running that might be causing this?
Reason, I was seeing about the same thing as you but not as drastic... SMB 10-14MB, FTP in the 90's. Turns out Ventrilo was slowing it down. How/why I don't know, but when I shut down Ventrilo SMB performance jump up to about the same as FTP. Took me a while to figure it out cause I have Vent auto-booting/logging on.
On my Synology, SMB was in the low 20's and didn't think too much about it at the time. I just tested it, and with Vent "on" I'm in the low 20's Vent "off" mid 40's.
Wounder if other chat/messenger type programs might have the same effect.
mickes wrote:Just a thought.. you think you might have any programs running that might be causing this?
Reason, I was seeing about the same thing as you but not as drastic... SMB 10-14MB, FTP in the 90's. Turns out Ventrilo was slowing it down. How/why I don't know, but when I shut down Ventrilo SMB performance jump up to about the same as FTP. Took me a while to figure it out cause I have Vent auto-booting/logging on.
On my Synology, SMB was in the low 20's and didn't think too much about it at the time. I just tested it, and with Vent "on" I'm in the low 20's Vent "off" mid 40's.
Wounder if other chat/messenger type programs might have the same effect.
Marty
Thanks, I appreciate your suggestion.
I did try disabling all the background programs I could find. I don't use messaging, but there were a few others.
Unfortunately, it didn't make any difference. Thanks anyway.
Got AS-608T and Synology 1511+ in hand, both in raid 5, so gave it a quick test by dragging 2 Fast F furious.mkv (7.6GB) up and down through Samba and direct cat5e connection:
using a Asus A52J laptop (Pentium P2600, gigabit lan, a little bit old machine) then I got very depressing number for both NAS. For upload to NAS, AS-608T fared better at 30-80MB/s, DS-1511+ at 20-60MB/s. The transfer speed just got dropping all the way. For read from NAS, then AS-608T is steadily at 70-80MB/s and DS1511+ at 50-60MB/s.
but if using my own built Desktop PC (Intel i5, gigabit lan), then for both upload to and download from NAS, AS-608T can sustain at 70-80MB all the time and the same with DS1511+ at 50-60MB/s.
Kerry wrote:Got AS-608T and Synology 1511+ in hand, both in raid 5, so gave it a quick test by dragging 2 Fast F furious.mkv (7.6GB) up and down through Samba and direct cat5e connection:
using a Asus A52J laptop (Pentium P2600, gigabit lan, a little bit old machine) then I got very depressing number for both NAS. For upload to NAS, AS-608T fared better at 30-80MB/s, DS-1511+ at 20-60MB/s. The transfer speed just got dropping all the way. For read from NAS, then AS-608T is steadily at 70-80MB/s and DS1511+ at 50-60MB/s.
but if using my own built Desktop PC (Intel i5, gigabit lan), then for both upload to and download from NAS, AS-608T can sustain at 70-80MB all the time and the same with DS1511+ at 50-60MB/s.
In my case, the client pc does matter a lot.
According to the tests I submitted to ASUSTOR and the remote troubleshooting they did, it would appear that my Wi-Fi connection is the issue. Sadly, 2 different (High quality) routers give the same poor results on two different laptops. Both sets of results are much less than I was getting on my Synology, with the same setup. Curious.