Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:23 Post subject: Kong build R7000: LAN-to-LAN max out ~550Mbps on Gb ethernet
Hi,
I found many discussions on WAN-to-LAN on R7000, but cannot find a specific thread about LAN-to-LAN performance.
I only recently noticed that my desktop, when connected to my R7000 [Kong b31100] via a Gbit cat6 connection, can only put out ~550Mbps measured using iperf3, as follow:
on DD-WRT via SSH: iperf3 -s
on Desktop via cmd: iperf3 - c [router ip]
I was expecting the LAN-to-LAN would push closer to the Gbit limit -- something like 800Mbps.
May I know if ~550Mbps is what R7000 + DD-WRT is capable of at this time? Or is there some settings I need to pay attention to in order to get closer to a 800Mbps point?
Joined: 13 Mar 2014 Posts: 856 Location: Montreal, QC
Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:56 Post subject:
by running iperf on the router you are not measuring lan to lan but maxing out the cpu of the router. Try through traffic instead as in run iperf server on a pc connected port 1 and client on a pc connected to port 2
by running iperf on the router you are not measuring lan to lan but maxing out the cpu of the router. Try through traffic instead as in run iperf server on a pc connected port 1 and client on a pc connected to port 2
I am interested in the router-to-PC speed as I host a LAN-only SMB/FTP server for my home use. File transfer is rather bogged down - though not hitting even the current measurement yet.
But yours a good suggestion -- to take the limited router CPU out of the equation and test. At least I can convince myself if the LAN speed is part of my file transfer problem or not.
by running iperf on the router you are not measuring lan to lan but maxing out the cpu of the router. Try through traffic instead as in run iperf server on a pc connected port 1 and client on a pc connected to port 2
I am interested in the router-to-PC speed as I host a LAN-only SMB/FTP server for my home use. File transfer is rather bogged down - though not hitting even the current measurement yet.
But yours a good suggestion -- to take the limited router CPU out of the equation and test. At least I can convince myself if the LAN speed is part of my file transfer problem or not.
You're right JAMESMTL. PC-to-PC iperf3 averages ~850Mbps - so LAN speed is not my pet file server's limiting factor. Though combining this measurement with what I got from running iperf3 on the router, my file transfer speed probably got bogged down by the actual router CPU:(
As James indicated, your test was using the routers cpu which is NOT in use on the 4 port switch.
However, if your going anywhere over the WAN then yes the cpu is likely involved with a few caveats.
True LAN applications do not reside on the router, just the 4 port switch and inside the network.
These are the limitations of making a router do other functions such as ftp server. Its primary design was to be a near gigabit router when Netgear built it. We the non-average user want our routers to do more.
Keep that in mind when your sad something isn't maxing out when the hardware wasn't designed for that purpose. _________________ Router currently owned:
Netgear R7800 - Router
Netgear R7000 - AP mode
As James indicated, your test was using the routers cpu which is NOT in use on the 4 port switch.
However, if your going anywhere over the WAN then yes the cpu is likely involved with a few caveats.
True LAN applications do not reside on the router, just the 4 port switch and inside the network.
These are the limitations of making a router do other functions such as ftp server. Its primary design was to be a near gigabit router when Netgear built it. We the non-average user want our routers to do more.
Keep that in mind when your sad something isn't maxing out when the hardware wasn't designed for that purpose.
Hi Slidermike,
Yes, taking the CPU out of the picture confirms a ~850Mbps throughput. I suspect my file transfer speed is bottle-necked by the router CPU or its USB3 port -- both of which hardware limitation that I cannot circumvent.
I know I should use a proper box for a true in-home file server -- something like a FreeNAS setup. But my application does not warrant the time and maintenance effort it takes, not to mention the extra electric bill from running an actual server, which will most likely be my dusted 7-year-old core-i3 box:(
