I get about 0.5mb/s speed on the local Wi-Fi network. I get up to 8mb/s on the computer (802.11N card). What about you? Maybe it depends on kernel/rom..?
Sent from my GT-I9100
Little answer please
Sent from my GT-I9100
You didn't get an answer because this info is easily found via a Google search Look for the SGS2 entry at Wikipedia, then follow the links to the article on the relevant WiFi standards.
Oh yeah "802.11 a/b/g/n Wifi" is it? Do you know which speed each of these letters is supposed to give..? I do, so i'm going to tell you that with 802.11n (which my router fully support) you're supposed to get up to 450mb/s. In reality you get let less, but it's still up to about 250mb/s, now you can even divide that by eight, which result in 31,25, far from 0.5 (the speed i get, if not lower, which my 1st post mention, did you read it fully..?) isn't it? Now you might see things that others don't, if so just tell me.
Hmm..?
Sent from my GT-I9100
It depends on many things. Bug in the kernel, faulty hardware, the distance from the router (phones have smaller antennae than laptops due to the size constraint, so laptops will constantly get higher strength signal than phones), faulty routers are all factors, if your phone is the only wifi device that's not getting the speed it should.
I don't know what the real life max speed of GS2 is, but I've hit somewhere between 20~50Mbps on a N router that has 1000Mbps internet connection (~750Mbps realistically, and I wasn't the only one connected to the router). So it should be able to get 8Mbps that your computer is getting, assuming the GS2 is right next to the router.
It doesn't change depending on placing.. And I can go faster when downloading. So I don't think hardware is défective..
Sent from my GT-I9100
Related
I'm using the new DCD 2.0 rom with great results -- and since I've been just a lurker for awhile, a big THANK YOU to everyone working on that.
I have a quick question: How do I know if it's connected using Rev A? I'm not seeing any performance differences, though there should be Rev A coverage here... just curious
There are a few mobile bandwidth tests that you can run.
http://www.dslreports.com/mspeed?jisok=1
my average looks about 611 kbit/sec... that is the same as before the Rev A upgrade. this means Rev A isn't working? and to judge by reports from others, I guess nobody really has it working?
sorry to put those as a question, butas far as I can tell, there is no evidence of a speed diff w/ the new radio.
gps works great, of course... and on WM6.1, everything is faster. just not data...
Are you sure you have Rev A in your area?
I'm getting around 900k now... before I was in the 200k range, if I was lucky!
Check out this site for an idea of Rev. A coverage in your area.
Hint: The more that submit the more accurate it becomes...
http://evdomaps.com/
Rev A is definetly working on the 3.16 ROMs. I used to average around 400-600 down and never more than about 120 up. Now I'm averaging around 1 meg down and 300 up. The best I've gotten was 2.2 down, 540 up. Definetly Rev A...
My upload speed is faster, but my download speeds are still the same. Then again, I've always wondered how good the EVDO network in my area actually is.
I like this entry on EVDO Maps:
200 Consillium Place Toronto, ON M1H 3J3
Carrier: Verizon Create Date: 6/29/2007
Computer: CANADAPK Update Date: 6/29/2007
Network: RevA Location: outdoors
Download: 1972 Upload: 640
dBm: Bars:
This is TELUS Mobility HQ.... almost 2megs/sec download!
interesting.
I'm in Utah Valley, in ... err... well, Utah. Sprint's maps all show full coverage, but I thought I saw a map once that had specifically Rev A. now I can't find it.
maybe they don't have it here yet... that would be strange, given the unusually high concentration of technology companies that are found around here, even despite Novell's slow decline. But, I've been getting 400-1000kbps since I got my phone, not just since the update... no noticable change.
maybe someday they'll get it going and suddenly everything will speed up =]
too bad there is no indication other than speed of which rev the evdo is running. it would be interesting
do you really mainly notice Rev A speeds when you use your phone as a modem? i thought i'd really be able to see a difference with Rev A using slingplayer, but i get the same speeds as i did on my old rom. i live around pittsburgh as well which is supossed to be a rev A area.
Check the latency
As a general statement, the improvements from Rev. 0 to Rev. A are not that impressive on the download side. Yes, the improvements on the upload side should be more impressive, but how many people are doing any significant uploading?
On the other hand, the latency should improve considerably and I think most people overlook that. It's a pretty big deal.
We just got finished upgrading the embedded WWAN on a bunch of laptops at work from Rev. 0 to Rev. A and I can tell you the entire improvement was in the latency. The responsiveness was much improved.
I would be checking that first. Do some before and after tests and report them back.
yeah, ive definately seen an improvement in latency, i used to get 1s+ pinging google, now i average about 125ms
wow
i flashed to the leaked htc 3.16 first and my download is really slow, more like 288 to 488. but when i flashed to dcd's 2.0 i got 997/sec. thats amazing. big difference. i used the same mobile speed site.
edit:
just did another test 1020/sec thats cool. I myt not get the same speed all the time but it feels good knowing i wont go anywhere near the slow speed of pass roms.
I get around 2.23MBPS download using opera mini and the running the Leaked 3.16 ROM. Much faster than my previous 400-1.2MBPS download on the 2.16 ROM. Funny thing is that, when i switch from opera mini to Opera Mobile, or IE, i get really slow speeds, maybe top at 1MBPS but usually like 500KBPS. Its like only opera mini can use the Rev.A while the other two stick with the Rev.0
well, i'm getting about 110 down, and i live in chicago where we have rev A, i've never been able to get more than 1x
anyone have any ideas on why that i live in a rev a area, i only get 1x, always only get 1 x
600-900kbs avg for me on TELUS
killerkhatiby009 said:
I get around 2.23MBPS download using opera mini and the running the Leaked 3.16 ROM. Much faster than my previous 400-1.2MBPS download on the 2.16 ROM. Funny thing is that, when i switch from opera mini to Opera Mobile, or IE, i get really slow speeds, maybe top at 1MBPS but usually like 500KBPS. Its like only opera mini can use the Rev.A while the other two stick with the Rev.0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember that Opera Mini goes through a server and strips some data from the images so they load faster on your device, which in turn shows inflated download speeds. Opera Mobile and IE are loading the raw data so it takes longer, thus yielding the "real" speed results.
I thought that Rev A was supposed to support simultaneous Data and Voice connections? I was not able to load a website while on a call. Is this something that needs to be activated by the carrier? Should I be able to do both on the new ROM? I see that there is still a CDMA1X connect that happens when I load a webpage, or at first data usage...any ideas?
dadishman said:
I thought that Rev A was supposed to support simultaneous Data and Voice connections? I was not able to load a website while on a call. Is this something that needs to be activated by the carrier? Should I be able to do both on the new ROM? I see that there is still a CDMA1X connect that happens when I load a webpage, or at first data usage...any ideas?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be EVDV not REV A.
Here is a good explanation of it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA2000
Got my S2 and loving it but having a problem with its wifi performance.
It is running slowly ie on a n network speed test gives between 0.1 and 1 MBs down upload seems fine tried different channels etc. Killed all others apps in task manager disabled background snyc, but no difference
Then tried a different wifi access point on my network with similar results so it seems to be the phone. In comparison my wifes phone is consistently around 5 times faster download speed. sucks not to be able to use my new toy properly Any ideas before it goes back?
Thanks
DonkQuixote said:
Got my S2 and loving it but having a problem with its wifi performance.
It is running slowly ie on a n network speed test gives between 0.1 and 1 MBs down upload seems fine tried different channels etc. Killed all others apps in task manager disabled background snyc, but no difference
Then tried a different wifi access point on my network with similar results so it seems to be the phone. In comparison my wifes phone is consistently around 5 times faster download speed. sucks not to be able to use my new toy properly Any ideas before it goes back?
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
is your router capable of sending G and N signal at the same time? u may have to change either a setting on ya phone to just pick up G or a router setting, this wont be your phone, i work for an isp, see this all the time 1 pc or laptop is N router is N and 2nd pc is G or even B and this causes problems
Thanks for the reply changed the router to n only and the phone is the only device connected still painfully slow. Then tried b/g and the speed test is much faster. Looks like the galaxy dosn;t play nice with the n router I have (home hub 3 from bt)
DonkQuixote said:
Thanks for the reply changed the router to n only and the phone is the only device connected still painfully slow. Then tried b/g and the speed test is much faster. Looks like the galaxy dosn;t play nice with the n router I have (home hub 3 from bt)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some routers with n were released with support for the draft spec. It's possible your router only supports a version of the draft n spec and thus isn't fully compatible with the SGS2 which would be full n spec compatible. Your router may have a firmware update that would give it full n spec. It would be worth a quick check.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
StickyGeko said:
is your router capable of sending G and N signal at the same time? u may have to change either a setting on ya phone to just pick up G or a router setting, this wont be your phone, i work for an isp, see this all the time 1 pc or laptop is N router is N and 2nd pc is G or even B and this causes problems
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great information! Thank you.
It is a new router only a month old so pretty sure its not draft n. Thanks for the suggestion though
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
Does anyone know if the SII's N wifi works on the 5GHz band? My wifi network with my PC is solely on 5GHz as get fewer disconnections and constant speed through my fibre connection then with 2.4GHz.
Thanks
According to this it supports Dual Band:
http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-galaxy-s-ii-supports-dual-band-wi-fi-80211n
which was based on this
http://certifications.wi-fi.org/pdf_certificate.php?cid=WFA11164 (does not work in Chrome)
I'm thinking the wifi performance could be poor just like the wifi performance on the Samsung Nexus S phones is. The Nexus S wifi is pretty poor. Does your signal strength show it being full or weak? On the Nexus S you could be 2 feet away from the router and it would still show weak reception.
p4nts said:
According to this it supports Dual Band:
pocketnow.com/android/samsung-galaxy-s-ii-supports-dual-band-wi-fi-80211n
which was based on this
certifications.wi-fi.org/pdf_certificate.php?cid=WFA11164 (does not work in Chrome)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks mate, exactly what I was hoping. I'll post a review of the performance using my 100MB fibre connection as soon as I get the phone and let everyone know how it degrades around my house.
I did a search and couldn't find anything definitive, so hopefully some of you can help me here
I've accepted the fact that my TFP won't get stellar wifi speeds but I guess what I can do is tinker with my router to ensure that it's maximizing its signal and throughput.
I have the Linksys WRT-320N router mounted high up on my wall in my 2 bdrm apt. When I'm next to the router, I get a pretty consistent 15mbps up/down but it trickles off to about 5 from my bedroom about 30 ft. away. My concern is that it's rated for a lot more than 15mbps, and my wired internet gets about 100mbps up/down, so surely it must be a router setting?
I've disabled QoS and tried various channels but besides that, I haven't done much. Are there particular recommended settings that I can play with to try to maximize my speeds? I also made sure my firmware is up to date on the router and have reset it a few times.
A question for you: why did you disable QoS?
How about using QoS to maximize wifi output/priority to your prime when its connected?
Why would you even use qos just for your prime? That's like a 6 lane highway and only allowing one car at a time. It's pretty useless.
I doubt you'll get any difference at all. Qos only prioritizes traffic so that more important traffic can pass first.
Try unlocking your prime and installing another rom, try another router, or move your router to a center location. You could try to update your firmware or even see if you can find any custom firmware for your router.
QoS has always been a pain in the ass so I would disable regardless.
But ASUS does need to publish their findings on recommended settings to optimize performance.
i disabled QoS based off another post about smoothing out the throughput from the router. either way, i've noticed neither a positive or negative result of this.
as far as custom firmware, i'm looking into the dd-wrt route, but would want to tweak the router with the stock firmware as much as possible to see if i have to resort to doing custom
Chances are the limitation will be the transformer's wifi chipset. If you flash your router with dd-wrt you might be able to get slighty better performance.
Don't know that its worth the effort. 5 mb/s is adequate for almost all web except downloading large files and vnc. My experience has been if you want performance your pretty much stuck with something that has gigabit lan.
Sent from my EPAD using XDA Premium HD app
Hi guys,
I've got a question for you, my fellow Flyer users.
Recently I got a new Modem/Router from my ISP.
I installed everything and it all works without a hick up.
After the installation I tested the internet speed using the Speedtest.net site.
On both my Windows laptops an my wives Macbook the speed was excellent, about 40 Mbps download and 2.5 Mbps upload and a 15 ms ping.
Same on the Ipad 3 we have.
However, on my HTC Flyer I only get between 5 and 10 Mbps download but I do get 2.5 upload but the ping is nearly 100 ms.
Does anyone have a clue what the problem could be or what app I can best use to see whats up. I now think the Flyer only connects in WiFi B mode instead of G or N. And it has been doing this all the time. I used to think the browser was slow but I now think this might be the problem. Is there any way to change this forcefully?
The router is a Cisco EPC3925 and I use WPA2 TKIP-AES security. It's on channel 1, 40 Mhz wide (wide channel 5) and in 2.4 Ghz mode ...not 5 Ghz.
Hope you can help.
Cheers,
Martijn
Try to use channel 11....strange enough this helped me in the past when I had several problems with my wi-fi network. Otherwise you could try this....go to the wi- fi settings on you flyer, choose Advanced and then choose the first option.
Tried channel 11 and it doesn't make a difference.
Connection speed also varies alot.
My laptops and the Ipad have good speed everywhere in the house.
But the HTC only in the proximity (< 4m.) of the router. And even then it is still way slower than the other devices. If I move further from the router the speed collapses.
Best I get is about 28Mbps while the others get around 38 and up to 52 Mbps.
Shame, I had a higher expectations of the Flyer.
Next I will put my old Belkin N router in the network as access point and see what happens.
First time I ever heard anyone complain about 20Mbs. you sure you got those numbers right? Most of use don't have a ISP that can even approach that. So you will get little sympathy. Anyway ping should only be between your router and the external IP, so whats up with that? Speedtest.net is a poor way to measure device performance since there are so many factors in between. Use a local lan speed test or you might just be measuring browser speed and nothing to do with the hardware.
I've seen a similar behavior some time ago.
Here is what I've got:
Speedtest on my desktop gives me about 20-25M
I turn my Flyer on, run the test, I get 4-6M.
I turn Airplane mode on, turn it off, test the speed. I get 20-25M.
I'm guessing throughput got something to do with the sleep mode.
Hi all,
First of, I'm talking about Mbps (Mega bits per second) NOT MBs (Mega Bytes per second). Huge difference there.
And 20 Mbps is of course a good speed, but its unsteady and way slower than the other devices.
As I wrote before my Ipad and laptops never go below 35 Mbps and I'm lucky if I get the Flyer over 20 Mbps. With my ISP promissing about 50 Mbps thats a big difference.
So I'm just dissapointed with the performance of the Flyer which I thought to be a top of the line tablet.
So thats why I placed the thread. I tried the air plane mode thing and different channels, taking into account which are busy around me. But stil slower than the rest and alot of different readings between messurments. Even using my ISP speedtest app, even then same result.
But judging by the lack of respons I gather I am the only one. Pity I hoped for a solution.
Any thanks for taking the time to help me.
cheers
Has anyone experienced getting drastically different speeds measuring either wifi or data with these two apps? With OpenSignalMaps, I'm getting a little over half of what I'm getting with SpeedTest.
Which one's more accurate?
clankfu said:
Has anyone experienced getting drastically different speeds measuring either wifi or data with these two apps? With OpenSignalMaps, I'm getting a little over half of what I'm getting with SpeedTest.
Which one's more accurate?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are many different speed test apps or websites out there. May of them utilize different technologies like Java or Flash and therefore can give different values. This has been an oft debated issue in the internet world. Personally I believe SpeedTest because it usually gives me the speed value I expect. I'll make two points though:
1. You have to be sure you are talking about the same number, i.e. Megabits per second vs. Megabytes per second
2. Depending on the location of servers you are connecting to to run your test, or the sites connected in between you can get different numbers. i.e. One test connect to a server 100 miles away and the other server being 1000 miles away.
both apps give me basically the same results. make sure u account for bits vs bytes. Openmaps is way more advance. the tower map and compass is awesome. especially when trying out prls
raptoro07 said:
There are many different speed test apps or websites out there. May of them utilize different technologies like Java or Flash and therefore can give different values. This has been an oft debated issue in the internet world. Personally I believe SpeedTest because it usually gives me the speed value I expect. I'll make two points though:
1. You have to be sure you are talking about the same number, i.e. Megabits per second vs. Megabytes per second
2. Depending on the location of servers you are connecting to to run your test, or the sites connected in between you can get different numbers. i.e. One test connect to a server 100 miles away and the other server being 1000 miles away.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And don't always trust the server closest to you... I live in Tampa, and be it over the phone nor the PC, I get faster and better pings and speeds using the Atlanta server...
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
spaceosc said:
both apps give me basically the same results. make sure u account for bits vs bytes. Openmaps is way more advance. the tower map and compass is awesome. especially when trying out prls
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They both measure by bits don't they?
clankfu said:
They both measure by bits don't they?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I believe so. If one is eight times faster than the other, then one is bits the other bytes. As for different speeds, the server makes a big difference. Speedtest usually uses the closest server so it's speeds tend to be faster for me. I have Bright house in Tampa and they host the local speedtest server, so my home speed always matches my advertised speed .
Save the Drama for your Mama with Tapatalk 2
coal686 said:
Speedtest usually uses the closest server so it's speeds tend to be faster for me. I have Bright house in Tampa and they host the local speedtest server, so my home speed always matches my advertised speed .
Save the Drama for your Mama with Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gotcha...makes sense.
Depends on methodology
Going to jump in here as one of the developers behind OpenSignalMaps.
When it comes to speed test there isn't really such thing as 'more accurate', its really just a question of the methodology you employ. There are all sorts of different choices you can make, such as, do you use the closest servers? how many http connections do you use? how large of a file do you download? do you discard any data points? The answers to all of these questions really depends on what exactly you are testing. The ethos behind OpenSignalMaps has always been that we are trying to measure the actual user experience as accurately as possible so all the decisions we've made in our speed testing methodology are in order to recreate what a user would experience in general usage of their device. I think the methodology behind Ookla's Speedtest.net app (which is fantastic) could be more accurately described as testing the raw, highest capacity of your network connection. Thus in general you should see higher speeds with the Speedtest.net app than the OpenSignalMaps app, but our aim is that our speeds would more closely mirror what you actually experience on your device.
One example is server choice: SpeedTest.net encourages you to use the nearest server, usually in the same city. We do use many different servers (to remove geographical bias), but in general the server will not be so close to you and we would argue that in general browsing of the web you aren't likely to be served by a server so close to you. We actually host our Speedtests on multiple popular CDNs in order to emulate a large proportion of general web traffic.
Another example is that SpeedTest.net will discard some of the result data before calculating the average speed as they argue its representing the TCP/IP algorithm rather than the raw HTTP throughput of the connection (see page 20 of an excellent paper "Broadband Speed Measurements" by Bauer, Clark and Lehr - google it). At OpenSignalMaps we don't care if the bottleneck is the TCP/IP algorithm or the actual network connection we just want to give you the most accurate representation of your connection speed.
Just to clarify I'm not trying to argue one is better than the other and we have great respect for Ookla and other speedtest providers, just that it depends on what you want to test. If you are looking to see if your ISP is providing you with the max speed that the are advertising, Speedtest.net is probably going to be the best tool for that. If you want to try and gauge what speeds you are actually seeing in day to day usage then we are trying to build OpenSignalMaps as the application for that. We still have a huge amount to do to achieve that but we have a lot of great features in the pipeline
bmdgill said:
Going to jump in here as one of the developers behind OpenSignalMaps.
When it comes to speed test there isn't really such thing as 'more accurate', its really just a question of the methodology you employ. There are all sorts of different choices you can make, such as, do you use the closest servers? how many http connections do you use? how large of a file do you download? do you discard any data points? The answers to all of these questions really depends on what exactly you are testing. The ethos behind OpenSignalMaps has always been that we are trying to measure the actual user experience as accurately as possible so all the decisions we've made in our speed testing methodology are in order to recreate what a user would experience in general usage of their device. I think the methodology behind Ookla's Speedtest.net app (which is fantastic) could be more accurately described as testing the raw, highest capacity of your network connection. Thus in general you should see higher speeds with the Speedtest.net app than the OpenSignalMaps app, but our aim is that our speeds would more closely mirror what you actually experience on your device.
One example is server choice: SpeedTest.net encourages you to use the nearest server, usually in the same city. We do use many different servers (to remove geographical bias), but in general the server will not be so close to you and we would argue that in general browsing of the web you aren't likely to be served by a server so close to you. We actually host our Speedtests on multiple popular CDNs in order to emulate a large proportion of general web traffic.
Another example is that SpeedTest.net will discard some of the result data before calculating the average speed as they argue its representing the TCP/IP algorithm rather than the raw HTTP throughput of the connection (see page 20 of an excellent paper "Broadband Speed Measurements" by Bauer, Clark and Lehr - google it). At OpenSignalMaps we don't care if the bottleneck is the TCP/IP algorithm or the actual network connection we just want to give you the most accurate representation of your connection speed.
Just to clarify I'm not trying to argue one is better than the other and we have great respect for Ookla and other speedtest providers, just that it depends on what you want to test. If you are looking to see if your ISP is providing you with the max speed that the are advertising, Speedtest.net is probably going to be the best tool for that. If you want to try and gauge what speeds you are actually seeing in day to day usage then we are trying to build OpenSignalMaps as the application for that. We still have a huge amount to do to achieve that but we have a lot of great features in the pipeline
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the response and explanation.