WLAN Speed Difference

Good morning,
I am noticing a difference in speed when I connect to one WLAN SSID vs another. I have checked the WLC with no noticable difference in the configuration of one over the other. When I do a Speedtest to the same server I get 20Mbps on the slow WLAN and over 150Mbps on the other.
Does anyone have any ideas what could cause this? Could there be a bug in the controller software?
Model 5508 Running :7.4.110.0

“Wireless clients are experiencing very slow speed” ,   is a common problem on a wireless lan environment.
As part of troubleshooting this, we got to take care of
1)      Low Signal Strength.
2)      Low SNR.
3)      Insufficient Data rate.
4)      Packet Drop.
5)      Interference.
6)      Client Driver problem.
7)      QoS related problem.
8)      Problem with Roaming.
9)      OR Any configuration related problem.
During the course of troubleshooting, we do need a way to test the throughput, as and when we make any changes.
IPERF comes as a very handy tool. This can easily tell us the speed of data transfer.
Here are the details for the IPERF test.
https://supportforums.cisco.com/document/12068771/iperf-test-measuring-throughputspeed-wlan-client

Similar Messages

AppleScript speed difference between 10.4 & 10.5

This post is related to a question I posed in March 2009 (https://discussions.apple.com/message/9226100) regarding the speed difference between AppleScript text handling in OS X 10.5 compared with 10.4.11.
I have recently written a script to search through a text file which is an xml file exported from WorkGroup Manager. The file, which is approximately 1.8 MB, contains all the user names on the school server (just over 1720 of them), their settings and any other information we have added. After adapting some script ideas (using text delimiters and offsets) which I found on the internet to assist with counting the number of users and searching through the information of each one, one at a time, I have a script which works far in excess of my expectations in terms of speed when run under OS X 10.4, but runs slower than molasses in winter under 10.5.
The script counts the number of accounts, extracts each user's log-in name and also their actual name (which we have entered under a 'general info' or 'comments' field - I can't remember exactly where, but it is stored in the file), makes up a complete list of all account names (with the actual name, if present) and also makes up a subset of this information into a separate list which contains only the log-in names of those whose actual name has not yet been recorded on the server, then saves both lists to separate text files.
My original attempts, using some rather clumsy text searching and comparison techniques, took about 1-2 minutes to go through the whole procedure. After some internet searching, head-scratching and a bit more more work, the finished script, when run on my G5 under OS X 10.4.11, takes less than 3 seconds to do all I have described above, including the writing to text files. To say I was pleased would be an understatement!
Because the school/work environment, where the script would be run, is all OS X 10.5 or higher, I thought I should test it out under at least OS X 10.5. The script was developed on my DP 2.5GHz G5 with 8GB RAM running OS X 10.4.11. Using a fresh, clean installation of 10.5 I ran the script and was extremely disappointed. After letting it run for more than 20 minutes and still not finishing, I force quit AppleScript and reduced the number of accounts in the file. 40 accounts took 3 seconds, 60 accounts took 6 seconds, 80 took 11 seconds, 100 took 19 seconds and 120 took 27 seconds. I eventually let the script run right through - total time taken to process 1720 users was 65 minutes, compared to 3 seconds under 10.4.11!
Given that it was tested on the same Mac, with the same amount of RAM, using the same script and the same original text file, the only variable left (that I can think of) is the change of OS version - 10.4.11 vs 10.5.
As was pointed out to me in my previous post, AppleScript in OS X 10.5 handles all text as Unicode and has a greater overhead in processing time as a result. I have implemented the various bits of advice offered by respondents to my original post and changed the way I handled lists, etc. Obviously, if the script works so speedily under 10.4.11, I must have done something right in terms of code optimization/efficiency. It's when that exact same script is run under OS X 10.5 that it slows down incredibly. I even tried it on a 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo iMac running 10.5.8 - it still took 40 minutes and Activity Monitor showed CPU usage by Script Editor constantly above 80% (often well above 90%). Saving the script as an application made no difference in the time taken.
Does anybody have any knowledge about what makes AppleScript Unicode-only text handling so slow? In this case, it is 1300 times slower! Is there any way of coercing/restricting the text handling/parsing to ASCII? If I really have to, I will set up a humble eMac at school with 10.4 on it just to handle large text files quickly with AppleScript, but I would prefer to be able to do it on the normal work Macs which have 10.5 or later on them. As mentioned, under 10.4.11 the script processes the 1.8MB text file with 1720 users and writes results to two files - all within 3 seconds, so I'm not really looking for coding suggestions unless they are directly related to what has changed in AppleScript under OS X 10.5. Without sounding too smug, the script works properly and speedily (at least in 10.4). I really would like to learn about the changes in AppleScript in OS X 10.5 and how to cope with or work around those changes.

Hi,
text 3 thru 14 in largeText
character 3 thru 14 in largeText
text 3 in largeText
character 3 in largeText
These lines will be slow on Leopard
Getting some text in a variable that contains more than 60000 characters will be slower on Leopard,
but I don't know why it's slower
Here a test script.
script o
    property t_text : ""
end script
set a to "abcdefghij"
set tResult to ""
repeat with i from 1 to 3
    set o's t_text to a
    repeat (item i of {17, 15, 14}) times
        set o's t_text to o's t_text & o's t_text -- add characters in the variable
    end repeat
    set StartTime to current date
    -- test
    repeat 20 times
        set b to text 3 thru 14 in o's t_text -- get a text in the variable
    end repeat
    -- end test
    set EndTime to current date
    set TimeTaken to EndTime - StartTime
    set tResult to tResult & " Getting text in the variable which contains " & length of o's t_text & ", (20 times) = " & TimeTaken & " seconds." & return
end repeat
tResult
Here the result on my old G5, 2 x 1.8 GHZ
Getting text in the variable which contains 1310720 characters, (20 times) = 50 seconds.
Getting text in the variable which contains   327680 characters, (20 times) = 12 seconds.
Getting text in the variable which contains   163840 characters, (20 times) =   6 seconds.
The result on the same machine on Tiger is always less of one second.
Also, I try with 20 millions characters on Tiger, the result : getting text in the variable which contains 20971520 characters, (20 times) = 0 seconds.
The solution ( text item in a list)
Here the script
script o
    property my_List : {}
end script
set OldDelims to text item delimiters
set RecordDelimiter to "::::::::::::::"
set LengthOfRecordDelimiter to length of RecordDelimiter
set o's my_List to findAll(read (choose file), RecordDelimiter)
on findAll(str, findString)
    set Oldtid to text item delimiters
    try
        set text item delimiters to findString
        if str does not contain findString then return {"Nothing found"}
        set t to str's text items
        set text item delimiters to Oldtid
        return t
    on error eMsg number eNum
        set text item delimiters to Oldtid
        error "Can't findAll: " & eMsg number eNum
    end try
end findAll
set NumberOfrecords to (count o's my_List)
display dialog "There are " & NumberOfrecords & " accounts."
set StartTime to current date
set text item delimiters to ":"
set FullUserList to {}
set ListOfUnnamedUsers to {}
-- first user needs to be done separately as it is not preceded by RecordDelimiter
set EndOfHeader to "Standard:URL"
set LengthOfEndOfHeader to length of EndOfHeader
set EndOfHeaderOffset to the offset of EndOfHeader in (item 1 of o's my_List)
set OffsetToApply to EndOfHeaderOffset
set TextBeingChecked to text (OffsetToApply + LengthOfEndOfHeader + 1) thru -1 of (item 1 of o's my_List)
tell TextBeingChecked to set {UserName, NameForInfo} to {text item 1, text item 7}
if NameForInfo = "" then set end of ListOfUnnamedUsers to UserName & return
set end of FullUserList to (UserName & tab & NameForInfo & return)
-- now do all the others
repeat with CounterG from 2 to (NumberOfrecords - 1)
    set TextBeingChecked to item CounterG of o's my_List
    tell TextBeingChecked to set {UserName, NameForInfo} to {text item 1, text item 7}
    if NameForInfo = "" then set end of ListOfUnnamedUsers to UserName & return
    set end of FullUserList to (UserName & tab & NameForInfo & return)
end repeat
set o's my_List to {}
set text item delimiters to OldDelims
-- write results to file
-- 1). full user list
set TargetFile1 to (path to desktop folder as string) & "FullUserList1.txt"
try
    open for access file TargetFile1 with write permission
on error
    close access file TargetFile1
    open for access file TargetFile1 with write permission
end try
set EndTime to current date
beep
set InfoToBeWrittenToFile to FullUserList as text
write InfoToBeWrittenToFile to file TargetFile1
close access file TargetFile1
-- 2). list of users without NameForInfo
set TargetFile2 to (path to desktop folder as string) & "UnnamedUsersList1.txt"
try
    open for access file TargetFile2 with write permission
on error
    close access file TargetFile2
    open for access file TargetFile2 with write permission
end try
set InfoToBeWrittenToFile to ListOfUnnamedUsers as text
write InfoToBeWrittenToFile to file TargetFile2
close access file TargetFile2
beep 3
set TimeTaken to EndTime - StartTime
set TimePerAccount to TimeTaken / NumberOfrecords
display dialog (NumberOfrecords & " accounts took " & TimeTaken & " seconds." & return & return & "That equals " & TimePerAccount & " seconds per account.") as string

Any speed difference between Apple Wifi Router(air express) and Tp link(or others) wifi router)

Any speed difference between Apple Wifi Router(air express) and Tp link(or others) wifi router?
I'm using a tp link router and sometimes it takes a long time delay for my 2 mac computers to connect each other. I don't know this is because of the router compability or the computers.

Anyone knows?

Wireless speed difference with WEP and WPA2?

I am connecting to my FiOS router wirelessly, since I was new on wireless networking, I did lots of reading they all say WEP encryption is flawed, and WPA2 should be used instead. So I changed the router's default WEP to WPA2 the same day I got FiOS installed. When I check about 10 of my neighbor's wireless networks, 8 of them using WEP, 1 has Security Disabled(D'oh), and I am the only one using WPA2-personal. My question is will I see any connection speed difference between using WEP and WPA2?
Solved!
Go to Solution.

in every day use, your experience will vary. There is more "going on" with WPA and WPA2 than with WEP, such as message checking and encryption key changes for each data transmission, so these, combined with other possibilities inherent in computer-connected-to-internet use, can slow you down. Another factor: There will be more administrative overhead to use WPA or WPA2. such as if you ever have to reset the router (to default settings), the default is WEP, so you have to go into the router to then chage it (or import a config file you previously saved on your PC). AND If you need to call verizon tier one tech support, they only support default settings. Their premium service is called Expert Care.
cjacobs001

Does a 1066x CF card have speed difference to a 800x on a 5D Mark II?

Does a 1066x CF card have speed difference to a 800x on a 5D Mark II? Is there a limiting factor that I should have in mind in order to avoid unecessary expenses?
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Sorry, I missed that in your first post. Here is the data for the 5D Mk II: http://www.robgalbraith.com/camera_wb_multi_paged527.html?cid=6007-9784
(the drop down menu at the top lets you choose from many different cameras)
With a 400x 60MB/s card the write speeds max out at about 30MB/s.
With a 1000x 150MB/s card the write speeds max out at about 50MB/s.
Mike Sowsun
S110, SL1, 5D Mk III

Speed difference

Does anyone know what the speed difference is between the 13-inch MBP at 2.66GHz with the Core 2 Duo and the new 15-inch: 2.4GHz with the i5? I'm assuming the new 15 inch is faster, but is it that much quicker, and is it truly noticeable? I'm trying to decide which computer to buy. If anyone knows anything about this it would help me out

You'll find a useful set of comparative benchmarks, including both of these machines, at MacWorld
The 15' i5 is faster, but just how much this will be noticeable for you depends to a significant extent on what you primarily use the computer for. For games like "Call of Duty" the difference is very substantial and for quite a few graphics and processor related tasks it is significant. If your main usage, though, is for word processing and web browsing, however you will not notice much, if any, difference.
Cheers
Rod

Satellite A665 - How to increase WLAN speed?

Hi There
I have 2 notebooks at home. One is A300 (Windows Vista 32bit) and the newer one is A665 (Windows 7/64 bit). My wireless router is US Robotics USR 9108A compatible for the both systems.
A300's wireless internet speed is about 8Mbs but A665' s speed is about 0,7Mbs. How can I increase the speed of A665? What can cause this?
Any help will be appretiated.

Hi buddy,
I had a similar problem on my new Satellite A660 and the problem was power saving mode of WLAN card...
In Windows Power Management you can choose different power saving modes for WLAN card. You have to turn off power saving (=> High Performance) for WLAN card and then you will have the highest possible WLAN speed.
This article explains all functions about Power Saving:

Speed difference between i7 quad 3rd gen 2.6ghz and i7 quad 4th gen 3.1ghz?

How much speed difference in Logic X will I notice between an i7 quad 3rd gen 2.6ghz and i7 quad 4th gen 3.1ghz?
both loaded with 16gb 1600 ram... 256gb ssd

Kappy wrote:
All other things being equal 4-cores are twice as fast as 2-cores. This is regardless of what you are doing. The only way a 2-core processor would be as fast is if it were run at twice the clock speed. But the 2-core CPU is only clocked around 10% or so faster. Now, for all that you claim you will be doing the relevant question is do you need 4-cores. My answer is that you don't. But the 2-core machine will be slower - all things being equal.
Iris is a far better GPU than HD4 or 5000. But not as fast as a discreet GPU with better performance measures. Again, you don't really need high-power GPU. Iris should meet your needs adequately for now.
But remember you want to keep the computer for 6 or 7 years. No one knows what your needs will be then. You may find whatever you buy today that meets today's needs will be inadequate for tomorrow's.
Your comments on graphics pretty much confirm the majority of what I've been reading on other sites.
The conflict is with cores. About half the people are saying for low CPU intensive tasks 4 cores are totally unnecessary, while the other half says they'll make things faster no what the task (one thing all seem to have in common is they're totally against the 2014s).
So it seems I'm left with the decision between faster performance vs better graphics.
I appreciate your input.

Speed difference between hotspot and cellular

Looking at an iPad mini, I have a hot spot on my phone, so I'm wondering how much of a speed difference there might be using a Mini with an iPhone 5 hotspot with AT&T and AT&T cellular on the Mini.

Download an app such as Speedtest to your iPad. Test both ways and see the results for yourself.

Is there much speed difference between the iMacs?

Just wondering, if there is any noticeable performance difference between the 1.83 - the 2.0 and the 2.16?
I'd be surprised to learn that there was (and also, keenly interested to learn).
My experience is that a dual processor is noticeably more capable than a single processor (regardless of minor increments at the end of the processor number).
Anyone?

You are right that it is more about futher differentiating the models than anything else. The speed difference is negligible, but a nice plus is you choose a larger display. Typically you also get a larger standard HD and maybe a better video card and if you add all those things up, the price difference is worth it.

Processor speed difference.

Hello. I'm taking thought into getting a new laptop. I currently have the iBook G4 (the rest of specifications is at the bottom of my post). I'm quiet the impatient person, so I enjoy lots of performance in a computer. I mainly wanted to know the speed difference between the Processors of the G4 and Intel Duo, as if both CPU's are running at 2.0GHz. I acknowledge that the processors have faster clock speeds.
Thanks in advance,
Sir Wetzel.

I just replaced by G4 Powerbook with a 2.8ghz Core 2 Duo MBP. It really depends on what you're doing, but in real world uses, the Intel processor cuts through video and sound encoding that leaves the G4 standing still. Photoshop launches in seconds, Safari almost immediately with no 'bounce'. RAW editing is a breeze. The G4 lagged badly when it came to RAW editing. It was nigh impossible to use Aperture for example.
I'm not sure it's possible to do what you ask, since the duo is really 2 processors, not one. Try the Xbench website for comparisons between systems.

Bonjour vs. DNS mapping to afp server -- huge speed differences

This is my original topic:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1340637
Initially, I thought the issue was Leopard's Finder sidebar was mapping via smb -- hence the very poor speeds. After several replies with RCR, I'm seeing that both machines were copying via afp, the only difference is the Leopard sidebar mapped the machine via Bounjour vs. DNS.
Here's my setup:
- Leopard iMac (August 2007), 4GB ram, gig-e connection
- Tiger Server Mini (August 2007), 2GB ram, gig-e connection
Using Leopard, mounting the sidebar via Finder will copy a file (located via Bounjour, over afp, confirmed with via Sharepoint and "mount" on cli) roughly 32MB/sec. Disconnect the Bounjour mapping and reconnect to the same machine (command-k) via DNS (full.three.partnaming) and the same transfer will be nearly 78MB/sec.
Has anyone else seen this speed difference? Can anyone else test this speed difference on Leopard?

As requested:
Last login: Thu Jan 24 16:16:51 on console
imac:~ vash$ dns-sd -G v4v6 imini.local
Timestamp A/R Flags if Hostname Address TTL
16:18:39.609 Add 3 4 imini.local. 192.168.1.40 120
16:18:39.609 Add 2 4 imini.local. FE80:0000:0000:0000:0216:CBFF:FEAB:6B84 120
Here is similar for the other full part naming:
imac:~ vash$ dns-sd -G v4v6 imini.fenjikufenji.com
Timestamp A/R Flags if Hostname Address TTL
16:19:56.768 Add 2 0 imini.fenjikufenji.com. 192.168.1.40 108002
16:19:56.777 Add 2 0 imini.fenjikufenji.com. 0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000 0 No Such Record

Mac Pro - Boot drive - Read & Write speed differences

Hi
My Mac Pro came with a 500GB boot drive when I ordered it 3 years ago. It has been used most days and now runs
Snow Leopard (for scanners and a canopus video box that don't work with Lion) and Lion.
I did a write & write test on the drive recently at both were approx 60 - 65 MB/s. I have another drive in my machine
I bought last month, replacing an WD drive that failed in less than 18 months. This new drive (complete same as replacement
is a WD Caviar (Black) 1TB 64Mb drive.
This drive tests at speeds for 110MB/s. This may seem an obvious question, but will I notice much difference if I swap the drives
around and have the newer drive as my boot drive.
Also, does having two OS on a HD slow the drive down also?
Thanks in advance
Matt

Use the 500 for a system backup clone then.
If you want to and have $150 then I recommend this for the system actually (you don't need 1TB and even if you did use a 1TB which are now $120, I would 'short stroke' and use just 1/3 to 1/2 for the system anyway.
Western Digital WD2500HHTZ 250gb Sata 6gb/s 3.5 Hd
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007V5A1BK/
check reviews of the new WD 10K VR ~200MB/sec

Satellite A200: Slow WLAN speed with Atheros AR5007EG

Hi there,
I recently bought an Satellite A200 with an Atheros 5007eg wireless lan adapter. I am using Vista. And i'm using a d-link router.
My problem is the following:
Somehow, when I download it only produces 1/4th of the speed I get when i connect it directly to my modem... Ive tried downloading new drivers, but no help there.
Can someone help me pls? I already talked to toshiba NL, they told me to send it to them, they had it for three weeks and then sent it back without doing anything.

As far as I know an BIOS and the Atheros driver update should clear this issue.
A friend of mine has the same notebook and he has updated the both mentioned thing and it works great.
The BIOS update you will find on the Toshiba European driver page and the Atheros WLan driver here:
http://aps.toshiba-tro.de/wlan/
Bye

Speed Difference ~ 17" and 20" iMac

I have two new Core 2 Duo iMac's running OS x v10.4.8. 17" is 2GHz with 2GB RAM and 20" is 2.16GHz with 2GB RAM. I have installed Windows XP Pro using Boot Camp Beta v1.1.1 with an equal partition of the 250GB HD of both computers. No applications have been installed other than those that come with the two operating systems. Both computers passed the complete diagonstics of TechTool Pro v4.5.1 before the Windows install. The 20" machine seems much slower than the 17' even allowing for the 8% difference in processor speed. I timed Cold Start and Restart and found that the 20" was about 50% slower. Has anyone else experienced this issue? Does anyone know what might be causing this issue?
cwsheets
Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Ian, thank you for a reply. I will respond to your questions.
1. I did not because I had no sense that the two machines were different. It was too late after I realized that there was a significant difference in speed. I still have no applications installed and am considering a clean install of OS X v10.4.8 on the 20". I may also reinstall everything on the 17" as well.
2. Meaningless, maybe? Cold Start: 17" = 0.34 min. and 20" = 0.55 min. Restart: 17" = 0.42 min. and 20" = 0.62 min. My timing device was a stopwatch and two runs were averaged.
If I do not obtain any insight into my issue I will do a clean reinstall on both machines and install applications. Then I will retest incrimentially and post the results.
cwsheets

WLAN Speed Difference

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for