Yep we are now starting to correlate that the Puma 6 is way worse the more channels. AND we have a good report that the number of upstream channels is a big factor in addition to downstream. I would also guess the constallation size might even matter, so QAM 256 vs say QAM 64..
What we need is a CMTS on a bench with a modem where we can try out all modulations and configs. IE Cablelabs should have done this.
This is kinda a fun chart.. The Puma 6 is producing jitter and latency that makes it a way worse performer then a 2009 modem.
Amazingly, amazing!
You would think that they might like to know how their machine was performing before throwing it out to the hungry masses, wouldn't you.
Thanks for all the info, Xymox1. Very enlightening.
@wotusaw wrote:Amazingly, amazing!
You would think that they might like to know how their machine was performing before throwing it out to the hungry masses, wouldn't you.
Thanks for all the info, Xymox1. Very enlightening.
Well they would have known how it was performing on the most common configuration at the time the unit was developed, these things don't just produce themselves overnight and despite the hub3 being "new" to VM, the unbadged unit isn't exactly new tech http://www.arris.com/globalassets/resources/data-sheets/tg2492s3.pdf the copyright on this document is 2015, so assuming it was probably being developed for atleast 6 months prior to that if not longer, you're looking at testing done in about 2014, in which time a LOT can change
@shanematthews wrote:
@wotusaw wrote:Amazingly, amazing!
You would think that they might like to know how their machine was performing before throwing it out to the hungry masses, wouldn't you.
Thanks for all the info, Xymox1. Very enlightening.
Well they would have known how it was performing on the most common configuration at the time the unit was developed, these things don't just produce themselves overnight and despite the hub3 being "new" to VM, the unbadged unit isn't exactly new tech http://www.arris.com/globalassets/resources/data-sheets/tg2492s3.pdf the copyright on this document is 2015, so assuming it was probably being developed for atleast 6 months prior to that if not longer, you're looking at testing done in about 2014, in which time a LOT can change
That's great and all but the latency issues were brought up in the SH3 beta trials so VM were very much aware there was an issue before deploying it to the masses....
@boltedenergy wrote:
@shanematthews wrote:
@wotusaw wrote:Amazingly, amazing!
You would think that they might like to know how their machine was performing before throwing it out to the hungry masses, wouldn't you.
Thanks for all the info, Xymox1. Very enlightening.
Well they would have known how it was performing on the most common configuration at the time the unit was developed, these things don't just produce themselves overnight and despite the hub3 being "new" to VM, the unbadged unit isn't exactly new tech http://www.arris.com/globalassets/resources/data-sheets/tg2492s3.pdf the copyright on this document is 2015, so assuming it was probably being developed for atleast 6 months prior to that if not longer, you're looking at testing done in about 2014, in which time a LOT can change
That's great and all but the latency issues were brought up in the SH3 beta trials so VM were very much aware there was an issue before deploying it to the masses....
Thing is, they say "beta trials" at this point they are already set on ordering and deploying the unit and are likely already training staff to install and troubleshoot them along with stocking up the required warehouses, the issue also doesn't affect most standard traffic and unless the closed pre-beta testing involved a lot of hardcore gamers and streamers the unit wasn't stress tested before the beta trial, at which point they probably could have backed out of the deal, once its wearing VM colours its almost guaranteed to arrive, so yes they would have been aware of a few instances of issues but they were clearly not widespread enough to actually need drastic action taken and likely would have fallen within the margin of error for testing purposes, they would also have assumed most issues could be patched with a firmware update, they now know better but hindsight is a wonderful thing
Hi guys,
Short follow up. Package arrived in the post yesterday from VirginMedia! Its my Superhub2ac!??
No.... its not....its another Superhub 3. <sigh>
1.5 hours later on the phone and I have the following result:
1) A SuperHub 2ac was ordered, but was fulfilled by a Superhub3, according to the person I spoke to, its likely Virgin has run out.
2) I have managed a downgrade to my original Superhub...which is a SH1 (boo, I thought it was a SH2)
Spot the difference below.
Note the difference not just in peak, but also in minimum and average.
Here's a graph of a local ping to the SH1, via my Asus router. Please refer to my original graphs of SH3 on page 53 of this thread for comparison.
BR
Peter
