cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Hub 3 / Compal CH7465-LG (TG2492LG) and CGNV4 Latency Cause

Datalink
Up to speed

Good Day Ladies and Gentlemen,

Greetings from the other side of the pond, so to speak.  Over the last few weeks I've been perusing various user forums across North America and Europe for issues related to Intel Puma 6 modem latency.  Of those forums, your Hub 3 stands out as yet another Puma 6 based modem where users see continuous latency no matter what site is used or what online game is played. Considering all of the problems that are on the go, the following information should be of interest to all Hub 3, Compal CH7465-LG and Hitron CGNV4 modem users.  There is much more to post regarding this, so this is a start, to alert VM users as to the real cause of the latency and hopefully engage the VM engineering staff, via the forum staff, with Arris.  I am surprised to see that there has been no mention on this board of users from other ISPs who are suffering the exact same issues with their modems, so, this may come as a surprise to some, and possibly old news to others.

So, the short story ........

The Hub 3 / Compal CH7465-LG (TG2492LG) & Hiton CGNV4 modems are Intel Puma 6 / 6 Media Gateway (MG) based modems.  These modems exhibit high latency to the modem and high latency thru the modem.  The latency affects all IPV4 and IPV6 protocols, so it will be seen on every internet application and game.  The basic cause is the processing of the data packets thru a CPU software based process instead of thru the hardware processor / accelerator.  It appears that a higher priority task runs periodically, causing the packet processing to halt, and then resume.  This is observed as latency in applications and in ping tests to the modem and beyond.  For the last several weeks, Hitron, along with Intel and Rogers Communications in Canada have been addressing the latency issue within the Hitron CGNxxx series modems.  To date, only the IPV4 ICMP latency has been resolved.  Although this is only one protocol, it does show that a Puma 6MG modem is capable of using the hardware processor / accelerator with good results.  Currently Rogers is waiting for further firmware updates from Hitron which should include an expanded list of resolved protocol latency issues.  For Arris modems, "Netdog" an Arris engineer indicated last week that Arris was onboard to address the issue for the Arris SB6190 modem.  That should be considered as good news for any Arris modem (read Hub 3) user as Arris should be able to port those changes over to other Puma 6/6MG modems fairly quickly.  This is not a trivial exercise and will probably take several weeks to accomplish.  Note that there is no guarantee at this point that it is possible to shift all packet processing to the hardware processor / accelerator without suffering from any packet loss side effects.  Time will tell if all of the technical issues can be resolved with the current hardware included in the Puma 6/6MG chipset.  Last night, Netdog loaded beta firmware on selected test modems on the Comcast Communications network.  As this was only done last night, it's too soon to tell what this version resolves and if it was successful or not.  Netdog has contacts with staff at Comcast, Rogers, Charter and Cox Communications to fan out beta versions and modifications for testing.  I'd say its time to add Virgin Media and/or Liberty Global to that group as well.

Recent activity:

Approx three weeks ago a DSLReports user, xymox1 started a thread where he reported high latency to an Arris SB6190 and illustrated that with numerous MultiPing plots.  This is the same latency that I and other users with Rogers communications have been dealing with for months so it came as no surprise.  As well as reporting via that thread, xymox1 took it upon himself to email several staff members at Arris, Intel, Cablelabs and others.  The result of that campaign was Netdog's announcement, last week, that Arris was fully engaged at resolving the issue.  That has led to last nights release of beta firmware, although as I indicated its too early to determine what the beta firmware resolves, if anything.


The original thread that xymox1 started is here:

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31079834-ALL-SB6190-is-a-terrible-modem-Intel-Puma-6-MaxLinear-mis...


Yesterday, DSLReports issued a news story covering the thread:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/The-Arris-SB6190-Modem-Puma-6-Chipset-Have-Some-Major-Issues-138...


Today, Arris responded:

https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Arris-Tells-us-Its-Working-With-Intel-on-SB6190-Puma6-Problems-1...


That response was also picked by Multichannel.com

http://www.multichannel.com/news/distribution/intel-arris-working-firmware-fix-sb6190-modem/409379

This is more news likely to appear in the next few days as additional tech and news staff pick up on this issue.


Hub 3 observations:

Like many others using a Puma 6/6MG modem, Hub 3 users are experiencing latency when they ping the modem, or ping a target outside of the home, game online or use low latency applications.  The common misconception is that this is Buffer Bloat. It's not. Its most likely a case of the packet processing stopping while the CPU processes a higher priority task.  The packet processing is done via the CPU no matter what mode the modem is operating in, modem mode or router mode and no matter what IPV4 or IPV6 protocol is used.  Normally, the latency is just that, latency.  The exception are UDP packets. In this case there is latency and packet loss.  The result of that is delayed and failed DNS lookups, and poor game performance for games that use UDP for player/server comms or player/player comms.


Can this be fixed?

So far, it appears that the answer is yes.  Rogers Communications issued beta firmware to a small group of test modems in October.  This version shifted the IPV4 ICMP processing from the CPU to the hardware processor / accelerator, resulting in greatly improved performance in ping latency.  At the present time we are waiting for the next version firmware which should shift other protocols over to the hardware processor / accelerator.  That can be seen in the following post:

http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/forums/forumtopicpage/board-id/Getting_connected/message-id/369...

The details and results of last nights beta release to the Comcast group have yet to be seen.

At this point there is enough reading to keep most staff and users busy.  My intention is to post some of the history leading up to this point and instructions on how to detect the latency and packet loss.  This is not thru the use of a BQM.  I had hoped to post this all at once but events are moving much faster than I had thought they would.  For now this should suffice to get the ball rolling.

Below is a link to a post with a couple of HrPing plots from my 32 channel modem to the connected CMTS.  This shows the latency that is observed and reflects what others have posted in this forum using Pingplotter and HrPing.

https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31106550-

HrPing is one of the freebie applications that can be used to monitor the latency to and thru the modem. 

Pingplots with Pingplotter which show the latency from my modem to the CMTS can be found in the first two to three rows of my online image library at Rogers Communications, located below.  They are essentially what the BQM would look like if you were able to zoom into the plot to the point where you could see the individual ping spikes.  Those ping spikes are common to Puma 6 and Puma 6MG modems.

http://communityforums.rogers.com/t5/media/gallerypage/user-id/829158

 

 

 [MOD EDIT: Subject heading changed to assist community]

4,478 REPLIES 4,478


@WildWayz wrote:

@impatientprada wrote:

@wotusaw

Thanks for the reply, I have just signed up for the VIVID350 so not a gamer package? I am very torn I have to admit. The download speed would be awesome but having seen the issues people have with FIFA (few threads below this) I don’t think I could live with that, another option is to get an ADSL line also which I can use for gaming and if it’s only a short term contract then it allows Virgin time to sort the issue out. I am assuming I could get an ADSL line alongside Virgin? 

Also, just to check is it correct I have a 14 day cooling off period once it’s been installed? I have been given a 30th Nov install date so the 14 days starts from then, correct? 

I am just thinking I can get it all installed, if it’s no good then I can just cancel it all and move elsewhere.


Apparently there is no Gamer package now - the top tier package ie 300 / 350Mbit IS the one with 20Mbit upload, no upload limits or download limits - basically it is the gamer package with the gaming brand removed.


It's been like this for at least two months unofficially although others on the forum told me off for 'speculating'...

dasBOT
On our wavelength

I called their useless customer servive today coz lags in World of Tanks are just crazy, they told me there is no chance to get new firmware, that i have to wait till it is approved and release to public .... I will call tomorrow but to BT you useless virgin media

 

[MOD EDIT: Inappropriate language removed, please review the Forum Guidelines]

purplemonkey
Joining in
How is it possible I get better performance from the Hub 3 in router mode than in modem mode?

Router I was using with the Hub was the TP-Link Archer C2 V3 AC900 and going by the specs and reviews I expected both a stronger, more stable wifi connection and, to be honest, better download speeds. Turns out, connected to the Hub 3, all that was fixed was the wifi connection stability. Speeds were way worse.

Vivid 350 on Hub 3 alone: 280/19
Vivid 350 through TP-Link 130/16

What's up with that?
https://imgur.com/a/Su2zn

No way of testing a wired connection but wifi results really shouldn't be so varied and as inconsistent as they seem to be.

Is it even the Hub 3's problem? Or the TP-Link's?


@purplemonkey wrote:
How is it possible I get better performance from the Hub 3 in router mode than in modem mode?

Router I was using with the Hub was the TP-Link Archer C2 V3 AC900 and going by the specs and reviews I expected both a stronger, more stable wifi connection and, to be honest, better download speeds. Turns out, connected to the Hub 3, all that was fixed was the wifi connection stability. Speeds were way worse.

Vivid 350 on Hub 3 alone: 280/19
Vivid 350 through TP-Link 130/16

What's up with that?
https://imgur.com/a/Su2zn

No way of testing a wired connection but wifi results really shouldn't be so varied and as inconsistent as they seem to be.

Is it even the Hub 3's problem? Or the TP-Link's?

 


superHub3 

* Euro / DOCSIS 3.0 (24 Downstream and 8 Upstream channels)
* 4 Gigabit Ethernet LAN Ports
* 2 x RJ-11 Telephone Ports
* 802.11 AC WiFi (2.4GHz + 5GHz) maximum wifi speed is 1.3Gbps
* Download Speed of up to 1 Gbps (ignore this, you won’t ever get that on VM until DOCSIS3.1 arrives)

TP-Link Archer C2 V3 AC900

  • Supports 802.11ac standard - the next generation of Wi-Fi
  • Simultaneous 2.4GHz 450Mbps and 5GHz 433Mbps connections for 883Mbps of total available bandwidth
  • 3 external antennas provide stable omnidirectional signal and superior wireless coverage
  • Full gigabit ports ensure ultrafast data transfer speeds
My Broadband Ping - My Virgin VIVID300 SuperHub3+RT-AC5300

My Broadband Ping - VM neighbor SH2ac vivid100

I'm well aware of the specs, mate. They're why I'm confused as to how my download speeds are so low using the TP-Link.

are you definitely connected on the 5Ghz AC band? make sure you have separate network names for the 2.4ghz and the 5ghz as devices can be known to chose poorly and actually connect to 2.4ghz which causes slower speeds.

Absolutely. Even went a step further and made it AC only. Both frequencies have also been named separately.

Tried different cables, moving router to a better place, reboots, resets. The works. QoS is off, wireless channels are perfect and have had their frequencies widened to the max.

The "link speed" matches the Hub 3's at 433Mbps but for whatever reason download speeds are almost halved.

All I want is a good connection close to what I'm paying for and to not have to constantly be checking speeds and whatnot. Would be nice to just plug'n forget and get on with my life.

I remember I encountered an issue like this one, just for testing purposes have you tried selecting manually the wifi channels? rather then auto? I often find by specifying the wireless channel for each radio manually it somehow resolved my speed issue with the router itself.

Always do. I always choose 13 for 2.4GHz and 44 on 5GHz and if those start playing up I use a wifi analyser app to determine the best channels.

My phone is more than capable of taking in VMs top speeds and the router should at least be pulling in real world downloads of at least 300Mb/s. Right?

it should do, I am not familiar with tp-link firmware to be honest, I always flash DD-WRT onto any of my routers, the fact you can reach expected speeds on Router mode with the hub and take a drop when using your own router leads me to suspect 2 things, either is a problem locally with the router itself, or you hitting a peering issue, as I'm sure you already know when you use your own router with a new MAC it gets assigned a different IP address, and these can be routed through the network differently, I believe its why virgin themselves suggest customers attempt it, I am wondering if the IP address your router is using might be causing the problem, have you done a speed test over LAN on your new router just to see if you get max speeds that way? sorry if you have already mentioned this I probably haven't read back far enough.