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

Hi all. My situation is slightly different to most people as I am still on the Superhub 1 (I do have 100mb speed though). I've been happy with performance...gaming and streaming. I've just received the v6 box (currently have Tvio) and Superhub 3. I am now reluctant to install both after reading of the problems with SH 3 on this forum. Am I right to hold until the next version of the hub? I assume even with 100mb on SH 1, I cannot just connect up the v6 box. The last thing I want is for the SH 1 to be deactivated when I activate the v6.

speed is nothing for online gamers... latency thats what matter and in that department VM is the worst in the market

Agree , who is this guy switching from sky to virgin lol ? Are you mad ? If sky or bt were in my area I would switch in a heart beat , virgin media is Great for everything except gaming. 

Speed is hardly "nothing" if you're a gamer. Your argument is flawed and has a gaping hole in it. If you download your games, most of which can reach in excess of 80Gb in size, then you're going to need that speed.


@ShadowOfDeth69 wrote:
Speed is hardly "nothing" if you're a gamer. Your argument is flawed and has a gaping hole in it. If you download your games, most of which can reach in excess of 80Gb in size, then you're going to need that speed.

But how often are you going to need to download huge games?


@Nejones1981 wrote:

Agree , who is this guy switching from sky to virgin lol ? Are you mad ? If sky or bt were in my area I would switch in a heart beat , virgin media is Great for everything except gaming. 


Mad? Probably. Although at least I will have a 14 day cooling off period to make a decision. If I do stay with Sky I think I'll need to get my line checked out as it isn't great either according to the BQM, however I haven't come across any noticeable issues while gaming online (mainly BF1) - Sky Fibre Max - Broadband Quality Monitor 

"But how often are you going to need to download huge games?"

Quite often. A typical HDD on console is 1TB and that fills up surprisingly fast especially when you take into account game updates.

Instead of worrying about available space I will just delete a few games and when I want to play them again I redownload them. There are ALWAYS new games coming out and I'm forever clearing space for them.


@ShadowOfDeth69 wrote:
"But how often are you going to need to download huge games?"

Quite often. A typical HDD on console is 1TB and that fills up surprisingly fast especially when you take into account game updates.

Instead of worrying about available space I will just delete a few games and when I want to play them again I redownload them. There are ALWAYS new games coming out and I'm forever clearing space for them.

Well I use the Xbox One X at the moment but before that the standard Xbox and PS4 Pro and I just leave it to do automatic downloads of purchases and updates when I am not playing or at work etc I'm not sitting there watching it download, I have no issues using my BT connection for that.

Out of interest however in real life what is the actual speed attained when downloading a game via Xbox or PSN because the majority of people I know never get anywhere near there max attainable using Virgin but most get very close to it when using BT in fact I always get just over 70Mbps on Xbox.

Plus Xbox and PSN both cap speeds anyway, plus PSN is notably slower than Xbox when downloading content and updates due to the PSN network being outdated.

If you use a console why don't you have an external HD to store games instead of downloading the same content over and over surely it would be much quicker.

If you're happy doing what you're doing the way you're doing, good for you. I do that too sometimes, download a game or update while at work or in bed. But, other times I'll buy a game on a whim while I'm chilling in the living room.

As far as real life DL speeds go on the console they're anywhere from 180-210ish so instantly a MASSIVE improvement over a mincey 70Mb/s connection.

Yes they "cap" speeds but there are little tricks and tweaks you can implement to get around those caps.

As far as the external drive goes. Why should I? My system works and refuse to pay a good wad of cash for something that just isn't necessary for me personally.

Also I am yet to suffer any game breaking symptoms of poor latency for the games I'm playing right now so I have the best of both worlds. Raw bandwidth and low latency 🙂


@ShadowOfDeth69 wrote:


As far as real life DL speeds go on the console they're anywhere from 180-210ish so instantly a MASSIVE improvement over a mincey 70Mb/s connection.

I would love to see a quick video of these download speeds being achieved on console especially anything stable over 150Mbps for at least 90 seconds, not saying I don't believe you are seeing these speeds I just know console speeds fluctuate and are often exaggerated.

Oh and btw doesn't the word mincey mean "MEAN"