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

"Nope, no misadvertising goes on here, since no actual numbers being mentioned. "Low" ping means absolutely nothing and not a technical term. Its basically same as putting these "new improved version!" stickers on same variation of cheap products - means nothing, very cheesy practice, but not illegal."

Let's see.  If I have time tomorrow I'll contact the ASA.  If the mendacious ********** at Verminmedia have the sheer ******** audacity to advertise their rubbish service as "low ping", then I think they are due for reporting.  **bleep**, I can SEE tears in texture as I move in on-line games, at the two second interrupt frequency of the Puma 6 chipset.  VM management and marketing: What a disgusting, lying bunch of toerags.

It's starting to become very annoying again.

https://youtu.be/dS3SsU7moiQ

mrfreeman
Joining in

Thanks for the replies guys (2 weeks ago lol), that's actually kind of reassuring.  Despite all the complaints on here, I think I might actually be able to use the Hub 3 if I get stuck with it.  So do all the posters in this thread game competitively, and is that why you are all up in arms?  Or are you unhappy with other aspects like browsing etc.? 

It's weird, but when online gaming took off in the 90's (like Quake, Doom etc.), I was so excited and found the whole thing such a novelty.  It was fascinating to actually play against other people in real time, and each game had it's unique appeal.  I will always remember hearing "Welcome to Gamespy" which was my favourite online app for playing online.  But I don't know when, at some point I got bored of running around and shooting real people online (and seeing less popular games like Jedi Knight, Populous, Far Cry etc. die a death due to the rise of Call Of Duty and Counterstrike etc.).  So I stuck with single player games mainly, or against bots, with just the occasional online diversion.  So I guess I am kinda lucky that I won't be too affected by all this.  But it does make me think I should start playing online more NOW to make the most of it before the dreaded Hub 3 is upon me!  (Opposite situation to you guys where I have excellent ping, but ain't using it lol!).

So shall we start compiling a list of what games are GOOD ENOUGH with the Hub 3, and what games are UNPLAYABLE?  So it might actually be of use to people new to the situation.  And this list could then be posted on YOUTUBE, PCGAMER (remember THEM??), EUROGAMER, IGN UK etc. etc. and warnings issued to potential VM customers that this is what you are letting yourself in for!  That might be more beneficial than just endless screenshots of yellow streaks and charts which are meaningless from a gameplay point of view.

Yes, and what about PC Gamer?  Haven't heard a single peep out of them about all this, or Rock, Paper, Shotgun.  They have always been at the core of online multiplayer gaming in the UK (going right back to the 90's), so for them to not even acknowledge this is absolutely bizaare and quite a letdown.  Because a huge proportion of gamers in the UK must surely be on Virgin Media?  Or not?  What percentage of market do VM have vs SKY, BT etc.?

OK, I've rambled enough, maybe someone on here will have the gumption to set the ball rolling on some of these ideas, and stop posting useless yellow charts which are not helping anybody. 😄  

mrfreeman
Joining in

And just another conspiracy theory that occurred to me, did Intel deliberately create this buggy firmware to cripple online gaming?  Why on earth would they do that?  Maybe because online gaming is considered unhealthy re: lack of exercise, it consumes so much time and reduces productivity, causes lack of sleep due to playing late at night, messes up circadian rhythms, contributes to RSI and bad posture, amongst other things?  All avoidable of course using common sense, but Barack Obama didn't see it like that when he told Americans to 'put away their Xboxes and get a job'!  So I can perfectly believe that Intel were under instructions from the upper echelons to do something about this 'problem'.  Funny how only online gaming is badly affected by the Puma 6...

<Tin hat off>  🙂

Keep in mind that the Puma 5 was originally designed and built by Texas Instruments around 2007/2008.

http://newscenter.ti.com/news-releases?item=127113

Intel bought the modem product line from Texas Instruments in 2010.

https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/intel-to-acquire-texas-instruments-cable-modem-unit/

Intel then put their own spin on the Puma chipset, developing the Puma 6 chipset in the 2011/2012 timeframe. 

https://www.fiercecable.com/cable/intel-debuts-1-gig-docsis-3-0-gateway

The rest as they say, is history……

 

Fwiw, the Puma 7 chipset resolves the vast majority of the run of the mill Puma 6 latency issues.  There are still complaints about VPN throughput performance, which was also observed in the Puma 6 modems.  And …. the DOS issue is still a problem.

Hub 3.0 user here.

NAT is always open on COD and I don't experience any lag or disconnect issues

*****
If you think my answer has helped - please provide me with a Kudos rating and mark as Helpful Answer!!
I do not work for Virgin Media - all opinions expressed are of my own and all answers are provided from my own and past experiences.
Office 365, Dynamics CRM and Cloud Computing Jedi

Be careful saying stuff like that in here. Positive experiences are frowned upon in these here parts and just dismissed as lies, being shills or whoever is saying such blasphemous things just doesn't know what lag is...

I too see/feel no lag or suffer what most do and can play quite comfortably and enjoy myself. That's not to say the complaints people have are false or anything. Just some are more affected than others.

Same here - HUB 3 user... no issues with lag in game. VOIP is fine. Downloading is fine. NAT always open on PS4 and also on PC games (Destiny 2 etc).
No issues whatsoever.

wotusaw
Superfast

Mmmmm..I spy with my little eye two little.....just kidding.Smiley Wink

Willing to accept what you say.

I've not alot of problems, but on the killcam in Titanfall 2 I can plainly see alot of latency effect, no question. Although the game plays well at 1st sight. I can't however play COD at all. The latency really shows on that genre. Also on switching over HUBS from HUB2 to HUB3 immediately saw page loading problems/delays.

Think you 2 geezers are just lucky and possibly better players than you think. Mind you, if I saw either of you on TT2 prob be a different story.Smiley Mad

I'd deffo agree that we're probably lucky. Broadband is such a hard fish to fry... as so many things impact the connection. 

Area 26 (Huddersfield) had a brief period of congestion (september 2016-april 2017) but since then and before, no issues at all with the performance. Also they seem to roll out upgrades there sooner than a lot of places like 300Mbit / 350Mbit.