Menu
Reply
  • 279
  • 19
  • 94
philjohn
Fibre optic
1,130 Views
Message 3721 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

I know the R7800 has had some issues with latency spikes, although the latest Linux Kernel seems to fix this (running OpenWRT Master)

0 Kudos
  • 159
  • 0
  • 16
nad223
Dialled in
1,118 Views
Message 3722 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

its called bt homehub 4
0 Kudos
  • 82
  • 0
  • 13
CJS23
Up to speed
1,098 Views
Message 3723 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

Best site I've found for info on the whole debacle is here

http://www.badmodems.com/

 

0 Kudos
  • 35
  • 0
  • 2
Mikey86uk
On our wavelength
739 Views
Message 3724 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

So its still not safe to upgrade from my ancient Super Hub 1 on VIVID 100 to the Super Hub 3 and VIVID 350?

 

Im a heavy user who games and streams Netflix (upto 4K) and stream 4K movies from iTunes, and with my Sky Q box downloading in the background at times I need the higher package really, but really don't like the sound of the Super Hub 3! 

It would be used in Modem mode and connected to my Netgear R7000 router, but I don't think that makes any difference with the Hub 3? 

0 Kudos
  • 102
  • 5
  • 13
jonathanm
Up to speed
703 Views
Message 3725 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

For all the things you describe (other than gaming) the Hub 3.0 even on the current/old (9.1.116V) should be more than adequate for those activities. Gaming is where there is a bit more of a risk, if you went to VIVID 350 and got the latest firmware (.603) then the recent posts suggest that this is better (dare I say seemingly on par with previous hubs?).

I'm on VIVID 200 and have a Hub 3.0 and don't have any issues with streaming or downloads.

Guess it depends what's more important or would hurt more - more bandwidth vs the risk of now getting the latest firmware for a some undetermined amount of time.

This assumes that there are not non-hub related connection issues when/if you upgraded - which I guess is a risk regardless of whether it was the Hub 3.0 or another version.

  • 279
  • 19
  • 94
philjohn
Fibre optic
696 Views
Message 3726 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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


@Mikey86uk wrote:

Im a heavy user who games and streams Netflix (upto 4K) and stream 4K movies from iTunes, and with my Sky Q box downloading in the background at times I need the higher package really, but really don't like the sound of the Super Hub 3! 

 

The Puma 6 issue is somewhat overblown, insofar as for the things you state are important (bar gaming) it makes zero difference. Some people have stated their browsing was stalling, but that's not something I encountered, perhaps because a lot of the issues with UDP packet loss and jitter could lead to DNS lookups failing. I have a caching DNS resolver on my own network which keeps 65k DNS entires locally, so lookups are sporadic.

It's likely if you upgrade to Vivid 350 you'll get .603 from inferring that other people on 350 are the ones who have had the update pushed when doing a reset, and from me being upgraded to it when I went from Vivid 200 to 350.

The other thing to think about is - do you *really* need 350Mbps? 4K netflix is circa 15Mbps, iTunes is similar bitrate. Sky Q will be ever so slightly higher - but - these are all "bursty" and so having sustained speed you're not using is just wasting money.

  • 874
  • 121
  • 388
Andruser
Well-informed
684 Views
Message 3727 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

Mikey86uk: "Im a heavy user who games and streams Netflix (upto 4K) and stream 4K movies from iTunes, and with my Sky Q box downloading in the background at times I need the higher package really, but really don't like the sound of the Super Hub 3! "

Really, you're doing that much downloading?  Gaming won't exceed 1 Mbps download, and that's being exceptionally generous.  Even streaming at 4K is "only" about 15 Mbps.  So if you are gaming and simultaneously watching a 4K download, meanwhile the missus is streaming TWO 4K movies at the same time you're still only using 46 Mbps - on a 100 Mbps contract that leaves your Sky Q with 54 Mbps for background downloads (which as a background task shouldn't really be using more than say 10 Mbps)..  

VM are very keen to flog 350 Mbps because they can charge more, and its faster than the most common form of competition (Openreach VDSL), but very, very few residential customers make any worthwhile use of it.

  • 35
  • 0
  • 2
Mikey86uk
On our wavelength
679 Views
Message 3728 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

I probably don’t need it but VM are offering me the 350 for less than what I’m paying for just the 100, I’m not sure what they would offer with the 200, and even then I think I’m correct in saying that the Super Hub 1 can’t do anything higher than 100? 

I did cancel my 350 order once I found this thread a few weeks ago as I didn’t want the headache with the Hub 3. 

 

Also so when I cancelled the 350 offer they couldn’t give me any kind of offer with my Vivid 100 package. 

0 Kudos
  • 874
  • 121
  • 388
Andruser
Well-informed
666 Views
Message 3729 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

"VM are offering me the 350 for less than what I’m paying for just the 100"

Fair enough, take it with both hands! 

But don't forget that when they start ramping the cost up again, you might be able to cope with a good Openreach connection!  My somewhat cynical view of the 200 and 350 offers is that they cost VM no more to provide than 50 or 100, but VM know that once they've got customer firmly beyond the speeds of Openreach, most people wouldn't willingly revert to a nominally slower line.  At the 50-100 speeds they have to be careful because the market price is largely set by Openreach.  Once they've got customers hooked on higher speeds, then they may not have to worry so much when working out the price rises.

Highlighted
  • 102
  • 2
  • 91
Datalink
Up to speed
643 Views
Message 3730 of 4,479
Flag for a moderator

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

@philjohn, the fact that you use a caching DNS resolver on your network results in very minimal impact, if any on your web browsing.  GRC's DNS benchmark can show up to a 10 % loss in DNS lookups, and the anecdotal comments from Puma 6 users who have switched to a Broadcom modem indicate that there is a noticeable web cruising improvement with the Broadcom or non-Puma 6 modems.  Speed in this case is irrelevant, its simply a matter what you're attempting to do, if for example you happen to be web cruising when the constant 1.92 second (interval) task runs, stopping traffic thru the modem (latency) and causing UDP losses (most likely due to the UDP packets timing out within the modem).  This should be easy to confirm with Wireshark.

0 Kudos