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

Well it’s the only known fix, you’ve waited 2 years. People have said the new firmware will roll out to everyone over the next few weeks.  

Could be done a bit quicker.  Still don’t think I will bother to plug back in my Hub 3 that’s collecting dust in the garage.  

So is it safe to upgrade my SuperHub 1 now then? 

 

VM are offering me the highest 350mb for slightly less than what im paying now and wont offer me any deal on my current VIVD 100 deal. 

the 350mb download would be nice for downloading games on Xbox Live/PSN, but don't want to bother if its going to cause me a headache playing those games online! 

Honestly if you are having no issues with your SH1 I would keep it. I am still using my SH1 on the same VIVID 100 deal and its fine. Games still download pretty fast.. can go eat something and download a game and its done when im back. The hassle/risk is not worth it for me anyway

alexgrist
On our wavelength

I was about to post that I'd just switched from a 2AC to Hub 3 for the helll of it since I got tired of waiting but then I looked at the BQM graph...

63941cb14df634189a4946337cd4b00d9a5fe8d6-18-05-2018

 

 

 

There's something else wrong then. Do you get 350meg?

Seph - ( DEFROCKED - My advice is at your risk)

Mikey86uk: "VM are offering me the highest 350mb for slightly less than what im paying now and wont offer me any deal on my current VIVD 100 deal. "

From what I see around here, the 350 offer and latest hub firmware is OK when it works, but there's a worrying number of complaints about 350 upgrades that result in slower speeds than before.  I'm not being offered 350, but even if I was I wouldn't chance it.  Unless you're pulling down 4 concurrent 4K video streams you won't be maxing out even a 100 Mbps line.

Also what's the price when the offer runs out?  At 100 Mbps you're close to the (maximum potential) of an Openreach VDSL line of 75-80 Mbps, and that tends to set the price.  When you're on 350, then unless Openreach have done a national G.fast roll out, VM will be able to command the price - assuming you don't want to roll back to 100, and by then you'll have to be using the verminous Hub 3. 

Hi guys, just catching up with this thread and amazed to see that this new firmware may actually be worthwhile.  But can someone please summarise what the firmware does exactly (sorry if explained before)?  I thought everyone was saying that the Puma 6 chipset was inherently flawed at a hardware level and couldn't be fixed, and now magically a fix appears!  Are they just bodging it to simulate lower latency or is it genuinely improving/reducing it?  I suppose it doesn't matter, so long as call of duty doesn't rubber band, and Skype/Youtube/Twitch tv live streams without herky jerky stutters.  Has anyone tried these on the new firmware?  Thx.

And I don't suppose the new firmware also fixes the DOS vulnerability problem?  I suppose that would be asking too much.


@mrfreeman wrote:

I thought everyone was saying that the Puma 6 chipset was inherently flawed at a hardware level and couldn't be fixed.


But, how many of those people had signed a NDA with Intel and Arris and had actually seen the detailed internal spec of the Puma 6 chipset and how Arris's code uses it?

Lol, this is true, but xymox etc. seem to know what they are talking about although I don't specifically remember them saying it wasn't possible to fix Puma 6 AT ALL, but very unlikely and very difficult at best to achieve any improvement.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining cos if a fix is here it is wonderful news, I just hope it is a good enough solution for the gaming and streaming problem mainly.

grindax
On our wavelength

Has anybody with the latest .608 firmware tried running the GRC DNS Benchmark software to see whether DNS resolution is 100% reliable? I'm on VIVID 200 with the old firmware still, and the DNS benchmark shows lots of unreliability in DNS resolution.