Slow speed since 1st connection

[Keefyv]

Hi,

After months of accepting a ridiculously slow speed in comoarison to the "Ultimate Oomph" speeds I am paying a fortune for, I have had enough, as theoretically I should be getting 629Mbps but I am lucky even to get into 3 figures download and hve been told that upload speeds are not part of the promoted speeds, unlike my previous ISP, Gigaclear who after years of waiting did actually come up with the quoted 300Mbps for both download and upload! See below for a summary graph of speedtests I have been taking recently (since 2nd November) which are representative of what I've experienced all along.

I have tried talking to VM, with no positive outcome apart from the arrival of a booster pod (I think) but that has predictably made no difference. I started with my Linksys mesh system I used at my previous Gigaclear supplied home, and have tried with it on its own, combined with the VM router and currently VM alone and none of these permutations help a jot.

Having seen many other posts along similar lines, I am attaching below the router status stats and hope someone can help me improve (massively) on this, as I feel a right mug paying as much as I do, when the VM 360 Box is pretty unreliable too, and it just winds me up when VM wax on about their 1Gb service - maybe I'll get to 100Mb more often with that!

Router status

Cable Modem StatusItem Status Comments

Acquired Downstream Channel (Hz)	203000000	Locked
Ranged Upstream Channel (Hz)	60300283	Locked
Provisioning State	Online

Downstream bonded channels

Channel Frequency (Hz) Power (dBmV) SNR (dB) Modulation Channel ID

1	203000000	2.5	40	256 qam	9
2	211000000	2.5	40	256 qam	10
3	219000000	2.5	40	256 qam	11
4	227000000	2.4	40	256 qam	12
5	235000000	2.2	40	256 qam	13
6	243000000	2	40	256 qam	14
7	251000000	1.4	40	256 qam	15
8	259000000	1	40	256 qam	16
9	267000000	0.7	40	256 qam	17
10	275000000	1.2	40	256 qam	18
11	283000000	1.9	40	256 qam	19
12	291000000	2	40	256 qam	20
13	299000000	2.2	40	256 qam	21
14	307000000	2.2	40	256 qam	22
15	315000000	2.2	40	256 qam	23
16	323000000	2.5	40	256 qam	24
17	331000000	2.7	40	256 qam	25
18	339000000	2.5	40	256 qam	26
19	347000000	2.7	40	256 qam	27
20	355000000	2.7	40	256 qam	28
21	363000000	2.5	40	256 qam	29
22	371000000	2.9	40	256 qam	30
23	379000000	2.9	40	256 qam	31
24	387000000	2	40	256 qam	32

Downstream bonded channels

Channel Locked Status RxMER (dB) Pre RS Errors Post RS Errors

1	Locked	40.3	145	0
2	Locked	40.3	106	0
3	Locked	40.3	387	0
4	Locked	40.3	108	0
5	Locked	40.3	111	0
6	Locked	40.3	91	0
7	Locked	40.3	115	0
8	Locked	40.3	216	0
9	Locked	40.3	238	0
10	Locked	40.3	168	0
11	Locked	40.9	105	0
12	Locked	40.3	275	0
13	Locked	40.3	132	0
14	Locked	40.9	140	0
15	Locked	40.3	91	0
16	Locked	40.3	123	0
17	Locked	40.3	163	0
18	Locked	40.3	137	0
19	Locked	40.3	114	0
20	Locked	40.9	146	0
21	Locked	40.3	109	0
22	Locked	40.3	108	0
23	Locked	40.3	77	0
24	Locked	40.3	139	0

More router status stats to follow due to the 20,000 character limitation...

[jbrennand · Accepted solution]

Old Cat5 cables are only specced for a maximum of ~100Mbps.. Some have reported getting more but there is no guarantee - for that you have to use a minimum of Cat5e - Cat6a provides better shielding from cross-talk and interference.

Its cheap so just get a 5/10/20 Meter run and use it for the tests I suggested

Old laptops often have 10/100 NIC cards and wifi cards - so again may max out at ~100. Check the detailed spec.

[Keefyv]

Thanks again John, and I have just searched in places I didn't know existed to try and find out what WiFi card spec my laptop has and still not found it, but in the WiFi status it does say 300Mbps and I have very occasionally seen beyond 100Mbps here, and used to enjoy 300Mbps both ways on my old Gigaclear connection so I don't think that's the limitation. However I gathered early on that VM only 'guarantee' speeds TO the Hub so I'll take a look at and with my existing cabling and maybe splash out on a Cat5e - Cat6a cable to test it but I cannot see us wanting cables trailing around the place, and surely WiFi connections can't be acceptable at such a fraction of the speed at the Hub?! As you may have been able to see from my speedtest results history, regularly in the 30-70Mbps range with the very occasional exciting moment when it tips into three digits!

Out of interest and for the record I have just run a speedtest on WiFi and the results were woeful, as you can see below...

 PING ms

21

 DOWNLOAD Mbps

15.72

 UPLOAD Mbps

13.06

So on to cable in due course and I'll let you know.

Cheers

Keith

PS If I don't get the 20,000 characters exceeded warning, I more often than not get the following error message and in this case I cannot imagine how I added HTML into my message:

"Your post has been changed because invalid HTML was found in the message body. The invalid HTML has been removed. Please review the message and submit the message when you are satisfied."

[jbrennand]

Post up the speedtest data from the test when you have done it in the exact way I said. All the ones you have posted so far are not done with that protocol.

You will only have the cable trailing all oveer the place for the duration of the tests - 5 minutes? Then roll it up and stick it in your bits drawer until you need to do it again.

Permanent connection on ethernet cables is always possible by careful positioning, concealing, etc - but thata a discussion for later

[Keefyv]

I have just used one of my existing bog standard ethernet cables, probably not even Cat 5, and got the following results:

 PING ms

19

 DOWNLOAD Mbps

551.89

 UPLOAD Mbps

37.98

Then from exactly the same position on WiFi, as follows, to my surprise:

 PING ms

22

 DOWNLOAD Mbps

157.24

 UPLOAD Mbps

24.47

Then with the router outside of its usual non-optimal position (but out of sight for aestetic reasons!) with my laptop on WiFi back in my study 2 rooms away in a 100 year old house!

PING ms

21

 DOWNLOAD Mbps

41.61

 UPLOAD Mbps

19.60

And finally for the full picture that suggests the distance is the issue more than with the router back in its hidden position:

PING ms

20

 DOWNLOAD Mbps

39.27

 UPLOAD Mbps

16.49

So I don't think I'll be investing in a Cat 5 or 6 cable just yet, as it's getting the signal around the house that's a bigger problem, which is why I initially tried using my Linksys mesh system with and without the router as a modem but without any meaningful change either way.  Before you ask, the router is kinda stuck where it is, so re-positioning it would be too much of a challenge...

Same invalid HTML error message again btw!

[jbrennand]

The Linksys is a good piece of kit (which model is it?) and as your ethernet connections are all ok it should certainly have sorted the wifi issue unless you live in a castle, a Victorian house with iron-rich red bricks or a new property with foil backed insulated walls - hence you are living in a "Faraday cage" ?

If not are you sure you set it up properly - there is a sequence that must be followed first time - which if you dont leads to all sorts of issues. I post it here if you want to try again
__________________________________________________________________

Set up your own router/first Mesh unit (in its settings) with the WAN port set to be in Automatic IP i.e. DHCP (& Nat) mode, it may be pre-set that way anyway. Then, disconnect all cables from your new router (or from all Mesh units) and switch it off and unplug it.

Then, put the VM Hub into modem mode
( https://www.virginmedia.com/help/virgin-media-hub-modem-mode )
... and wait for the base light to turn magenta/purple (on a Hub3 - but not on a Hub4!). Once it’s in modem mode, the VM hub “MUST” then be powered off.

Switch your router/first Mesh unit on and make sure it’s fully initialised (leave 5 min) and then put in the ethernet cable from its WAN port to the VM hub (any port will do).

ONLY NOW… power up the VM hub and wait 5-10 minutes for The Hub to initialise and and you should get a connection. Use the recommended App to connect any other Mesh units to the first one. This order only needs to be done the first time you connect the router to the VM hub.

[Keefyv]

Thanks again John

I certainly found the Linksys to be a good piece of kit in our last place (model WHW01) whch was a 200 year old long building made out of 3 two-up-two-down cottages but our current place is a 1928 fairly substantially built if not Victorian house with no idea about whether they're iron-rich red bricks or not, although I can confirm they're red!

As you have been kind enough to provide those specific instructions I will try to follow them to the letter as I don't recall taking those particular steps in that order or not at any stage here or at the last place, apart from putting the VM hub into modem mode so watch this space...

Meanwhile I now have my BQM results starting to come in so see below, in case there's anything of interest:

Cheers

Keith

[jbrennand]

Your BQM's have been rejected as you left the i.p. address on them, you should follow the instructions to post the "share live graph" which strips it out.

That said... I can see them and they look pretty spot on from what I can see. So do set the LInksys up again in that sequence.

Re - the bricks.... our semi is built from Cheshire pale-red bricks (1930's) and have no real wifi problems so probably similar to yours - they are relatively soft and easy to drill through. Victorian Dark red bricks are full of iron and are as hard as a hard thing. My friend, when they had VM installed, it took the Tech over an hour to drill a hole through the wall to get the cable in and then... the wifi was only usable in that room or rooms adjoining it via wooden doors - so he got a TP-Link Deco Mesh system which sorted it for him 🙂

[Keefyv]

The images were indeed rejected so maybe you saw them before that happened, but in case you need to refer to them later I have removed the IP address from them and have attached them here again. I hope the moderator didn't take offence at my title for it! ;o)

I will certainly try the Linksys Mesh solution again as I always thought it would be better than Virgin's own router, even with the booster pod they sent me, and now I know it needs to be in a certain order, it makes sense to give it another whirl, albeit that will mean I'll have to reset all the devices that currently only connect through the VM router - worth the bother in the long run I hope... There have been some walls that have resisted drilling and my study is in an extension that is therefore effectively outside the original outside wall but the Mesh should be able to handle it, surely! I have one 'parent' and 2 'clients' so between them they should distribute the signal better than my VM plus one booster pod, I would hope!

[Keefyv]

Well I sent practically all evening on the phone with Linksys getting my mesh system up and running again, and although my first attempt to follow your instructions to the letter failed, as the master node didn't want to connect to the VM modem when I turned it back on, the second person I spoke to there (for about 2 hours alone - what a tech support service!) managed to get them communicating and I am now enjoying speeds in excess of 100Mbps on my laptop even when in my office, as I have a child node right behind me as originally planned.

We did identify that maybe my laptop's wireless adapter could be limiting the ability of higher speeds but as you will see from tonight's speedtests it seems to have stabilised at a more acceptable level, so I thank you greatly for your "wise insights" and patient help with my issues. Not sure if there's more speed to be gained on a wireless basis, and the speeds to the hub certainly appear to be where they should be so I shall have to rename my BQM at the very least! I still remain to be convinced that the VM 360 boxes are as stable as they might be, but perhaps with my improved speed along will come more stability too - time will tell...

Many many thanks

Keith

[Keefyv]

Doh, forgot to add this!