Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kitz]

Code: [Select]

Noise margin:   6.7 / 11.0
The default Target Noise Margin is 6.3dB.  So you have 4.7dB to play with. 
Based on a ball park figure of 1dB =3Mbps, then that takes you up to 54.1 Mbps

Code: [Select]

Maximum data rate:   12921 / 54723
Normally this would give a fairly decent indication as long as the line isn't interleaved.


------------------

The HubOne is a re-badged HH5A with Lantiq VRX-268 chipset.
Those chips dont perform too well on my (ECI) line.  >3Mbps lower than a HG612 and ~6Mbps lower than a VMG8324 and more errors than on BCMs.

OMG, they even confuse 5Ghz WiFi with 5th Generation Mobile networking.

First thing I noticed when looking at the page.  What a nutjob! 

I am still a little stumped why the attainable is so low for the attenuation. Perhaps there are other factors, including many users on your cabinet creating crosstalk.

My Zyxel doesn't show my overall concatenated attenuation but IIRC it is 12dB.    I'm badly affected by crosstalk.
 
I sync at 65/66Mbps using a BCM63168 chipset non interleaved or ~ 62Mbps interleaved.   
If I were to use a VRX-268 you could knock anything up to another 6Mbps off that. 

[re0]

My Zyxel doesn't show my overall concatenated attenuation but IIRC it is 12dB.    I'm badly affected by crosstalk.
 
I sync at 65/66Mbps using a BCM63168 chipset non interleaved or ~ 62Mbps interleaved.   
If I were to use a VRX-268 you could knock anything up to another 6Mbps off that. 

Ah yes, then perhaps the case is that the OP has also been subject to both crosstalk and ECI-itis - double whammy! A modem with a good BCM chipset may help, but only trying would answer (yes, I know they tried the HH6, but that's just one device).

If this is actually the case, then the best bet is for the OP to go G.fast if they want much faster. The DSL checker is optimistic about the line for VDSL, but the stats seem underwhelming.

[Alex Atkin UK]

The HubOne is a re-badged HH5A with Lantiq VRX-268 chipset.
Those chips dont perform too well on my (ECI) line.  >3Mbps lower than a HG612 and ~6Mbps lower than a VMG8324 and more errors than on BCMs.

That's interesting, as so far I've found it performs BETTER on mine, at least using OpenWRT.  I wonder if the stock OS is using some older modem firmware?

Its also the identical chipset to the ECI modems which I thought were supposed to work better on ECI cabinets?

[j0hn]

Its also the identical chipset to the ECI modems which I thought were supposed to work better on ECI cabinets?

Nothing performed better on my ECI line than a Broadcom BCM63168 chipset.
Even on the same chipset I got a few Mb difference between different modems.

Matching the DSLAM and modem to the same Vendor means diddly squat.
Every line is unique and some on ECI will perform better with Lantiq chipsets and others better with Broadcom chipsets.

The ECI modem and HH5A having the same chipset does not mean they will sync the same or even similar either.

Using an old/budget Broadcom chipset with a Huawei cabinet doesn't mean it will be better than a Lantiq chipset.
Each Vendor has a range of different performing chipsets.

[mrk26]

I totally agree that every line is different, I tested few modems on mine with booth lantiq and broadcom chipset and broadcom only sync better on interleave, on fastpatch in my eci cabinet old eci modem sync 3-4 Mb/s higher than any broadcom chipset modem that without tweaking snr of course.

[kitz]

ts also the identical chipset to the ECI modems which I thought were supposed to work better on ECI cabinets?

BCMs have always performed better on my [ECI] line - even when on adsl.
The VMG8324 out performs my HG612 which in turn outperforms any of the VRX-268 based modems such as the ECI or TPlink..  and it produces less errors which is why I always fall back to it despite trying several others. 

I think you will find quite a lot of users on this forum who are connected to an ECI cab and whose line performs much better with a BCM device such as the HG612 or the Zyxels.


As mentioned above all lines are different, but I wonder if its like with adsl where some chips are better for longer lines and some better for shorter lines.  It may even be down to the type of noise experienced.   
Back in the days of adsl2+ there were an awful lot of people on Annex_M who loved the old ST585 as it tended to give a bit more speed even before SNRm tweaking.   Be* users either loved them (the short lines) or hated them (long lines).
 
Also the infamous 2-Wire 2700HGV which was extremely good for long lines...  but was a total heap of rubbish on short lines. 
I could never sync at more than 16Mbps using the 2-Wire yet happily got the full 24/2.6 using the ST585v6.

[kitz]

(yes, I know they tried the HH6, but that's just one device).

There were indeed 2 variants of the HH6 (otherwise known as the smarthub) - See thread - the A version supplied to residential users was supposedly a sagemcom and the B was an arcadyan.    There were quite a few unhappy with the 'A' and there's a post in there by kitz reg underzone saying that it sync'd lower than his 5A.

[Alex Atkin UK]

As mentioned above all lines are different, but I wonder if its like with adsl where some chips are better for longer lines and some better for shorter lines.  It may even be down to the type of noise experienced.   
Back in the days of adsl2+ there were an awful lot of people on Annex_M who loved the old ST585 as it tended to give a bit more speed even before SNRm tweaking.   Be* users either loved them (the short lines) or hated them (long lines).
 
Also the infamous 2-Wire 2700HGV which was extremely good for long lines...  but was a total heap of rubbish on short lines. 
I could never sync at more than 16Mbps using the 2-Wire yet happily got the full 24/2.6 using the ST585v6.

Yes that would make sense, my line is under 250m and relatively clean, its just the crosstalk thats reduced its speed.  Using the HH5A on OpenWRT I managed to bring the SNR down to 3.7dB thus gaining 7.7Mbit.  Curiously it seems like its banded, as it refuses to come down to 3dB, even if I change the target from -3dB (77Mbit attainable) to -4dB (81Mbit attainable) I get exactly the same sync speed of 72.9Mbit with 3.7-4dB SNR.

I also had the 2-Wire when I was on the 4KM ADSL2+ line (with aluminium on the E-side) and like you said, worked great on the long line with 3dB SNRm.  So it seems in both cases my line favours the hardware that yours hates.

[atkinsong]

I think you will find quite a lot of users on this forum who are connected to an ECI cab and whose line performs much better with a BCM device such as the HG612 or the Zyxels.

Not on mine. Tried all the BCMs and whilst they do sync slightly higher than Lantiqs it is at the cost of much higher error rates. The difference in synch is significantly bettered by the ability to run the Lantiq based Draytek at 3db with only a very slight increase in error rate.

[mrk26]

On Lantiq based modems will be less errors as they are corrected on booth downstream and upstream, that is why I prefer lantiq on my eci cabinet.

[Alex Atkin UK]

On Lantiq based modems will be less errors as they are corrected on booth downstream and upstream, that is why I prefer lantiq on my eci cabinet.

What direction are they not corrected on with BCM?

I'm curious as ECI always seemed more responsive on my line and most of my errors are on upstream.

[mrk26]

On BCM only upstream, that’s why on lantiq you still see FEC errors in booth directions. On BCM you will see more CRC errors instead.

[j0hn]

On Lantiq based modems will be less errors as they are corrected on booth downstream and upstream, that is why I prefer lantiq on my eci cabinet.

You really should clarify that a little.
That's on ECI cabinets only, fastpath only.

Lantiq modems apply a very small amount of FEC on the downstream with no INP/Interleaving, other chipsets don't.

On BCM only upstream, that’s why on lantiq you still see FEC errors in booth directions. On BCM you will see more CRC errors instead.

Not necessarily true.
Just because a little FEC is applied doesn't mean less CRC.
As mentioned by others on previous posts in this thread even without the small amount of FEC applied to the downstream many users see considerably less CRC/ES using BCM chipsets on ECI cabinets.

Every line is different.
No 1 chipset is better for a particular DSLAM and matching Vendors isn't necessarily the best thing.

My experience on these forums is the exact opposite to what you posted.
Most members get lower ES using a BCM chipset with ECI cabinets. Particularly the Zyxel modems with the additional noise filter fitted.

[mrk26]

Sorry @j0hn, you're right, I should clarify that this only apply to fastpatch, and eci cabinet. However I tested (as you may remember) asus dsl-ac88u and also zyxel VMG1312-B10A. Once I sorted main issues with my line I honestly couldn't see the difference in operation between these two, sync exactly the same and pretty same values regarding all type of errors. My line is about 233m from cabinet (using google), so maybe that is why I don't see any improvements using broadcom based modem where I do with lantiq based chipset (even sync higher).
Also compared (from memory) the two I did have more CRC errors with broadcom than I have now with lantiq.
I never said that lantiq based modem is better for every eci cabinet, it's definitely better for one I'm connected to.
I never forced anyone and never will be, this where I'm now only came out by testing different modems on my line, I find my way and I'm happy with it.

@j0hn
Thanks for all your help.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Sorry @j0hn, you're right, I should clarify that this only apply to fastpatch, and eci cabinet. However I tested (as you may remember) asus dsl-ac88u and also zyxel VMG1312-B10A. Once I sorted main issues with my line I honestly couldn't see the difference in operation between these two, sync exactly the same and pretty same values regarding all type of errors. My line is about 233m from cabinet (using google), so maybe that is why I don't see any improvements using broadcom based modem where I do with lantiq based chipset (even sync higher).
Also compared (from memory) the two I did have more CRC errors with broadcom than I have now with lantiq.
I never said that lantiq based modem is better for every eci cabinet, it's definitely better for one I'm connected to.
I never forced anyone and never will be, this where I'm now only came out by testing different modems on my line, I find my way and I'm happy with it.

@j0hn
Thanks for all your help.

Our lines sound quite similar (distance and performance), were obviously the outliers for this chipset.

I've gained a real-world 20Mbit boost between both lines thanks to being able to reduce the downstream SNRm, which is the most obvious improvement.