Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AirPort Extreme (n) - Only 5 MB/sec throughput?

MBHockey

MBHockey

macrumors 601
Original poster
Oct 4, 2003
4,050
297
Connecticut
This is my setup: 1 MacBook and 1 airport extreme (n) router with a HD connected to it via USB 2.0.

I have been trasferring a large folder with only two files in it. It is around 17 GB total. However, according to iStat in the MenuBar, i am only sending data out at around ~5 Mb/sec. Is this the maximum speed for my situation?

I have installed the N enabler that came with the AirPort extreme and have made sure that the router is running in N-only mode (at 5GHz).

Also, in Network Utility when i choose my AirPort interface, the link speed is being reported as 130 mb. Why isn't this closer to 300? Is it because of the WPA2 protection?

Edit: Removed WPA protection, and link speed is now correctly being reported as 300 mb. However, still around 4-5 Mb/sec transfer speeds to the drive. Am I missing something?
 
J

jonsey

macrumors newbie
May 22, 2009
4
0
Me too! only 6MB/sec Airport Extreme

I have 2 Airport Extremes setup in bridge mode using 5GHz 802.11n and on either Airport Extreme I have a PC connected via one of the 1Gbit ehternet ports. (Pretty easy and fast to setup - and it works like a charm!)

However when copying files between the two PC's I only get 5-6MB/s - shouldn't this be 10-20MB/s (or more since the standard theoritically is 300Mbit/s which is eqv. of 37,5MB/s)

Does the Airport extreme not use channel bondling? or why is the transfer speed so low?

I've also tried setting it up without encryption which hardly made any difference (expected an increase in throughput)

I'm even configured it to use widechannels - but still no difference - is it firmware? I've upgraded to the newest 7.4.1 stil no result!

Anyone!??!
 
J

jonsey

macrumors newbie
May 22, 2009
4
0
Still only 6MB/s transfer speed

Hi consultant I had read the article you refered me to, and others alike however it is apparently very difficult to find any info from Apple about what this unit is surpose to deliver - and how to make it deliver it.

No matter what I do configuration wise it makes the transfer speed slower. 6MB/s is just not good enough - I think I will try some other product to bridge with - maybe the DLink DAP-1522 or alike.
 
B

brentsg

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2008
3,578
936
jonsey said:
Hi consultant I had read the article you refered me to, and others alike however it is apparently very difficult to find any info from Apple about what this unit is surpose to deliver - and how to make it deliver it.

No matter what I do configuration wise it makes the transfer speed slower. 6MB/s is just not good enough - I think I will try some other product to bridge with - maybe the DLink DAP-1522 or alike.
Click to expand...

5GHz is greatly affected by obstacles in the typical home, much moreso than 2.4 in my experience. I think shooting for 10MB/s is going to require a short distance and clean line of sight. It's almost comical to criticize Apple for lack of support and then cite D-Link as your next step. My experience with D-Link is that you're lucky to even get a firmware update when it's necessary.

Don't fault Apple for not holding your hand with wireless. There are far too many factors in the wild that degrade theoretical performance.
 
J

jonsey

macrumors newbie
May 22, 2009
4
0
Initially I setup the units 5 feet from each other and the through put was 6MB/s - now they are about 15 feet apart with a couple of brick walls in between and the through put is still 6MB/s. (I was actually surprised that it didn't effect the through put that much.)

If I get the chance to test some other brands/models in the near future - I will post the result here.
 
rkdiddy

rkdiddy

macrumors 65816
Mar 19, 2008
1,183
65
OC Baby!
Question -

Since the OP has one of his computers hard wired to the AEBS and then his HD attached to that - would he get better transfer speeds if he hooked his HD up to the computer connected to the AEBS, rather than the AEBS itself?:confused:
 
Consultant

Consultant

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,314
34
rkdiddy said:
Question -

Since the OP has one of his computers hard wired to the AEBS and then his HD attached to that - would he get better transfer speeds if he hooked his HD up to the computer connected to the AEBS, rather than the AEBS itself?:confused:
Click to expand...

Yes, USB connection is cheaper than firewire because it requires the use of additional processor.
A computer processor is faster than an appliance processor, which means faster usb drive access speed.
 
J

jonsey

macrumors newbie
May 22, 2009
4
0
brentsg said:
Don't fault Apple for not holding your hand with wireless. There are far too many factors in the wild that degrade theoretical performance.
Click to expand...

I see no reason for not stating theoretical max especially if they know it to be lower than 300mbit - other than misleading the customers - all they have to do is explain that performance is degrade by obstacles such as metal surfaces and brick walls aso. I'm not saying apple are the only ones doing it.

So I'm not dissing Apple as such - I actually think the firmware/software in the Aiport Extreme is the most intuitive I've seen to date. But if the max through put in mint conditions is lower than industry standard I would have liked to have known this before paying $200 for it - for example the D-Link DAP1522 is only around $100.
 
Sesshi

Sesshi

macrumors G3
Jun 3, 2006
8,113
1
One Nation Under Gordon
Disk-on-AEBS is pretty much the same as many other low-cost NAS's. The throughput is pretty pathetic. I'd suggest a dedicated NAS with a better processor, which would be faster. Of course, the wireless throughput of the AEBS is a factor, but it should be faster in any case.

Look here:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_nas/Itemid,190/chart,12/

For relative reference, the AEBS's 'brain' + throughout for USB disk duties is generally slightly worse than the QNAP TS-101 in the chart. And as you can seen the WRT600N - a very similar router to the AEBS, only that it actually has a firewall - is at the bottom of the list.
 
B

brentsg

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2008
3,578
936
jonsey said:
I see no reason for not stating theoretical max especially if they know it to be lower than 300mbit - other than misleading the customers - all they have to do is explain that performance is degrade by obstacles such as metal surfaces and brick walls aso. I'm not saying apple are the only ones doing it.

So I'm not dissing Apple as such - I actually think the firmware/software in the Aiport Extreme is the most intuitive I've seen to date. But if the max through put in mint conditions is lower than industry standard I would have liked to have known this before paying $200 for it - for example the D-Link DAP1522 is only around $100.
Click to expand...

I've never seen any objective tests or reviews that found it to be slower than other draft 2 N products.

And as far as being lower than 300mbit, have you ever seen anyone actually achieve any of the wired theoretical maximums? Nope...
 
eXan

eXan

macrumors 601
Jan 10, 2005
4,731
63
Russia
My AirPort Extreme N with 100 Mbit Ethernet and a USB 2.5" HD attached to it are able to show 5-6 MB/sec speeds on large files when accessed via wi-fi, and 9-12 MB/sec when accessed via Ethernet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom