Question on New Estimated Network Speed

For help and support with Universal Media Server in general
Forum rules
Please make sure you follow the Problem Reporting Guidelines before posting if you want a reply
Post Reply
Madoka
Posts: 328
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:51 pm

Question on New Estimated Network Speed

Post by Madoka » Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:31 am

Not a problem really, just a curiosity. I'm on a 100 Mbit/s wired network.

When I was running 2.5.1, I'd get a ping of ~11 ms and an estimated speed of 85 or 93 Mb/s.

With 2.5.2, I get a ping of 12 ms and an estimated speed of 42 Mb/s. That seems like a drastic difference for 1 ms.

I've had files use 65-70 Mb/s according to UMS without stuttering so I was curious as to what the numbers really mean. Perhaps I should just go with the estimated part and not worry about it as UMS works fine. :D

ExSport
Posts: 596
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 1:57 am

Re: Question on New Estimated Network Speed

Post by ExSport » Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:08 am

More accurate is 42Mbit but we can't talk about accuracy anyway:-)
UMS sends 64000bytes sized ping. Rounding it to 64KBytes*8=512Kbits.
If you get 12ms it means 512/12ms*1000 give us speed for one second in Kbps=42666.666.
Finally 42666.666/1024=41.666Mbits
But it is still informative only:-)
Eg. ping reply of <1ms give us 1Gbit but response =1ms give us 512Mbits. From this we should understand the speed is informative only ;-)
About the max bandwidth... every renderer have internal cache so peaks higher than detected speed is in most cases ok with no stuttering. Also better to show lower than higher speed so users will not oversize quality or bandwidth settings and then complains why it stutter.
Also have to say that many routers doesn't accept so big ICMP packet so no response is returned for 64000bytes ping in size what leads to no speed detection.

Madoka
Posts: 328
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:51 pm

Re: Question on New Estimated Network Speed

Post by Madoka » Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:05 pm

Thank you for the explanation, ExSport!

Post Reply