Performance differences v1.7.0 vs. v2.0.2 on Windows XP

To: <iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net>
Subject: Performance differences v1.7.0 vs. v2.0.2 on Windows XP
From: "Fittall, David, VF-Group" <David.Fittall --at-- vodafone.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:11:46 +0200
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C78754.70D7A041"
Reply-to: iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
Sender: owner-iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
Thread-index: AceHVGwiN7tr8ngoQjGzsVLrR8XVTw==
Thread-topic: Performance differences v1.7.0 vs. v2.0.2 on Windows XP

Hi,

We have just upgraded to using v2.0.2 from v1.7.0 and have noticed a number of issues

1. For exactly the same test set-up (2 x Windows XP PCs, 1Gbit LAN connection directly via a crossover cable) for TCP there is a large difference in throughput particularly for the 8k window.

v1.7.0 = throughput of 350 -400 Mbps

v2.0.2 = throughput of 40 Mbps

2. The UDP server no longer reports receiving any packets in v2.0.2. This was for any buffer size.

Has anyone seen this behaviour before, can explain why this is happening and can offer a solution?

Thanks.

Best regards,

David Fittall.

Prev by Date: Could we test data uplink and downlink using iperf and How
Previous by thread: Could we test data uplink and downlink using iperf and How

Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index