EP 950 is not a 1-Gbps Network it is a 100 Mbps Network - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 16 Old 07-10-2012, 04:53 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jcgrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I recently had the following dialogue with Micca Engineers regarding the inability of the player to pass data at 100 Mbps:


JCGrey: I have been unable to get the unit to transfer data at 1Gbps. My network shows that it is connected at 1 Gbps speed, but transfer speed is restricted to 100 Mbps. I could not find a setting to change it.

Micca: The player's LAN communications does establish a 1000gbps link. But due to limited power of the player's processor, communications on average is 90-120mbps. This is a common limitation with all Realtek 1186 based players.

JCGrey: Then why advertise it as a 1 Gbps device? There is no advantage to connecting at 1 Gbit, but unable to transfer data at this speed. Under the "Network Streaming and Sharing" section of your website it states: "" The EP950 has a built-in SAMBA file server which, when combined with its support for large hard drives and fast Gigabit Ethernet LAN, is an effective solution for sharing media files to other devices on the local area network." And, under the "Features" section on your website it states: " Ultra fast Gigabit LAN and optional 802.11n WiFi networking capabilities." Neither of these statements or true, there is absolutely no benefit from having 1 Gbps connection, this is really only 100 Mbps. So my large 8 - 45 GB files transfer 10x slower than I expected! Instead of taking 6 minutes to transfer a 43 GB file, it took 60 minutes across the network! Do you plan to fix this?

MIcca: Gigabit equipped players like the EP950 communicate about 40-50% faster than those with only a 100mbps LAN connection. So the Gigabit connection does provide a measurable and significant boost in speed. The bottleneck is with the processor, so this is not something that can be improved. Just to be clear, like all network specifications, Gigabit is a theoretical maximum and the actual observed transfer rate is typically much lower. If you transfer files from one computer to another over a Gigabit network, you typically will not get any better than 300-400mbps performance. You can run such a test to confirm.

JCGrey: I am an Electronic Engineer, and more specifically a network engineer, on my home network I routinely transfer data at close to 1 Gigabit speeds, between 90-95%, see attached files #1 & #2; and at work up to 10 Gbps! Your device however transfers between 8-9% Gbps, (see attached file #3), i.e., 100 Mbps, no boost in speed, otherwise it would be 30-40% of 1 Gbps, which I have never observed.

Micca: Regarding, this is a limitation of the player. If the network speed is not acceptable, we recommend returning the player. In such a situation, we recommend that you try a non-Realtek player since all Realtek 1185 and 1186 based players have the same network speed limitation.

All, before you buy a Micca EP950, be warned it is falsely advertised as 1 Gbps, it is only a 100 Mbps network!
jcgrey is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 Old 07-10-2012, 05:54 PM
 
gregzoll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,524
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 32
There is a lot of Routers out there the same way. The CPU is always going to be the crutch on throughput. One reasoning why manufacturers are still sticking with 100meg throughput, is because the chips are cheaper, and until things change that the throughput for streaming gets any faster from the slowest device, we will see 100meg chips in the majority of these streaming devices.

I would guess that within the next 5 years, things will get cheaper with Gig chipsets, since 2gb will start to become the norm, but in turn Wireless-N will become more common than Wireless-G, and will be able to sustain higher speeds for streaming with WiFi.
gregzoll is offline  
post #3 of 16 Old 07-10-2012, 08:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GusGus748s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Visalia, CA 93291
Posts: 6,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Interesting!

Media Server: UnRaid Server: 15TB of storage and growing :).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Home Theater Set Up:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

GusGus748s is offline  
post #4 of 16 Old 07-11-2012, 12:20 AM
Advanced Member
 
Tiddles88's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
And? Does 100MB serve? I bet it does. So this moaning about nothing. Not surprising either, this isn't a PC where you buy a $50 3.0Ghz dual core that will slaughter transfer times.
Tiddles88 is offline  
post #5 of 16 Old 07-11-2012, 12:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GusGus748s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Visalia, CA 93291
Posts: 6,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiddles88 View Post

And? Does 100MB serve? I bet it does. So this moaning about nothing. Not surprising either, this isn't a PC where you buy a $50 3.0Ghz dual core that will slaughter transfer times.

I don't think this is moaning about nothing. I think this is good information to know. I know that the processor was a bottleneck for transfer speed, but I didn't know it was that much. I believe it is indeed false advertisement, and the worse part about it is that the manufacturer knows about it, but they rather not say anything.

This also includes the new PCH's, HiMedia, AIOS, etc. The only one media player that states to have gigabit network, but also states the actual transfer speeds is the Mede8er.

Mede8er MED500X2, which I used to own, transfer speeds:

* 1) Typical wire network transfer speeds Samba NAS -- From PC to MED500X2 (up to 8.5MB/sec) -- From MED500X2 to PC up to 12MB/sec to MED500X2 internal HDD
* Tested with 1TB Internal SATA HDD
2) Typical Video Streaming on Gigabit Network -- Full BDMV / BDISO non 3D (up to max 8.5MB/sec)

Media Server: UnRaid Server: 15TB of storage and growing :).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Home Theater Set Up:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

GusGus748s is offline  
post #6 of 16 Old 07-11-2012, 02:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
canton160's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
@jcgrey

thanks for this information
return the player if you not happy, or fell cheated , the average consumer don't need 1gbps to watch a blu-ray movie, but the elite consumer, they always analyzing every bit of bandwidth.

have you tested other media streamers? found the same results ?

regards
canton

Projector Mitsubishi HC5

Projector Optoma hd300x 

Av receiver Onkyo TX-NR 818

Oppo 103D

Media player Med1000x3D

 

 

KEN KREISEL DXD-808 

Q7000 5.1

canton160 is offline  
post #7 of 16 Old 07-11-2012, 08:57 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jcgrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am not analyzing every bit of bandwidth although I certantly could, nor am I moaning, I would like to be able to buy a product that works the way it is advertised; when I buy a 1080p TV that really only supports 1080i then told the same nonsense about the processor is the problem, then don't advertise it as 1080p! I installed an internal hard drive to transfer files, now to transfer 40 GB of data takes 53.3 minutes, under ideal conditions, instead of doing it in 5.3 minutes as I expected. I can burn the files to a RW Blu-Ray faster than that! If the best they can do is produce a 100 Mbps product, then it should state that!
jcgrey is offline  
post #8 of 16 Old 07-11-2012, 09:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GusGus748s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Visalia, CA 93291
Posts: 6,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcgrey View Post

I am not analyzing every bit of bandwidth although I certantly could, nor am I moaning, I would like to be able to buy a product that works the way it is advertised; when I buy a 1080p TV that really only supports 1080i then told the same nonsense about the processor is the problem, then don't advertise it as 1080p! I installed an internal hard drive to transfer files, now to transfer 40 GB of data takes 53.3 minutes, under ideal conditions, instead of doing it in 5.3 minutes as I expected. I can burn the files to a RW Blu-Ray faster than that! If the best they can do is produce a 100 Mbps product, then it should state that!

+1

Media Server: UnRaid Server: 15TB of storage and growing :).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Home Theater Set Up:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

GusGus748s is offline  
post #9 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 02:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
canton160's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcgrey View Post

I am not analyzing every bit of bandwidth although I certantly could, nor am I moaning, I would like to be able to buy a product that works the way it is advertised; when I buy a 1080p TV that really only supports 1080i then told the same nonsense about the processor is the problem, then don't advertise it as 1080p! I installed an internal hard drive to transfer files, now to transfer 40 GB of data takes 53.3 minutes, under ideal conditions, instead of doing it in 5.3 minutes as I expected. I can burn the files to a RW Blu-Ray faster than that! If the best they can do is produce a 100 Mbps product, then it should state that!

i fell cheated, we i bought the samsung ue40d6530 advertised 3D 1080P and in fact was 3D 1080i, but 2D 1080p the problem was not the tv processor but the panels used to manufacture the LED.

streamers are not to meant to transfers files, streamers are meant to play files, and i really don't recommend using the internal hd in micca, is too hot and the hd don't cool down properly.

i would never wait 53 minutes to transfer 40gb

why you would think is possible to achive 1GBPS ?

I'm transferring 50GB in 8 minutes from a external WD 3.0 to a WD internal drive in a lain-li ex-503 box using usb 3.0 , IN or OUT never drops from 100MB/s thats about 800mbps
the htpc also have usb 3.0 and a crucial SSD 6Gbps
the lain-li is just limited to 3Gbps
the hard drives are WD 6Gbps that are limited to 125MB/S have you ask to micca engeeniers what sata port they using in micca?

see my example I'm limited by lain-li hardware SATA2 (300MB/s ) and I'm never going to achive does speeds, its a illusion.....

regards
canton

Projector Mitsubishi HC5

Projector Optoma hd300x 

Av receiver Onkyo TX-NR 818

Oppo 103D

Media player Med1000x3D

 

 

KEN KREISEL DXD-808 

Q7000 5.1

canton160 is offline  
post #10 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 04:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
etrin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
All companies lie like this.
They and all companies say things that well lets say they stretch the truth.
Well the processor is Gigabit capable, or it could do Gigabit speeds IF we did X.
So its like saying it could do it But since it could we can say it does.

Other companies it supports Y, ok it does Y.
NO we didn't say that, we said it supports Y.

yep its lying without having to say we lied because we don't have to.
NOT any worse than the companies that bring out products with all kinds of listings and BETA statements to make up sales and then
when the product is on the shelves...WE NEVER SAID Z except in every thing we could until the day of sales, then we didn't retract anything since it was said by a beta tester (who is also an engineer but we don't say that) and they can't be blamed for anything.

In the world today misleading and misrepresenting and lying is not lying its just stupid consumers that should know better.


to be fair they are not the only ones who said gigabit and people said wait it won't do but 100.
yea but its gigabit.
ZEROS DONT COUNT!!! LOL
etrin is offline  
post #11 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 11:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
GusGus748s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Visalia, CA 93291
Posts: 6,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by canton160 View Post

streamers are not to meant to transfers files, streamers are meant to play files
canton

I wonder where have I seen that sentence before biggrin.gif +1

I don't think he is referring as to the false advertisement companies make. I do indeed agree that this is false advertisement. They should advertise gibabit if it doesn't do it. They should advertise it like the Mede8er does even though they are in small print.

Media Server: UnRaid Server: 15TB of storage and growing :).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Home Theater Set Up:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

GusGus748s is offline  
post #12 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 12:36 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Jack@Micca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 614
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hey guys,

I am a little puzzled by the reaction here.

Network connections are always specified as the physical layer link established, while actual transfer speeds will vary depending on the rest of the system. Having a certain physical layer link is not an a indication/guarantee/promise that the system as a whole is capable of sustained network communications at full physical layer speeds. This reality isn't limited to just network communications, but anytime there is a data interface. Everything including memory, hard drives, video cards, have data interfaces with theoretical maximum throughput figures that are not reached by most of the devices that incorporate them.

I am not aware of any sub $200 or even $500 devices that can sustain gigabit network communication speeds for local hard drive read/writes. There are some multi-bay NAS devices starting at about $600-$700 equipped with hardware RAID, multiple gigs of RAM and fairly powerful processors that gets pretty close to saturating gigabit. I don't believe it is reasonable to expect a device like the EP950 to provide sustained gigabit read/write to its local hard drive.

With all of that said, the gigabit connection on the EP950 does communicate faster than a 100mbps connection. The system does benefit from it. For bulk or large file transfers to the EP950's internal hard drive, the USB 3.0 connection is a faster interface. However, I should point out that the EP950's transfer speed over USB 3.0 will not be anywhere close to the 400MB/s allowed by that interface's specifications.

Jack@Micca
Micca Support Specialist
Jack@Micca is offline  
post #13 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 01:03 PM
Newbie
 
leonardtan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack@Micca View Post

Hey guys,
I am a little puzzled by the reaction here.
Network connections are always specified as the physical layer link established, while actual transfer speeds will vary depending on the rest of the system. Having a certain physical layer link is not an a indication/guarantee/promise that the system as a whole is capable of sustained network communications at full physical layer speeds. This reality isn't limited to just network communications, but anytime there is a data interface. Everything including memory, hard drives, video cards, have data interfaces with theoretical maximum throughput figures that are not reached by most of the devices that incorporate them.

That is the way I understand it too. I have seen many consumer grade equipment including network switches and routers with Gigabit ports that don't even come close to the 1Gbit speed. Link speed does NOT equal true speed.
leonardtan is offline  
post #14 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GusGus748s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Visalia, CA 93291
Posts: 6,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack@Micca View Post

Hey guys,
I am a little puzzled by the reaction here.
Network connections are always specified as the physical layer link established, while actual transfer speeds will vary depending on the rest of the system. Having a certain physical layer link is not an a indication/guarantee/promise that the system as a whole is capable of sustained network communications at full physical layer speeds. This reality isn't limited to just network communications, but anytime there is a data interface. Everything including memory, hard drives, video cards, have data interfaces with theoretical maximum throughput figures that are not reached by most of the devices that incorporate them.
I am not aware of any sub $200 or even $500 devices that can sustain gigabit network communication speeds for local hard drive read/writes. There are some multi-bay NAS devices starting at about $600-$700 equipped with hardware RAID, multiple gigs of RAM and fairly powerful processors that gets pretty close to saturating gigabit. I don't believe it is reasonable to expect a device like the EP950 to provide sustained gigabit read/write to its local hard drive.
With all of that said, the gigabit connection on the EP950 does communicate faster than a 100mbps connection. The system does benefit from it. For bulk or large file transfers to the EP950's internal hard drive, the USB 3.0 connection is a faster interface. However, I should point out that the EP950's transfer speed over USB 3.0 will not be anywhere close to the 400MB/s allowed by that interface's specifications.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leonardtan View Post

That is the way I understand it too. I have seen many consumer grade equipment including network switches and routers with Gigabit ports that don't even come close to the 1Gbit speed. Link speed does NOT equal true speed.

I agree and understand what you are saying. The point is that any media player that states it is gigabit it isn't!

Media Server: UnRaid Server: 15TB of storage and growing :).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Home Theater Set Up:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

GusGus748s is offline  
post #15 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 07:58 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
jcgrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have a WD Caviar Green, 3 TB installed in the Micca using the SATA connection. If I remove that drive and put it in my NAS, and connected it to the SATA port, the drive laughs at the download speed. Because it can handle 6 Gb/s, but at home I only have a 1 Gbps network, so my 40 GB transfers at a little under 6 minutes, I've done it hundreds of times. If I take the same drive to my work and place it on my 10 Gbps network, it takes 2 1/2 minutes, because now the drive cannot keep up with the network speed. So I know the drive is not the problem. I have multiple gigabit devices connected to my home network, they all transfer at 95% - 98 % of 1 Gbps network, so I know the problem is not the network. So the problem must be in the micca device. It's advertised as 1 Gbps network, well I know that it doesn't do that, the best I've ever seen is 100 Mbps. Some folks above stated they have seen it go higher, tell me how you did it? Because, I know the drive can handle it, so that is not the bootleneck. Maybe it's the micca SATA chip, maybe it is advertised as 6 Gb/s or 3 Gb/s (SATA standard), but really, due to processor limitations, can only do 1 Gb/s, maybe only 0.5 Gb/s?

I agree I can remove the drive from the micca device and either connect to my external computer SATA connection, and transfer files at blinding speeds, or I can connect to my external computer's USB 3.0 port and do the same thing. Both of these methods defeat why I bought this device that advertised 1 Gbps transfer speed! Why do I need to install an internal drive if I need to remove it every time to transfer files and then re-connected. That is what I been doing the last couple of years with my existing $49.00 Micca MPLAY-HD media players, that work perfectly fine! I would then have more capabilities, e.g., slow motion, and could have saved myself $170 x 2 = $340. Since when does a upgrade reduce capabilities at 3x the cost?

By the way, I've been doing this kind of stuff professionally for 25 years, I am a Design/Test Engineer. Unfortunately, we can't test commercial systems in our labs, only stuff that goes into space!
jcgrey is offline  
post #16 of 16 Old 07-12-2012, 08:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
GusGus748s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Visalia, CA 93291
Posts: 6,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcgrey View Post

I have a WD Caviar Green, 3 TB installed in the Micca using the SATA connection. If I remove that drive and put it in my NAS, and connected it to the SATA port, the drive laughs at the download speed. Because it can handle 6 Gb/s, but at home I only have a 1 Gbps network, so my 40 GB transfers at a little under 6 minutes, I've done it hundreds of times. If I take the same drive to my work and place it on my 10 Gbps network, it takes 2 1/2 minutes, because now the drive cannot keep up with the network speed. So I know the drive is not the problem. I have multiple gigabit devices connected to my home network, they all transfer at 95% - 98 % of 1 Gbps network, so I know the problem is not the network. So the problem must be in the micca device. It's advertised as 1 Gbps network, well I know that it doesn't do that, the best I've ever seen is 100 Mbps. Some folks above stated they have seen it go higher, tell me how you did it? Because, I know the drive can handle it, so that is not the bootleneck. Maybe it's the micca SATA chip, maybe it is advertised as 6 Gb/s or 3 Gb/s (SATA standard), but really, due to processor limitations, can only do 1 Gb/s, maybe only 0.5 Gb/s?
I agree I can remove the drive from the micca device and either connect to my external computer SATA connection, and transfer files at blinding speeds, or I can connect to my external computer's USB 3.0 port and do the same thing. Both of these methods defeat why I bought this device that advertised 1 Gbps transfer speed! Why do I need to install an internal drive if I need to remove it every time to transfer files and then re-connected. That is what I been doing the last couple of years with my existing $49.00 Micca MPLAY-HD media players, that work perfectly fine! I would then have more capabilities, e.g., slow motion, and could have saved myself $170 x 2 = $340. Since when does a upgrade reduce capabilities at 3x the cost?
By the way, I've been doing this kind of stuff professionally for 25 years, I am a Design/Test Engineer. Unfortunately, we can't test commercial systems in our labs, only stuff that goes into space!

No one is talking about the hard drive. The bottleneck is the processor or CPU!

Media Server: UnRaid Server: 15TB of storage and growing :).


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

 

Home Theater Set Up:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

GusGus748s is offline  
Reply Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off