cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

N/A

why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

Hi, I have a dual boot 98se/XPpro athlonxp1700 machine, both OS running Plusnet (isp)supplied usb modem.
The 98se set up shows v.good readings of around 57-60 k/s downloads
but the xp pro set up can only manage about 75% of this download speed and tcp/ip
tweaking (mtu, rwinn etc.) does not improve things.( readings averaged from a variety of locations)
Tthe uploads are fairly good but im not concerned about those speeds.
I am at a loss to explain this, the only diference between the setups (apart from OS) is the different usb modem driver used for XP , for which i am trying to track down a new one.( Plunet supplied -unbranded with no i.d)
xp has all microsoft updates.
Is it the case that XP is known to be much slower tcp/ip wise? Any sugestions appreciated.
Simon.

ps. removing hosts files and disabling firewall make no diference.


I ORIGINALLY POSTED THIS AT ADSLGUIDE BUT WONDERED IF ANYONE HERE COULD TELL ME WHERE TO GET UPDATED XP DRIVERS FOR PLUSNET USB MODEM
9 REPLIES
elton
Grafter
Posts: 175
Registered: 30-07-2007

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

Didn't you know, WinXP steals your bandwidth ?
See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23090.html

> Hi, I have a dual boot 98se/XPpro athlonxp1700 machine, both OS running Plusnet (isp)supplied usb modem.
> The 98se set up shows v.good readings of around 57-60 k/s downloads
> but the xp pro set up can only manage about 75% of this download speed and tcp/ip
> tweaking (mtu, rwinn etc.) does not improve things.( readings averaged from a variety of locations)
> Tthe uploads are fairly good but im not concerned about those speeds.
> I am at a loss to explain this, the only diference between the setups (apart from OS) is the different usb modem driver used for XP , for which i am trying to track down a new one.( Plunet supplied -unbranded with no i.d)
> xp has all microsoft updates.
> Is it the case that XP is known to be much slower tcp/ip wise? Any sugestions appreciated.
> Simon.
>
> ps. removing hosts files and disabling firewall make no diference.
>
>
> I ORIGINALLY POSTED THIS AT ADSLGUIDE BUT WONDERED IF ANYONE HERE COULD TELL ME WHERE TO GET UPDATED XP DRIVERS FOR PLUSNET USB MODEM


--
Skonko!
N/A

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

> Didn't you know, WinXP steals your bandwidth ?
> See:
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23090.html
>
thanks for the info, I shall see if this makes a diference :rollsmile:
N/A

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

I have followed instructions from http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23090.html ,

but when i get to group policies, the options listed inthe article are not there to adjust!

If i go to control panel,network conections, my adsl conection, properties and then click on qos - it has a greyed out tick that i am unable to click to see properties.

does this mean qos is not in action on my PC and not responsible for loss of bandwidth?
:confused:
N/A

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

Hi there. Depends if you have XP Pro or XP Home Edition. If you have XP Pro, you can adjust the reservable bandwith to zero. If you have the Home edition, I don't think you have this option. That said, I have the Pro edition and I have yet to see this setting of zero reservable bandwidth make any difference. I've tried it with the standard setting of 20%, and also set at zero. If there was an improvement I couldn't see it. If you're realy keen to try it, try a tweaking utility like Tweak XP. You may be able to adjust the Home Edition with that. You can get it for nothing at giveit2me43.com along with loads of other useful stuff. You have to register, but it's all free. Hope this is of some help to you.
Regards, John Taylor.

espresso_mick
Grafter
Posts: 225
Registered: 30-07-2007

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

XP does not steal your bandwidth.

The 20% is for the 'quality of service' function.
It would only be used if you have software that uses QOS and it requires it. Even if you have QOS software, if the full 20% isn't being used the rest is available to the system. The full bandwidth is available at all times unless a QOS enabled application is sending data.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/techinfo/planning/networking/overview/performance.asp

(scroll down to clarification)
espresso_mick
Grafter
Posts: 225
Registered: 30-07-2007

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

XP does not steal your bandwidth.

The 20% is for the 'quality of service' function.
It would only be used if you have software that uses QOS and it requires it. Even if you have QOS software, if the full 20% isn't being used the rest is available to the system. The full bandwidth is available at all times unless a QOS enabled application is sending data.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/techinfo/planning/networking/overview/performance.asp

(scroll down to clarification)
N/A

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

Thanks for info John,
I do have XP pro, and did find the QOS setting ( temporary blindness) and set to o% reserved bandwidth as the article suggested.
It has made little diference, if anything made it even slower.
I have asked Plusnet to let me know where to get updated drivers (if available) for the self install usb modem, that they supply. Smiley
N/A

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

The old XP 20% myth still going strong huh?

LOL

Ed.
N/A

RE: why is XP tcp/ip transfer slower than 98se ????

yes the QOS setting seems to make little difference.

My xp pro acheiving 20 odd percent less transfer rates is no myth, but very real unfortuanately.