Re: GEN-5 Speed faster than advertised - Page 2 - Hughesnet Community

larrykelly · ‎03-24-2017

I ran a speed test using a utility different than HughesNet's and got the same excellent results. Notice the test results from a year ago of GEN-4 which I considered pretty good at the time. I just upgraded a couple days ago.

Larry

GabeU · ‎04-04-2017

I'm right where I put the yellow dot in Western, NY. Not in the center of the beam, but still not a bad placement. My RSS is sitting at 99 right now, but it's overcast. I also don't know where my Gateway is to know what the weather is like. Wherever ROS is. Roswell, NM?

GW · ‎04-04-2017

I may be wrong but I think you all up north get lower signal by default just because you're farther away.

Yes, I think there's a Roswell gateway on Gwalk's map. Looks like beautiful weather in Roswell tonight.

https://www.wunderground.com/US/NM/Roswell.html

GabeU · ‎04-04-2017

@GW wrote:
I may be wrong but I think you all up north get lower signal by default just because you're farther away.

Yes, I think there's a Roswell gateway on Gwalk's map. Looks like beautiful weather in Roswell tonight.
https://www.wunderground.com/US/NM/Roswell.html

On his map there's one in Albuquerque, but not Roswell. There're most likely Gateways for Gen5 that aren't on that map, though.

C0RR0SIVE · ‎04-04-2017

There are a few Jupiter II only gateways that aren't on that map... I happen to be on one of them, and Gabe happens to be on another one of them it seems.

GabeU · ‎04-04-2017

@GW wrote:

I use my computer for business only. I've been very happy with the FX-6300 since I got it 2½ years ago so I don't know anything about a controversy.

It was basically that what is purported to be a six core CPU is actually a three core CPU with each core divided into two "modules" acting as cores. People were angry that they weren't getting a true six core CPU, though, for the most part, it still acts as a six core CPU. For the most part there is no difference in performance, especially for what most people use their computer for. Only those runnig certain data intensive programs might notice the difference between these and true six core.

It was the same with the four and eight core FX's, with them really being two and four core with those cores, again, divided to make two each.

The performance in gaming and other intensive programs wasn't quite what they purpoted it would be with the FX, either. You have the third generation, though, so yours is updated and much better than the FX6100.

It caused a lot of people to learn their lesson with jumping right in, even if it didn't really affect them. This is why I am waiting on the Ryzen to see what is said about it before I buy one for a new build.

Again, though, with all of this said, for us and most others, it's still just like a six core CPU and it works very well. People just wish they would have been more honest from the start and their reputation took a bit of a hit.

GW · ‎04-05-2017

That's interesting. Thanks for the info Gabe. I didn't know anything about that but AMD is supposedly a lot of the reason our Intel stock with reinvested dividends has doubled in value in the last four years.

The last two notebooks I bought for my wife and myself are i7.

C0RR0SIVE · ‎04-05-2017

Actually... It's a bit hairier than one would think when it comes to the FX series... For example an FX 8-core CPU is more similar to a 4-core CPU with HT enabled. While not a true 8-cores, the CPU can process upto 8 threads at one time, and in some instances appear as 8 individual cores to the OS. The efficiency however depends greatly on how well the software is coded.

In virtualization, an FX-8350 is a beast of a CPU for the cost compared to an i7. However, in single threaded applications, performance could suffer greatly, and applications with poor coding and built around the SMT instead of CMT method would choke horribly on an FX series CPU. AMD Ryzen has since switched to SMT and is killing Intel in terms of multi-threaded performance, and staying on par in most single-threaded applications, sometimes falling slightly short...

Below is a diagram I grabbed off of wikipedia... You see the four modules, but looking at each module, you see two integer units for 8 total "cores", the modules also share a good bit of stuff, mostly cache, memory controller and pci-e lanes. Great for specialty workloads like running ESXi/VMWare, horrible for most other things.
FX 8 Core CPU

Below is an Intel Skylake i7 Quad Core with SMT take note it has four cores but you can see everything shares a bit of cache, Memory Controller, among other things. Strangely, most normal people buying an i7 always thought they was getting an 8-core CPU as Intel and partners didn't state "Quad Core" and would always say, "with Hyper-threading". Why the masses didn't go up in arms over that in the earlier core-series life is beyond me.
i7-6700k diagram

Ryzen... Is different... It's new, powerful, and does an amazing job at multi-threaded applications, I plan on waiting a bit for the bugs to be worked out, as is seen with any release of a brand new architecture.
I suggest reading this article if you wanna learn more about Ryzen... http://www.ocdrift.com/amd-ryzen-cpu-die-diagram-exposed/

ALL THAT JABBERING ASIDE... Most people honestly don't need any more than a dual core CPU like the Intel Pentium G3258, or a more modern Skylake Pentium... Seeing as Pentiums are now getting the HT treatment, they are more like i3 processors. More than sufficient for the typical user.

I wish I had invested in AMD two years ago... $1.67/share and they are at $14.16/share now and could go even higher as the year goes on. Could have made a killing on that.

tampasteve1 · ‎04-05-2017

PowerPC all the way! Man, all that info reminds me of the Intel vs PowerPC debate. We all know who won that, but in my uses PowerPC was a superior processor, they just could not keep up with the heat being produced on the higher end G5 and then mobile computing on a G5 never really panned out. Too bad, I liked it.

I personally am an AMD fan as well...but stuck using an i5 at work.

GW · ‎04-05-2017

Thanks for all the CPU info C0RR0SIVE. Interesting stuff.

The AMD stock is certainly amazing considering the book value is a piddling 50¢ a share. It's one of the most overvalued stocks on the market. Even worse than Tesla.

GabeU · ‎04-06-2017

@C0RR0SIVE wrote:
ALL THAT JABBERING ASIDE... Most people honestly don't need any more than a dual core CPU like the Intel Pentium G3258, or a more modern Skylake Pentium... Seeing as Pentiums are now getting the HT treatment, they are more like i3 processors. More than sufficient for the typical user.

Exactly. For most people, the debacle didn't really affect them. With that said, though, one thing it definitely had an effect on, whether the processor really did or not, was trust in the company. It wasn't so much it not performing they way they purported it would for the high end users, but rather people being felt like they were straight out lied to. A company really takes a hit from something like that, and in AMD's delicate position, had they not owned a graphics processor division (ATI), they may not be here today.

Waiting on Ryzen is definitely the way to go. It looks like it's great, but better to wait.

C0RR0SIVE · ‎04-07-2017

Yeup, I keep getting asked to price out Ryzen builds, and most people wanting custom builds need ECC memory... Difficult to recomend Ryzen when it has memory compatability issues with regular RAM... Forget trying to find a good board that supports ECC right now, that will take a few years.

larrywabrams · ‎07-20-2017

I am on Gen5 with 30 GB limit, which I use up in about 10 days without any big movie steaming. During these prescious 10 days I get between 17Mbps and 48Mbps. When I run out of allotment, I am throttled down to between 1.8 Mbs and 2.9 Mbs. Above 2Mbp and steaming on Amazon Prime is fine. But, around 1.8Mbs, it becomes annoying as the steam stops and starts.

My question is why can't Hughes offer GEN5 customers the choice to throttle from the very beginning, say at 10Mbs, so as to prolong the allotment, then do the normal throttle to say around 3.0 Mbs?

C0RR0SIVE · ‎07-20-2017

To be honest, speed sells... How is Hughes to compete with anyone when everyone has "bigger and better" numbers? People buy what sounds the fastest/biggest, not the slowest.

That aside, speeds when in FAP can hit 1Mbps or lower, though you should still be able to stream standard definition video just fine.

GabeU · ‎03-30-2017

The download speed looks to be about what I've heard and seen, but the upload speed doesn't. That upload result seems VERY high.