In reply to a post by Pheasant:

In reply to a post by D_an_W:

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

Are you able to connect the PC directly to the ONT? You will need to set up a PPPoE connection under Network with the login details.

That will at least eliminate the Airport from the equation and give you a baseline of what the hardware is capable of.

I did try that after reading a post on here but couldn't get it to connect, maybe I did something wrong.

Worth doing. Not particularly difficult in MacOS:
- click '+' to create a new service
- choose 'PPPoE' (second from bottom)
- select the wired ethernet port from the drop down (it defaults to this anyway)
- Give it a name and click 'create'

Once its built, select the new PPPoE service
- enter your account name + password (tick remember the password)

Should be ready to connect from that point, using the button

This gives you direct unfettered access at the ONT, so no routers etc to get in the way. Should give you the cleanest test result.

I really wouldn't expect much difference performance wise doing it this way in MacOS and Ubuntu, certainly not as much as "abstraction" as doing it with Windows.

BINGO!



fast.com : 1.0Gbps / 99Mbps
speedtest.net: 909Mbps / 98Mbps

The problem was I had to manually assign an IP to allow the PPPoE to connect, once it did things look much different which as I used the same Ethernet lead that was connected to the Router puts the Router as the culprit as suspected?

In reply to a post by shrey:

It's the AirPort Extreme that's slowing you down. I have 900/110 FTTP as well. Using the BT Smart Hub2 I get full speed on a wired 2017 iMac. I changed the router to TP AX10 and my speeds were the same but the router was reliable and wifi way better.

On the AirPort Extreme acting as the router, I topped out at about 300Mb.

I still use the AirPort Extreme in bridge mode to extend my network via ethernet. That works fine and get full speed to any device wired to it.

I hope that helps.

Shrey

Thanks, just discovered that as you posted!

Yup you have found your culprit (and the post above yours also points the finger at the AirPort)....

Anyhow it's always good (in my mind anyway) to prove this beyond a doubt on your own setup. You could have been more unlucky and had further issues with the hackintosh, but that looks fine

Edited by Pheasant (Fri 19-Nov-21 22:19:05)

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

Yup you have found your culprit (and the post above yours also points the finger at the AirPort)....

Now to decide wether or not to pull the trigger on this TP-Link Archer AX6000

In reply to a post by candlerb:

This unfortunately is the problem with gigabit services: they highlight problems with your client devices and your local network. (I have 300M).

This needs to be a strap-line or something It is unfortunately going to become more and more commonplace

Cate5e is good for ~300ft or 100m at 1Gbps. In fact it is good for 2.5Gbps at that distance.

Should be ... Have recently come across some where either due to bad install or cheap cable it was not always possible at well under 100m.

In reply to a post by D_an_W:

(I have some unopened Cat7 labeled cables to use if required).

One born every minute. So which IEEE 802.3 standard do you think requires the use of Cat7 cable? That would none what so ever. I also very much doubt you have the proper connectors on the end of the Cat7 cable and you absolutely do not have any equipment that could properly terminate those connectors, because none has ever been released. In fact it worse than that because if you don't have the proper connectors on the end of the Cat7/8 cable you actually make things worse not better. If you don't understand why then it is pointless trying to explain to you why.

Anything beyond Cat6a is for suckers and those who like to engage in willy waving contests while burning the planet.

Cat5e is a 20+ year old, mature (some would say outdated) cabling standard with relatively, modest and yet forgiving performance limits (100 MHz) you can get away with quite a lot… Yet there always remains a world of difference between say…

a) Dedicated installer, reputable/warrantied single ‘cabling system’ supply from one of the wel known structured cabling manufacturers. Every perm. link performance tested with a certification tester like a Fluke DSX. Hundreds or thousands or points.

b) Part timer/sparky, cabling of unknown provenance, mismatched everything (whatever the wholesaler had behind the counter) and installer that doesn’t really know what they’re doing, Testing?? what’s that I just bell’d out the pairs guv…a few dozen maybe a hundred points. Cowboy territory.

Driving cabling at 20 or 30m is pretty easy. Performance of installed cables at the extremes of 90m sorts the wheat from the chaff (especially beyond Cat5e), but you never see those lengths outside of large commercial installs anyway.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

In reply to a post by D_an_W:

(I have some unopened Cat7 labeled cables to use if required).

One born every minute. So which IEEE 802.3 standard do you think requires the use of Cat7 cable? That would none what so ever. I also very much doubt you have the proper connectors on the end of the Cat7 cable and you absolutely do not have any equipment that could properly terminate those connectors, because none has ever been released. In fact it worse than that because if you don't have the proper connectors on the end of the Cat7/8 cable you actually make things worse not better. If you don't understand why then it is pointless trying to explain to you why.

Anything beyond Cat6a is for suckers and those who like to engage in willy waving contests while burning the planet.

Wow,

Did I catch you at a bad time or something?

I wrote "Cat7 labeled" and left them unopened as I was sceptical about them myself but thanks for making it clear and no, don't bother explaining anything as I doubt I would read anything you write.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

In reply to a post by candlerb:

This unfortunately is the problem with gigabit services: they highlight problems with your client devices and your local network. (I have 300M).

This needs to be a strap-line or something It is unfortunately going to become more and more commonplace

Thanks for yours and others help with this, much appreciated.