Slow network transfer speeds - QNAP

M

MrHood22

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
4,312
I have a QNAP connected with dual gigabit and the transfer speeds leave more to be desired. I've done a little troubleshooting but I'm not sure where else to go. I'll try to lay the info out as cleanly as possible.

Modem/Router - Connects to my Asus RT56u router (Cat5e)

Gigabit switch - Devices: Qnap (2 x Cat6). Also connected to Asus router with Cat5e cable

PC: Connected to Asus Router via 5ghz

Random facts:
-My PC is literally right above the router on the next floor. Speeds are ~12-18mb/s @ 5ghz. ~5mb/s @ 2.4ghz
-Originally router wasn't direct under PC, it was 10 feet away ~4mb/s
-Connecting my computer to the router with a Cat5e cable - 11mb/s
-Connecting qnap directly to PC lan port with cat6 cable - 42mb/s

What I know:
-This is a network issue because when it's hooked up directly to PC speeds double/quadruple.
- 5ghz appears to be faster than Cat5e -- To me this seems opposite
- Originally the router wasn't far away but the speeds drastically changed when I moved it a little closer.
 
/usr/home said:
Are you talking MB/s or Mb/s?
Click to expand...

To be honest I confuse myself when I think about MB/s vs Mb/s :p

I believe it's MB/s.

Example of how I'm determining my speeds:
Windows7FileCopy_5F00_2704D3A4.png
 
If the source device is running on a 5400 speed Hard Drive then you will never achieve optimal speeds. There is 6 key components for transfer speeds. The source ( IDE, SATA, RAID, etc), cable, congestion of data, trunking, switch, or the destination ( IDE, SATA, RAID etc ). So yes, you will see different speeds depending on where the source is if the destination is always the same.

I had a Synology 1511+ in RAID 5. I normally see 100+/- MB only because the source location is SSD or a high quality HD that can achieve that speed. In theory with 1000BaseT, you could achieve 200+/- but with overhead the normal range is any where from 80 MB - 120 MB.
 
ElvisG said:
If the source device is running on a 5400 speed Hard Drive then you will never achieve optimal speeds. There is 6 key components for transfer speeds. The source ( IDE, SATA, RAID, etc), cable, congestion of data, trunking, switch, or the destination ( IDE, SATA, RAID etc ). So yes, you will see different speeds depending on where the source is if the destination is always the same.

I had a Synology 1511+ in RAID 5. I normally see 100+/- MB only because the source location is SSD or a high quality HD that can achieve that speed. In theory with 1000BaseT, you could achieve 200+/- but with overhead the normal range is any where from 80 MB - 120 MB.
Click to expand...

The source and destination are always same. It's just the method of data transfer. The data below proves to us that with my current source and destination it is capable of at least 40mb/s. My question is why is there such a big gap in the numbers? I understand that the speed I get when hooking it up directly will not be the same as what I get through a network but to only be 1/4th the speed seems like too big of a gap.


MrHood22 said:
-My PC is literally right above the router on the next floor. Speeds are ~12-18mb/s @ 5ghz. ~5mb/s @ 2.4ghz
-Originally router wasn't direct under PC, it was 10 feet away ~4mb/s
-Connecting my computer to the router with a Cat5e cable - 11mb/s
-Connecting qnap directly to PC lan port with cat6 cable - 42mb/s
Click to expand...
 
You must be running the QNAP in a non-RAID. 40 MB +/- is perfectly normal for non-RAID. You answered your problem then. It would be safe to assume that the issue is within your network most likely a switch.
 
ElvisG said:
You must be running the QNAP in a non-RAID. 40 MB +/- is perfectly normal for non-RAID. You answered your problem then. It would be safe to assume that the issue is within your network most likely a switch.
Click to expand...

It's in a RAID 5.

As I said, I agree it's probably a network speed. When I hook the QNAP up directly to the computer it gets about 40mb/s but when I hook it in to the network I get about 75% less. This is what I'm trying to figure out. Is there some setting I would have to do in the router to fix this?
 
Describe your network in detail. We need router model / switch number and how is the source connected to the destination?

IDE 7200 -> Cat5e -> router model number -> Cat5e -> QNAP

Your router should have auto-negation on so when a Gig port is plugged in it will run Gig. If you have a managed switch then you could have one port on 100 MB.

I would look at the nic speeds and they will tell what speeds your nic is running. Open command prompt and run this..

wmic NIC where NetEnabled=true get Name, Speed

I would also run a "tracert IPofQNAP" to see how congested your network is. You can also run ping.
 
ElvisG said:
Describe your network in detail. We need router model / switch number and how is the source connected to the destination?

IDE 7200 -> Cat5e -> router model number -> Cat5e -> QNAP

Your router should have auto-negation on so when a Gig port is plugged in it will run Gig. If you have a managed switch then you could have one port on 100 MB.

I would look at the nic speeds and they will tell what speeds your nic is running. Open command prompt and run this..

wmic NIC where NetEnabled=true get Name, Speed

I would also run a "tracert IPofQNAP" to see how congested your network is. You can also run ping.
Click to expand...

I thought my network was pretty accurately described in my original post but I will try again in a different format.

[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on the floor above, ~5 feet): ~11-18mb/s

[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on floor above router, ~15 feet): ~4mb/s

[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> Cat5e -> [PC]
Transfer Speed: ~11mb/s

[QNAP] -> Single Cat6 -> [PC LAN 10/100/1000 port]
Transfer Speed: ~40mb/s


I have port trunking turned on in the Qnap and I have confirmed it's running at gigabit speeds. When it is plugged in to the switch WITHOUT port trunking one port is 1000, the other is 100. I have not checked what it is when it is plugged in to the router because it's no longer configured like that.

I will do a tracert when I get home.
 
MrHood22 said:
I thought my network was pretty accurately described in my original post but I will try again in a different format.

[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on the floor above, ~5 feet): ~11-18mb/s

[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on floor above router, ~15 feet): ~4mb/s

[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> Cat5e -> [PC]
Transfer Speed: ~11mb/s

[QNAP] -> Single Cat6 -> [PC LAN 10/100/1000 port]
Transfer Speed: ~40mb/s


I have port trunking turned on in the Qnap and I have confirmed it's running at gigabit speeds. When it is plugged in to the switch WITHOUT port trunking one port is 1000, the other is 100. I have not checked what it is when it is plugged in to the router because it's no longer configured like that.

I will do a tracert when I get home.
Click to expand...

1) Trunking protocol is 802.3ad. Your router doesn't support 802.3.ad so you are not trunking. Trunking involves both devices to support 802.3ad.

2) "[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on the floor above, ~5 feet): ~11-18mb/s "
This is perfectly normal because you are transferring over wireless.

3) "[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on floor above router, ~15 feet): ~4mb/s "
Again, this is perfectly normal. Notice the speed decrease as you move the device away. You can't get wired transfer speed on wireless. Totally two different medium's.

4) "[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> Cat5e -> [PC]
Transfer Speed: ~11mb/s"
This is perfectly normal. It looks like the data is transferring on the 100 MB nic. You should see 40 mb/s. Both nic's are Gig so I don't know why one is 100 MB unless you changed it. Since you are not running trunking then just disable the 100 MB nic.

On QNAP website, it says that this "Data transfer rate: 300 Mbps". There is 8 bits in 1 byte so 8 divide into 300 = 37.5. That is why you can only see 40 mb/s. This is weird because 1000 / 8 = 125. It has to be something kind of funky QNAP software limit.
 
ElvisG said:
1) Trunking protocol is 802.3ad. Your router doesn't support 802.3.ad so you are not trunking. Trunking involves both devices to support 802.3ad.

2) "[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on the floor above, ~5 feet): ~11-18mb/s "
This is perfectly normal because you are transferring over wireless.

3) "[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on floor above router, ~15 feet): ~4mb/s "
Again, this is perfectly normal. Notice the speed decrease as you move the device away. You can't get wired transfer speed on wireless. Totally two different medium's.

4) "[QNAP] -> Dual Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> Cat5e -> [PC]
Transfer Speed: ~11mb/s"
This is perfectly normal. It looks like the data is transferring on the 100 MB nic. You should see 40 mb/s. Both nic's are Gig so I don't know why one is 100 MB unless you changed it. Since you are not running trunking then just disable the 100 MB nic.

On QNAP website, it says that this "Data transfer rate: 300 Mbps". There is 8 bits in 1 byte so 8 divide into 300 = 37.5. That is why you can only see 40 mb/s. This is weird because 1000 / 8 = 125. It has to be something kind of funky QNAP software limit.
Click to expand...

1) Perfectly understandable. I didn't know this.

2) Makes sense but it still seems pretty slow. If my computer fell through the floor it would fall directly on my router. To me I would think my speeds would be closer to 30mb/s (10% degradation through the floor seems logical).
3) Logical.

4) It should be dual gigabit so I'm not sure why one would be at 100. When you said "Your router should have auto-negation on so when a Gig port is plugged in it will run Gig. If you have a managed switch then you could have one port on 100 MB. " does this mean that it could be expected?


Now that I know Port trunking must be supported on both sides I will disable it. Then I will look in to the protocols on the QNAP to see why one is set to 100. Is there anything else you recommend?
 
I'd probably only plug one nic in on the QNAP, there's really no reason to use the second nic unless you were going to use it for some other protocol with a 2nd IP, like for iSCSI or NFS.
 
I think you don't understand what trunking or using 802.3ad does.

Think of trunking as if you were moving stuff in a pickup truck and you decided to rent a 22' Uhaul instead.

Are you going faster down the highway? No, your actual transfer speed does not increase.


Can you haul more stuff? Yes. Technically since you are using two lines you can move twice as much data.....


The problem then becomes can you load and unload your data at a rate that uses that capacity?

One machine running Windows 7? No.
One machine running Windows 8 or 8.1? usually no.
Multiple windows 7 clients both downloading at the same time? Yes each client can max out a connection.

The problem is that your QNAP box maxes out at 300Mbps=37.5MBps
 
Mackintire said:
I think you don't understand what trunking or using 802.3ad does.

Think of trunking as if you were moving stuff in a pickup truck and you decided to rent a 22' Uhaul instead.

Are you going faster down the highway? No, your actual transfer speed does not increase.


Can you haul more stuff? Yes. Technically since you are using two lines you can move twice as much data.....


The problem then becomes can you load and unload your data at a rate that uses that capacity?

One machine running Windows 7? No.
One machine running Windows 8 or 8.1? usually no.
Multiple windows 7 clients both downloading at the same time? Yes each client can max out a connection.

The problem is that your QNAP box maxes out at 300Mbps=37.5MBps
Click to expand...

Trunking is more clear to me now. It would definitely be a benefit to me as I have multiple devices accessing it. However, it's not important enough to buy a new router for.

If my QNAP box maxes out at 37.5 why was I able to get to the low 40's when I hook it up directly? As Elvis said it appears to be a software limit as the hardware should be capable of 125. So does that mean it has a software limit of 37.5 but it's not set in stone?
 
"[QNAP] -> Single Cat6 -> [Asus RT-56u router] -> 5ghz -> [PC]
Transfer Speed (PC on the floor above, ~5 feet): ~11-18MB/s "

Is fairly good considering what you are doing.

You'd need to be using 802.11ac equipment configured for 80Mhz channel width to get to 40MB/ps ASUS part numbers listed below:


RT-N66R or RTN68U and the appropriate client adapter PCE-AC66 or PCE-AC68
 
ElvisG said:
On QNAP website, it says that this "Data transfer rate: 300 Mbps". There is 8 bits in 1 byte so 8 divide into 300 = 37.5. That is why you can only see 40 mb/s. This is weird because 1000 / 8 = 125. It has to be something kind of funky QNAP software limit.
Click to expand...


I'm willing to bet it has more to do with the weakling Atom processor the majority of them use.
 
Liger88 said:
I'm willing to bet it has more to do with the weakling Atom processor the majority of them use.
Click to expand...

Yes that and the lack of RAM puts a hurting on this. I forgot to check that when I was at ~40.
 
MrHood22 said:
If my QNAP box maxes out at 37.5 why was I able to get to the low 40's when I hook it up directly? As Elvis said it appears to be a software limit as the hardware should be capable of 125. So does that mean it has a software limit of 37.5 but it's not set in stone?
Click to expand...

What model QNAP are you using?
 
I bet you are 100% correct, Liger88. My Synology 1511 has a 1.8 GHz Dual-Core with 1 Gig of ram and I have no problem getting near the 125 Mb/s limit. I'd be curious to see some kind of test with different processors on testing bandwidth limitation.
 
ElvisG said:
I bet you are 100% correct, Liger88. My Synology 1511 has a 1.8 GHz Dual-Core with 1 Gig of ram and I have no problem getting near the 125 Mb/s limit. I'd be curious to see some kind of test with different processors on testing bandwidth limitation.
Click to expand...


Yikes and it's not even an Atom, but a Marvell 800Mhz. I'm definitely going with CPU bottleneck and seeing how it's only 256MB of RAM that is definitely not helping one bit. I think it's definitely a device limit (hardware) at this point.
 
Liger88 said:
Yikes and it's not even an Atom, but a Marvell 800Mhz. I'm definitely going with CPU bottleneck and seeing how it's only 256MB of RAM that is definitely not helping one bit. I think it's definitely a device limit (hardware) at this point.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. I watch the resource monitor when I transfer and it's not near being maxed out. Basically where I'm at now is I know it can get 40mb/s at the very least. I'm trying to figure out what I can do to get close to that without plugging it directly in to my computer.
 
Personally unless I REALLY needed the performance I would be looking at the TS-419P II.

The idle power is just as low and it can nearly saturate a gigabit line. 109MB/ps read

When your box spends 23 hours of the day idle, power consumption starts to matter.

Otherwise your looking at the TS-459 Pro II and higher.
 
i-feel-like-im-taking-crazy-pills.gif


I appreciate the willingness to help but 90% of you aren't contributing anything. I'm aware of the limitations. I'm not shopping for a device.

The short and easy...

I have seen the device get ~40mb/s but only when connected directly to my computer. So there's something about going through a router that cuts my transfer rate in half. What can I do to troubleshoot this and/or get it closer to its expected ~40mb/s max transfer rate.
 
First off, you'll only get close to the 40 MB/s when reading from the QNAP, not on writes to it.

Now that you have it non-trunked and only single nic'd to your router, what read speeds do you get from it when using your wired PC?
 
Ditch the second network cable on the QNAP.

Go wired to your switch from PC.

Don't be jealous (details in sig).

filecopy.png
 
Also in the OP you said you connected a Cat5e cable from the computer to the router and got 11MBps. I have a feeling it might be the cable holding you back there. There have been numerous reports that not all Cat 5e cables are up to snuff for 1GbE despite the common belief that just being Cat 5e should guarantee that ability. Since the next test compares Cat 6 directly to the QNAP device I'd suggest, if you haven't already, replacing that cable connecting from the computer > router with a Cat 6 one and run that test again. In other words run all Cat 6 and see what happens. There is a reason why Cat 6 exists despite it originally only supporting 1GbE same as "claimed" by Cat 5e cables.

I'm thinking the cable is just not up to par because 11MBps coincides with the exact limit of 100Mbps Ethernet. Cable problem seems most likely. The Asus N56U definitely is capable in WAN-LAN, LAN-WAN, and LAN-LAN to nearly max out 1GbE.
 
Liger88 said:
Also in the OP you said you connected a Cat5e cable from the computer to the router and got 11MBps. I have a feeling it might be the cable holding you back there. There have been numerous reports that not all Cat 5e cables are up to snuff for 1GbE despite the common belief that just being Cat 5e should guarantee that ability. Since the next test compares Cat 6 directly to the QNAP device I'd suggest, if you haven't already, replacing that cable connecting from the computer > router with a Cat 6 one and run that test again. In other words run all Cat 6 and see what happens. There is a reason why Cat 6 exists despite it originally only supporting 1GbE same as "claimed" by Cat 5e cables.

I'm thinking the cable is just not up to par because 11MBps coincides with the exact limit of 100Mbps Ethernet. Cable problem seems most likely. The Asus N56U definitely is capable in WAN-LAN, LAN-WAN, and LAN-LAN to nearly max out 1GbE.
Click to expand...

What he said +1
 
So I tried a few other things...

[QNAP] -> Cat6 -> [Router] -> Cat5e -> Computer
Speed: 46mb/s (QNAP CPU @ ~98%)

It appears that this device has a Gigabit port and a 100mb/s port. Even when I manually set it to 1000mb/s (in QNAP) it reads 100mb/s even when it's the only one plugged in. Regardless, I only need 1 port at this point so I guess it's not that big of a deal.

To me it looks like this pretty much narrows it down to being a wireless problem. As I said, the router is on the floor below my PC (literally ~5 feet below the PCI wireless adapter). 75% seems like a MASSIVE decrease for Wireless N (5 ghz) at such a close range. What do the rest of you think?
 
Right on man that looks about right, glad you got it figured out. I thought it looked funny when QNAP was only reporting 100/100.

As far as wireless goes, I forgot to mention this awhile back, but it looks O-K to me so long as:

Random facts:
-My PC is literally right above the router on the next floor. Speeds are ~12-18mb/s @ 5ghz. ~5mb/s @ 2.4ghz
Click to expand...

this really is referring to 5MB/s for 2.4Ghz and 12-18MB/s for 5Ghz. If you are referring to megabits NOT megabytes then we got a problem.

Those are pretty much the best theoretical speeds you can get on that wireless router on those freqs, despite what the box for the router says because they all lie.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...nd-gigabit-wireless-n-router-reviewed?start=1

The average 2.4Ghz test was around 63.6Mbps which is 7.95MBps.

The average highest 5Ghz test they managed to do was 111Mbps which is 13.875MBps.

So you are well within the range especially with it being below you. That ceiling will impact performance even if you had 5 bars on the signal quality in Windows.
 
I've done 11MBps on 2.4Ghz negotiated at a 144Mbps connection rate (wireless N)

I've also done 18MBps on 5Ghz negotiated at a 300Mbps connection rate (wireless N)

I've also done 33MBps on 5Ghz negotiated at a 600Mbps connection rate (wireless AC)

I've also done 108MBps at 24Ghz but that was using Ubiquiti Airfiber (but yes it works!)

The factory firmware kinda sucks on the RT-N56U, look here for something better: http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=7857

Here's the link to the firmware I would currently use:
http://xserv.mooo.com/xnor/linux/rt-nxxu/
 
Mackintire said:
I've done 11MBps on 2.4Ghz negotiated at a 144Mbps connection rate (wireless N)

I've also done 18MBps on 5Ghz negotiated at a 300Mbps connection rate (wireless N)

I've also done 33MBps on 5Ghz negotiated at a 600Mbps connection rate (wireless AC)

I've also done 108MBps at 24Ghz but that was using Ubiquiti Airfiber (but yes it works!)

The factory firmware kinda sucks on the RT-N56U, look here for something better: http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=7857

Here's the link to the firmware I would currently use:
http://xserv.mooo.com/xnor/linux/rt-nxxu/
Click to expand...

I didn't think about different firmware. Where can I go to compare the differences between the firmware you linked and the one I have?
 
Does the QNAP support NFS? If it oes try enabling NFS in Windows, and switch to that protocol.

It's an old trick we use on the FreeNAS community. SAMBA is single threaded, and surprisingly CPU intensive, so on many low power and embedded cpu's (like what probably is in the QNAP) it can slow down rather significantly. NFS typically is much much faster.

I'm also a little confused? are you talking about Wireless speeds too? Yeah, just avoid Wireless for NAS. It's never enough. Too much protocol overhead. Regardless of the wifi connection speed, you usually wind up topping out at 6-8MB/s via Wifi.
 
Zarathustra[H];1040443756 said:
Does the QNAP support NFS? If it oes try enabling NFS in Windows, and switch to that protocol.

It's an old trick we use on the FreeNAS community. SAMBA is single threaded, and surprisingly CPU intensive, so on many low power and embedded cpu's (like what probably is in the QNAP) it can slow down rather significantly. NFS typically is much much faster.

I'm also a little confused? are you talking about Wireless speeds too? Yeah, just avoid Wireless for NAS. It's never enough. Too much protocol overhead. Regardless of the wifi connection speed, you usually wind up topping out at 6-8MB/s via Wifi.
Click to expand...


Yes, I'm talking about wireless speeds. NAS is wired, PC is 5ghz. For troubleshooting sake I ran a ethernet cable to connect my PC to the router but it's not really a practical solution for long term.

I know wired is always better than wireless. The point of this thread was to find out if I could get a closer to the wired speed as I think a 75% decrease for wireless at this range is a bit excessive.
 
MrHood22 said:
Yes, I'm talking about wireless speeds. NAS is wired, PC is 5ghz. For troubleshooting sake I ran a ethernet cable to connect my PC to the router but it's not really a practical solution for long term.

I know wired is always better than wireless. The point of this thread was to find out if I could get a closer to the wired speed as I think a 75% decrease for wireless at this range is a bit excessive.
Click to expand...

Well, in that case, you are probably out of luck. Advertised transfer speeds on wireless are really a marketing scam, and not representative of true speeds at all.

the 802.11xx standards have HORRENDOUS overhead, suffer greatly from interference, and are half duplex instead of full duplex. They may advertise as much as 600Mbps, but in reality you'll rarely connect higher than 130Mbps in a dual band (2x65) setup, and even that might be a stretch.

It goes something like this for 2.4Ghz:
Router marketed wireless speed: 600Mbps
Actual connected speed with most devices: 130Mbps to 300mbps
Less interference from nearby competing devices: 65Mbps to 130Mbps
Less ~50% overhead: 32.5 Mbps to 65Mbps
Divide by 8 to go from bits to bytes: ~4 to 8 MB/s

And if you are simultaneously transferring in both directions this halves (due to the half duplex), so 2 - 4MB/s

5Ghz typically fares a tiny bit better, but not much.

Gigabit Ethernet on the other hand will sustain up to ~120MB/s throughput in both directions at the same time over NFS in Linux or ~100MB/s in both directions at the same time over CIFS/SMB/SAMBA in Windows. So we are talking as much as 60 times faster.

There should really be some law requiring companies to market their routers using real world transfer speeds, not the theoretical figures they put on the boxes.

I repeat, advertised speeds for Wifi are a huge scam. They are usually good enough to browse the outside internet, but that is about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top