F5F Stay Refreshed Power Users Networks Transmission rates are significantly lower compared to incoming data rates.

Transmission rates are significantly lower compared to incoming data rates.

Transmission rates are significantly lower compared to incoming data rates.

T
thefrogkid
Member
209
10-07-2016, 08:08 AM
#1
I set up a new Windows Server 2019 Tyan 1U machine with a 10Gb NIC using an SFP+ connector. The setup includes a switch for connecting the server and other gear. The server connects via an SFP+ to SFP+ cable showing a 10Gb link, while RJ45 ports show a 2.5Gb connection. Data moves at about 280MB/s to the server and 50MB/s from it. I’ve tested using an SFP+ to Ethernet transceiver inside the server port and then through a CAT7 cable to the switch, but speeds remained unchanged.
T
thefrogkid
10-07-2016, 08:08 AM #1

I set up a new Windows Server 2019 Tyan 1U machine with a 10Gb NIC using an SFP+ connector. The setup includes a switch for connecting the server and other gear. The server connects via an SFP+ to SFP+ cable showing a 10Gb link, while RJ45 ports show a 2.5Gb connection. Data moves at about 280MB/s to the server and 50MB/s from it. I’ve tested using an SFP+ to Ethernet transceiver inside the server port and then through a CAT7 cable to the switch, but speeds remained unchanged.

S
142
10-07-2016, 04:00 PM
#2
I'm sending data from the server. Check if its storage or the service can handle higher speeds using iperf3 for testing.
S
seishi_no_kami
10-07-2016, 04:00 PM #2

I'm sending data from the server. Check if its storage or the service can handle higher speeds using iperf3 for testing.

S
Sookabooyat
Junior Member
24
10-07-2016, 04:25 PM
#3
Consider your topic formatting carefully to avoid confusion. Are you referring to 280 M B per second and 2.5 G bps? Do you mean 50 Mbps or 50 MB/s in the opposite direction? What data are you moving—small files or large ones? Also, what are the disk specifications and protocols involved? These aspects might actually be limiting performance instead of the connection itself.
S
Sookabooyat
10-07-2016, 04:25 PM #3

Consider your topic formatting carefully to avoid confusion. Are you referring to 280 M B per second and 2.5 G bps? Do you mean 50 Mbps or 50 MB/s in the opposite direction? What data are you moving—small files or large ones? Also, what are the disk specifications and protocols involved? These aspects might actually be limiting performance instead of the connection itself.

P
pitbuilder27
Member
50
10-09-2016, 08:52 AM
#4
Surprised, but the post was made too soon in the morning. Updated. Confirmed 280MB/s download and 50MB/s upload. Moving a 200GB file as a test. Performance matches what Explorer shows and the transfer time is recorded. Also checked with a 300MB test using LANSpeedTest.
P
pitbuilder27
10-09-2016, 08:52 AM #4

Surprised, but the post was made too soon in the morning. Updated. Confirmed 280MB/s download and 50MB/s upload. Moving a 200GB file as a test. Performance matches what Explorer shows and the transfer time is recorded. Also checked with a 300MB test using LANSpeedTest.

F
Fin_poika
Member
69
10-13-2016, 10:33 PM
#5
Extremely large video files are present (200GB). I also rely on LANSpeedTest to evaluate connection performance. The storage needs to support read speeds exceeding 400MB/s. After noticing the problem, all subsequent tests will be conducted on an internal boot SSD with read and write capabilities surpassing 500MB/s. Every client is utilizing NVMe drives that offer significantly faster speeds.
F
Fin_poika
10-13-2016, 10:33 PM #5

Extremely large video files are present (200GB). I also rely on LANSpeedTest to evaluate connection performance. The storage needs to support read speeds exceeding 400MB/s. After noticing the problem, all subsequent tests will be conducted on an internal boot SSD with read and write capabilities surpassing 500MB/s. Every client is utilizing NVMe drives that offer significantly faster speeds.

J
joeyzombeh
Junior Member
8
10-13-2016, 10:48 PM
#6
I’m noticing signs that the new NIC might be underperforming compared to the previous setup. I’m transitioning from a 1Gbps connection where both input and output were about 112MBps, which seems normal. The same storage media is being used now, but the performance feels off.
J
joeyzombeh
10-13-2016, 10:48 PM #6

I’m noticing signs that the new NIC might be underperforming compared to the previous setup. I’m transitioning from a 1Gbps connection where both input and output were about 112MBps, which seems normal. The same storage media is being used now, but the performance feels off.

B
BBOMB98
Member
73
10-14-2016, 01:38 PM
#7
Are you relying on fiber optics or standard internet? A non-fiber connection will result in significantly slower upload speeds compared to download speeds, which may cause issues when sending data from the server to another device.
B
BBOMB98
10-14-2016, 01:38 PM #7

Are you relying on fiber optics or standard internet? A non-fiber connection will result in significantly slower upload speeds compared to download speeds, which may cause issues when sending data from the server to another device.

E
ExtasyFox
Member
177
10-16-2016, 08:57 AM
#8
This involves no internet activity. It's strictly local data movement.
E
ExtasyFox
10-16-2016, 08:57 AM #8

This involves no internet activity. It's strictly local data movement.

D
128
10-16-2016, 09:53 AM
#9
Correct.
D
DiamondDasher3
10-16-2016, 09:53 AM #9

Correct.

E
EckigesEi
Member
136
10-17-2016, 06:24 AM
#10
If you notice higher performance from the server using the gigabit NIC at full speed, it’s likely the 10G card is not working properly.
E
EckigesEi
10-17-2016, 06:24 AM #10

If you notice higher performance from the server using the gigabit NIC at full speed, it’s likely the 10G card is not working properly.