Community discussions

MikroTik App
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 11:58 pm

Rb112 R52 - r52 Rb112 the best cfg

Sat Jan 06, 2007 3:53 pm

I installed several links like this, usually with wpa2 and b/g mode

now i'm trying to use something more faster
but i see no difference between g turbo , or nstreme

I'm testing the modes with the 2 boards over the desktop
signal -47 + -

when i do a bandwidth-test
upd im geting 22m max
and tcp 11m max

dunno why is so big the difference

Thank you
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 11:58 pm

Mon Jan 08, 2007 5:48 pm

so what for are all those modes if i get the same bandwidth?
and how can i do a REAL bandwidth test (bechmark)?
User avatar
MikroTik Support
MikroTik Support
Posts: 24824
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 11:04 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:06 am

don't do test FROM the router to the router, do it over the link.

PC TEST 1 ~~~~ ROUTER 1 -----> ROUTER 2 ~~~~~ PC TEST2

like from PC1 to PC2. Use the BTest app:
User avatar
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 888
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:48 am

Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:43 am

Those boards are not very powerfull

Npt sure turbo would really help you (run out of cpu power before spectrum)

Nstream may be the same.

Look at system resorces, see cpu.

But yea, you can get a smidge more doing test vi pc-pc with radios in the middle
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 11:58 pm

Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:38 pm

today i did a bandwidth test and it gave me 30mbps!!!
the cpu usage was 33%
i disabled nstream and test it again but it was only 17
then i re enabled nstreme, but the results were 17 :(
and the cpu usage 100%
how can i test the link if it chage like that
User avatar
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 703
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 12:26 pm
Location: UK

Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:18 pm

That's probably the very best anyone has got from that platform.
It can be really great as a CPE but P2P links are limited by the CPU.
The basic rules are:
- raw 802.11 (nstreme off) less CPU utilisation, but bad at max capacity and range due to ACK timing and small packet performance
- Nstreme on much higher CPU utilisation, and very good at capacity and range due to solving ACK issue and packet aggregation into frames.
- if you want a high capacity, long range link, you need CPU horsepower.

IMHO there should be a WIKI on which RB's or x86 platforms are suitable for what. Our co. went through that learning curve 2+ years ago, and it's a shame we don't share the consensus so new users can be pointed in the right direction.
Buying a board/solution designed for CPE and expecting 40-80Mbps throughput could be a disappointment to say the least.

How about a user+MT contributed Wiki? I suggest start this now as a barebones, people add and when there's consensus from everyone someone kindly posts it as a Wiki?

Note all bandwidths quoted are Bridged wireless<>ethernet throughput half duplex .

RB112 or equivalent 175MHz MIPS CPU - 17Mbps Nstreme, 30Mbps non-Nstreme
-Ideal for a CPE or a low-speed P2P link

RB230 or equivalent 266MHz x86 CPU - 35Mbps Nstreme, ?45Mbps non-Nstreme
- Ideal for a faster P2P link or smaller base station/AP

RB532 - 333MHz MIPS CPU - ?35Mbps Nstreme, ?40Mbps non-Nstreme
-Ideal for faster P2P link or a smaller base station/AP

RB532A - 400MHz MIPS CPU ?anyone tested that?
-Faster version of above: ideal for faster P2P links or medium base station/AP

Custom x86 1GHz+ CPU - 80Mbps Nstreme, ?65Mbps non-Nstreme
-Suited to high speed backhaul or sectored P2MP base station
-Over 200Mbps P2MP nstreme possible on properly configured hardware with multiple radio cards

(need various people's input and debate on the above numbers - there have been widely varying figures reported)

Need to specify Nstreme test scenario settings for consistency:
How about Polling on, best-fit, buffer size 4000?
And some notes
- Non-nstreme = 802.11, suffers with ACK timing/distance and small packets
- Connection-tracking turned off in IP-Firewall (not needed for backhaul)
- bridged ethernet<>radio throughput is quoted: L3 routed connections are generally faster compared to L2 bridged, as L2 "extra packets" are not passed.
- B/W's quoted using MT UDP bandwidth test **through** the routers not run "from the box" which consumes CPU power

Well, this would be useful with input from others -
If there's input & agreement on this could be fleshed out to be a useful Wiki.


CableFree Solutions
Member Candidate
Member Candidate
Topic Author
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 11:58 pm

Mon Jan 22, 2007 3:08 am

thank you!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 54 guests