PCBUILD Archives

Personal Computer Hardware discussion List

PCBUILD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
David Gillett <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCBUILD - Personal Computer Hardware discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 1 Feb 1999 17:25:30 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (36 lines)
On 31 Jan 99, at 12:27, Iain Lang wrote:

> Yes, but what anything *says* is/can be academic, certainly it can be
> puzzling.  I have an un-named modem card and it says 115,200 all the time.

  This is almost certainly the speed between the CPU and modem, not the
speed of the phone connection.

> Now, it's supposed to be a 56K but when I set it to 56000 it is definitely
> slower than otherwise.

  Many modems do a certain amount of compression, so a 53K download
connection could provide a peak flow of 80K or more to the CPU.  If the
modem-CPU speed is sett for 115K, this works fin, but if it's limited to
33.6K then the modem has to throttle back and buffer the data to suit.
DON'T DO THIS.

> My ISP swears that it cannot be - and I have to assume they know what
> they're talking about -

  Unfortunately, running an ISP is no guarantee of cluefulness.  Sigh.

> but all I can say is that at 115,2000 the stuff comes in like a
> train.  When downloading large files I consistently get 2.5 to 4
> kB/s.  (I use Opera, mind you, so that may help in the speed stakes.)
> Before a totally new install of Win95, the same card at 42,000 was
> like wading through treacle; at 33,600 - great!  anything over 42,00
> was a lottery.  I'd seen 44,000 and it wasn't remarkable.


David G

                         PCBUILD's List Owner's:
                      Bob Wright<[log in to unmask]>
                        Drew Dunn<[log in to unmask]>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2