So you want hypothetical answers to a hypothetical question.
I doubt you will get 600-800Mbps transfer data in your scenario due to wifi channel interferences and your router being struggling to serving 4 clients via Samba at the same time unless you use a monster router that I am not aware of.
I suggest you run some test with iperf with 2-3 devices (don’t need to be Vero’s to see how they interact
Have you tried using a Wi-Fi strength meter app on a phone to see what signal strength you can get in the vehicle? I find that when my truck is parked in the garage (physically about 20-25 feet from the router which is on the other side of a couple of drywall walls) I can get a signal of about -60dBm standing outside the vehicle next to the driver’s door, about -65dBm holding the phone up inside the vehicle with the doors and windows closed, and about -70dBm if I prop the phone in a cupholder in the center console (lower, below the window line).
According to a web page on metageek:
-67 dBm Minimum signal strength for applications that require very reliable, timely packet delivery.
-70 dBm Minimum signal strength for reliable packet delivery.
This leads me to believe that the transfer rate from house to vehicle would be rubbish, so if I were in your situation, I’d use a portable USB HDD and sneakernet.
Very good info!
Yeah, now that you mention it, it probably would be better to setup a local ethernet network in the vehicle and then use a portable drive to copy from the house, plugin that into a vero in the vehicle which would just share to all the others on the vehicle’s local net.
Hi.
No big deal here, but just wondering why the team decided to go for 100 mbps instead of 1000 mbps for the network.
Considering that Gigabit network has been out there for quite a long time, is stable, and does not cost much more than 100, why was it decided to go for 100 instead of 1000? I would pay some prewium to get that. Even though to play 4k content from a network device 100 is enough, there could be scenarios when files are copied from a network location to an attached USB drive via Vero / file manager.
I could attach a Gigabit USB network adapter via USB but then it is only 480 mbps (via USB2) and if I want to copy the files to a USB drive attached but there is already network adapter attached to another USB, this would degrade the speed even more.
Was there such a big difference in price of components and production that prevented the 1000 option?
Also, wouldn’t Gigabit make it faster to start, fast forward and rewind media while watching?
Thanks.
I have moved your post here as the question has already been asked and answered
Could you elaborate on that a little bit? I am really surprised. 10+ years since it became a standard, so the industry should have been to every single dark corner of it :). WiFi AC shoulb be less stable that Gigabit Ethernet then.
Well there was a reason that I linked you to this thread
Sorry, I am probably not explaining myself correctly. The posting talks mostly about AC WiFi and only a little bit about Ethernet.
I wanted to know what kind of problems using the Gigabit Ethernet was causing.
So, if I extract the information about Ethernet that I can see in this posting I get:
Ethernet is connected via an integrated PHY
We found that Gigabit Ethernet caused some issues, particularly with flow control, which isn’t always handled well with consumer equipment.
going from that, I wanted to know what are those “some issues” and what kind of “consumer equipment”.
Thank you.
Flow control issues mainly. We had this problem with OSMC on the original Vero where we used 1000M. A lot of switches used in homes are dumb and don’t allow this to be toggled.
The price would be quite a lot higher if we had used Gigabit Ethernet as well, as we would be adding a separate PHY instead of using the integrated one on the SoC. That’s a higher BOM and longer time to market straight away.
While I understand the concern, I haven’t seen a need for Gigabit Ethernet yet, even when streaming UHD rips. So it’s not on the roadmap for the foreseeable future.
USB Ethernet adapters will work if you need higher throughout.
Sam
Thank you, Sam.
so when you are playing a 4k content, what is the utilization of the fast ethernet? how much bandwidth trhoughput is needed?
What is the bitrate of the file you are trying to play?
both 8 bit and 10 bit
Those are not a bitrate.
h264 @15.4 Mb/s
or this
Video Codec: AVC High@L5.1
ReFrames: 5 frames
Bitrate: 80 Mbps
That will stream fine
thanks, can you educate me more? how did you conclude that?
bitrate: 80 mbps or any other number, how do you calculate that to see if fast ethernet is enough or not?
Yes, if that is the real Bitrate that eg MediaInfo reports than that would indicate to play fine over 100Mbit LAN which normally should give you 94Mbit/s
so the media player will buffer before playing if the bit rate is higher then 100 Mbit/s,
is that correct?