20mhz channel, 125 customers, doing 125-150Mbps of traffic
- image-9.png (138 KB)
2 Likes
@Michael Meluskey wrote:20mhz channel, 125 customers, doing 125-150Mbps of traffic
Hi Michael,
Thank you, some nice numbers there.
With sector utilization only at 64% and with those good group size numbers (4 & 5) I expect it will go up to >200Mbps if needed.
best regards,
Andy.
Mike - Are any of those 125 subs using the 450b? How are these performing for you?
of the 129 SM's (added 4 more today)
29 - 450
16 - 450i
84 - 450b
@CambiumMatt wrote:Mike - Are any of those 125 subs using the 450b? How are these performing for you?
3 Likes
Thanks Mike,
Nice to see all flavours of 450,450i,450b and 450m playing nicely together !
Andy.
Today is less performance generally we have around 540 Mb/s :-)
30 Mhz channel with 36 client
- medusa.png (3.09 KB)
3 Likes
Thanks for the updates,
If you are monitoring the peak throughput on the 450m with normal user traffic is the demand from users pushing you near to these numbers yet ?
best regards,
Andy.
users demand is around 150 mb/s in peak time I think we have room to put 100 cpes more with 100/5 mb/s service before to switch to 40mhz channel :-)
1 Like
@beppeorowrote:users demand is around 150 mb/s in peak time I think we have room to put 100 cpes more with 100/5 mb/s service before to switch to 40mhz channel :-)
Thanks, I look forward to seeing the results with the extra cpes & 40MHz soon !
Andy.
We have always left the AP QOS at the default 155Mbps up and down.
With one 450m we were noticing data stopping at 150Mbps.
We then changed the QoS to 240Mbps down, 70Mbps up.
Data for the 120 customers went from 155Mbps to 180Mbps.
Lesson learned......and Cambium, 310Mbps is not enough total QoS capacity for 40Mbps channels.
2 Likes
@Michael Meluskeywrote:Data for the 120 customers went from 155Mbps to 180Mbps.
Lesson learned......and Cambium, 310Mbps is not enough total QoS capacity for 40Mbps channels.
Thanks Michael,
Great datarate and interesting observation on the QoS cap. I'll look in to it, especially with UL MU-MIMO and other DL MU-MIMO improvements on the way.
best regards,
Andy.
Hi Michael,
Sorry for the delay getting back on the QoS issue.
These settings are used by an SM if no other setting is available as the 'authenication server'
some more details are in this thread
An individual SM can never get more than 310Mbps total (even in 40MHz 5ms) so that is where that number is from.
It may have been better if this was automatically adjusted to reflect the DL percentage in the radio page settings. On 40MHz it is not unreasonable to go over 155Mbps DL to an individual SM (even at 64QAM) so yes well spotted that this needed changing too !
So in summary it's an setting used on a per SM basis (if no other QoS server setting is found) not throughput at the AP that is being set here and it should reflect the DL percentage. Link Test to a single SM will give you the theoretical max throughput in each direction for 6X and 8X performance.
Do you have some users with 'unlimited' packages on the sector doing speed tests ? :)
Hope that makes sense. Not a part of the user guide I had ever read before !
best regards,
Andy.
Hi,
I've just been chatting with a US WISP who has allowed me to share the Link Test results they have in a 20MHz channel, 75% DL, 3 mile range and 4 contention slots. They hope to get around 150 SMs (from 36 now) on here in the near future. This might just squeak in as the best on 20MHz so far. Good grouping being seen.
4 Likes
Thanks Simon,
Did you want a cambium T-Shirt ? :)
Andy.
We loaded up an AP with 200 customers in a 40Mhz channel (it usually has 120 customers, moved SM's from adjoining AP's for the test....a very busy tower).
233Mbps average throughput with spikes over 400Mbps.
80% CPU utilization (a feature of 15.1.5)
Steady ping times, still able to do 25Mbps speed tests.
Customers are mostly on a 5Mbps plan, but 25% on a 25Mbps plan.
5 Likes
Awesome Mike... it would be interesting to know if all of those "ungrouped" guys are having high priority traffic, or if they could be persuaded into groups to further improve your results.
@CambiumMatt wrote:Awesome Mike... it would be interesting to know if all of those "ungrouped" guys are having high priority traffic, or if they could be persuaded into groups to further improve your results.
Matt, I don't know how to persuade SM's into groups. We are very excited about these results and are going to keep the AP at 200 customers for further evaluation. Bumping up customer speeds is on our agenda in the next few weeks.
1 Like
Hi Michael,
Thanks for showing us these results, very promising.
Matt, note the grouping picture that Michael shared is from the Frame Utilization page, NOT the Link test to Multiple VCs. This means that group of one is perfectly acceptable in this case as the AP is not running anywhere near full sector/MUMIMO capacity, so some VCs will be serviced in SUMIMO mode.
If a Link test to Mutiple VCs is done and still shows a significant proportion in groups of one that would be more worrying/interesting (unless they are assigned as HP and not allowed to form groups).
Not the first time these two tables have caused a bit of confusion (even in this thread !)
best regards,
Andy.