Superhub : What hardware versions / revisions of the superhub are there?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

However the last device was, as you said yourself, supposed to be a second supplier for the Superhub 1, and a device that in practice, would perform the same as the original Superhub.

This new "Superhub 2" sounds like it's actually based on newer-generation hardware, and vastly improved over the outdated legacy components in the Superhub 1. That aside, the current Superhub would be hard pressed to hit 100mbps over wireless, let alone 200, and I believe even hardwired it won't do 400.

In my opinion, after 200mbps VM would have to replace the Superhub anyway, and as far as I'm concerned the sooner they do it the better.

Interestingly, Broadcom claim the BCM3383 is 50% faster than what came before, yet only runs at 500Mhz, suggesting the Superhub 1's CPU runs at 333Mhz. I've seen routers with 384Mhz MIPS processors become CPU bottlenecked when transmitting over wireless, in just single-band configurations.

Back of the envelope calculations suggest that an 800Mhz-1Ghz MIPS CPU to be the required minimum to efficiently operate concurrent dual-band wireless without the processor being a bottleneck. A multi-threaded/multi-core 500Mhz like the BCM3383 would obviously also do the trick. I do know however 684Mhz ARM processors are too slow to run dual-band concurrent wireless properly. The 333Mhz MIPS in the Superhub is thus in my opinion is barely sufficient to handle single-band wireless-N.

I do wonder then, if the Superhub's lack of dual-band concurrent wireless was impacted by the fact that VM put a processor in the Superhub that is simply too slow to handle it, similarly, its performance even single band could have been impacted by having a processor just barely fast enough to deal with it.

A brilliant piece of analysis, qasi.

[qasdfdsaq]

Thanks Seph.

I should point out one correction to my post above - the 684Mhz ARM processor I was referring to is in fact a 680Mhz MIPS processor, i.e. same architecture as what's in the Superhub. I got confused by the "AR" in "AR71xx chipset" and must have just made the 4Mhz up in my head :P

Routers with the 680Mhz AR71xx MIPS CPU top out at about 300-500mbps wired routing speed depending on firmware, so I have some doubts about the ability of the Superhub's 333Mhz (or possibly 400, according to some sources) processor to hit even the claimed 320mbps - perhaps under ideal conditions with the wireless off...

[Chrysalis]

I downloaded an android app which analyses signal strength live updating every few seconds.

The superhub was actually stronger than my £150 router and the dir615 at its peak output. Note the word peak.

The issue it had is it fluctuates hugely going up and down and constantly almost stalling like a 20 year old car which has had no maintenance. This test was on my old rev01 superhub tho as I didnt want to drop the one I am using out of modem mode.

[sniper007]

@ qasdfdsaq
When you talk of such speeds topping out at "300-500mbps" just to confirm, you are talking about WAN potential speeds; is this bidirectional predictions? i.e. up and down?
Thanks for your info on all this.

[Kymmy]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I downloaded an android app which analyses signal strength live updating every few seconds.

The superhub was actually stronger than my £150 router and the dir615 at its peak output. Note the word peak.

The issue it had is it fluctuates hugely going up and down and constantly almost stalling like a 20 year old car which has had no maintenance. This test was on my old rev01 superhub tho as I didnt want to drop the one I am using out of modem mode.

I don't think the hardware is bad instead it's the firmware that's the major issue

[Chrysalis]

Well the result surprised me but I think them chosing aesthetics over functionality was a wrong move. Its hard to argue tiny internal antennaes have no bearing on the problem. As well as the processing capability of the unit as well.

The app I used is called 'wifi analyzer' and its free.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by sniper007

@ qasdfdsaq
When you talk of such speeds topping out at "300-500mbps" just to confirm, you are talking about WAN potential speeds; is this bidirectional predictions? i.e. up and down?
Thanks for your info on all this.

Yes, I'm talking about NAT'd WAN to LAN throughput and vice versa. The big range is to account for both - looking at, say, SmallNetBuilder's reviews (which I have rubbished several times in the past, but meh) - some routers get perhaps 300 in one direction only and 320 when up/down combined, with others using the same chip getting 410 down, 420 up, and 470 combined max.

I have seen some Broadcom routers with Cisco/Linksys proprietary firmware hit 800mbps+ with slower processors, but these are quite special units with hardware cut-through forwarding and the likes - rare in the consumer world.

[Methanoid]

Anyone know what the penta screws on the VM Superhub need for opening? Theoretically of course

[kwikbreaks]

Depends if you want to do them back up again.

A "friend" who dismantled a surplus one used the time honoured prising apart with a screwdriver with assistance from a hammer when needed. It would have gone back together too given enough gaffer tape.

[qasdfdsaq]

Giggle. That's the way to do it (and probably how I'm going to open my BT HH3)

[Methanoid]

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks

Depends if you want to do them back up again.

A "friend" who dismantled a surplus one used the time honoured prising apart with a screwdriver with assistance from a hammer when needed. It would have gone back together too given enough gaffer tape.

Well would prefer it didnt shout "I've been tampered with" .. so any less brutal methods would be nice. Theoretically speaking just want to disconnect those crappy laptop internal aerials and plug some pigtail to SMA adapters in and two MOFO big external aerials... theoretically