Hello all,

I ordered a XP 1900 server few days ago. At first, the server don't show correct amount of RAM and type of CPU. The problem has been fixed fast. After that I found the speed of server is rather slow compare with my P4 server at RS. So I make some test to download some files from different locatoins, and I found there is a great differences between these 2. The download speed of XP 1900 server is unreasonable slow(P4 server already has web sites but there is no web sites on the XP 1900).

I did open a TT 2 days ago, but they actually didin't solve the problem. So I get the server and can't use it.

The reason I post here is not to put any company down. I just want to know is there anyone having the same problem? And I would also like to suggest anyone got a XP 1900 server to check the network speed. Also, their support seems to can't provide a real solutions to the problem. It make me a little bite upset. They just ask me to provide traceroute info and then they replied "Changing Category" and I really don't what they means.

I make a test to get a large files(around 30MB) from tucows (http://tucows.tierra.net/files2/psp704ev.exe) on both servers. I found a great differences in speed between these 2 servers. I use wget to the files, here is the result:

P4:
09:23:39 (357.80 KB/s) - `psp704ev.exe saved [31637760/ 31637760]

XP 1900

06:46:38 (94.22 KB/s) - `psp704ev.exe.2 saved [31637760/ 31637760]

Traceroute from both servers:

P4 info:

traceroute to tucows.tierra.net (216.104.166.42), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 216.12.218.1 (216.12.218.1) 0.370 ms 0.211 ms 0.168 ms
2 tayhou-223-4.ev1.net (207.218.223.4) 0.339 ms 0.327 ms 0.317 ms
3 ge-0-0-0.a03.hstntx01.us.ra.verio.net (128.241.2.101) 0.817 ms 0.811 ms 0.795 ms
4 ge-5-0.r01.hstntx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.29.94) 0.790 ms 0.719 ms 0.707 ms
5 p4-1-0.r00.sndgca01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.186) 30.828 ms 30.936 ms 30.766 ms
6 ge-1-1.a03.sndgca01.us.da.verio.net (129.250.27.84) 30.959 ms 30.948 ms 31.052 ms
7 tierranet-gw.sndgca02.verio.net (207.67.240.42) 72.995 ms 372.503 ms 147.996 ms
8 games.tucows.tierra.net (216.104.166.42) 31.189 ms 31.171 ms 31.291 ms

XP 1900 info:

traceroute to tucows.tierra.net (216.104.166.42), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 64.246.36.1 (64.246.36.1) 0.355 ms 0.271 ms 0.221 ms
2 tayhou-223-2.ev1.net (207.218.223.2) 0.319 ms 0.300 ms 0.300 ms
3 tayhou-223-4.ev1.net (207.218.223.4) 0.307 ms 0.333 ms 0.447 ms
4 ge-0-0-0.a03.hstntx01.us.ra.verio.net (128.241.2.101) 0.784 ms 0.788 ms 0.794 ms
5 ge-5-0.r01.hstntx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.29.94) 0.742 ms 0.695 ms 0.747 ms
6 p4-1-0.r00.sndgca01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.186) 30.763 ms 30.805 ms 30.812 ms
7 ge-1-1.a03.sndgca01.us.da.verio.net (129.250.27.84) 30.878 ms 30.968 ms 31.063 ms
8 tierranet-gw.sndgca02.verio.net (207.67.240.42) 31.279 ms 31.079 ms 31.615 ms
9 games.tucows.tierra.net (216.104.166.42) 31.148 ms 31.533 ms 31.746 ms


Another test to UUnet:

wget ftp://ftp.uu.net/uumap.tar.Z

P4:

09:25:14 (1.16 MB/s) - `uumap.tar.Z.1 saved [8520221]

XP 1900

06:51:08 (64.10 KB/s) - `uumap.tar.Z.1 saved [8520221]

What a big differencs! 1.16 MB/s VS 64.10 KB/s!

Traceroute info:

P4

traceroute to ftp.uu.net (192.48.96.9), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 216.12.218.1 (216.12.218.1) 0.730 ms 0.215 ms 0.167 ms
2 tayhou-223-4.ev1.net (207.218.223.4) 1.048 ms 0.347 ms 0.318 ms
3 ge-0-0-0.a03.hstntx01.us.ra.verio.net (128.241.2.101) 0.783 ms 0.990 ms 0.756 ms
4 ge-0-1-0.r00.hstntx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.30.209) 0.879 ms 0.916 ms 0.864 ms
5 p4-4-0-0.r01.dllstx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.3.193) 6.320 ms 6.483 ms 6.530 ms
6 p16-0-0-0.r02.dllstx01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.5.4) 6.447 ms 6.292 ms 6.327 ms
7 40.ATM3-0.BR1.DFW9.ALTER.NET (204.255.169.21) 7.259 ms 7.335 ms 7.363 ms
8 0.so-1-2-0.XL2.DFW9.ALTER.NET (152.63.98.134) 7.479 ms 7.546 ms 7.348 ms
9 0.so-0-0-0.TL2.DFW9.ALTER.NET (152.63.2.181) 7.491 ms 7.517 ms 7.574 ms
10 0.so-6-0-0.TL2.DCA8.ALTER.NET (152.63.3.193) 43.146 ms 43.097 ms 43.050 ms
11 0.so-4-3-0.XL2.DCA8.ALTER.NET (152.63.144.30) 43.237 ms 43.038 ms 43.147 ms
12 188.at-1-0-0.XR2.IAD5.ALTER.NET (152.63.35.94) 44.628 ms 44.801 ms 44.442 ms
13 501.ATM7-0.GW3.IAD5.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.9) 44.791 ms 44.939 ms 45.724 ms
14 pos5-0.soesr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (207.18.173.162) 45.380 ms 44.947 ms 45.298 ms
15 gig1-0.esr-b-10-9-2.ash.ops.us.uu.net (198.5.240.36) 45.255 ms 44.943 ms 45.561 ms
16 neo-ftp.uu.net (198.5.241.101) 44.992 ms 45.337 ms 45.012 ms

XP 1900

traceroute to ftp.uu.net (192.48.96.9), 30 hops max, 38 byte packets
1 * 64.246.36.1 (64.246.36.1) 0.397 ms 0.410 ms
2 tayhou-223-2.ev1.net (207.218.223.2) 0.327 ms 0.331 ms 0.383 ms
3 g1.ba21.b000605-0.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.28.209) 1.290 ms 1.338 ms 1.192 ms
4 g1-2.core01.iah01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.66.233) 1.572 ms 1.618 ms 1.335 ms
5 p15-0.core01.tpa01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.46) 21.264 ms 20.986 ms 20.995 ms
6 p14-0.core01.jax01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.142) 26.040 ms 26.029 ms 25.795 ms
7 p5-0.core01.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com (66.28.4.138) 228.896 ms 157.427 ms 205.800 ms
8 g6-0.br01.atl01.atlas.psi.net (154.54.1.2) 32.034 ms 31.872 ms 31.938 ms
9 p6-0.se.peering.tier1.psi.net (154.54.1.10) 50.392 ms 50.415 ms 50.438 ms
10 154.13.66.18 (154.13.66.18) 46.102 ms 45.835 ms 45.950 ms
11 0.so-4-0-0.XL2.DCA6.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.138) 46.081 ms 46.112 ms 46.163 ms
12 0.so-7-0-0.XR2.DCA6.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.90) 46.002 ms 46.062 ms 45.964 ms
13 184.at-2-0-0.XR2.IAD5.ALTER.NET (152.63.35.50) 47.721 ms 47.587 ms 47.801 ms
14 501.ATM7-0.GW3.IAD5.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.9) 47.868 ms 47.660 ms 47.748 ms
15 pos5-0.soesr1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (207.18.173.162) 48.005 ms 47.818 ms 47.957 ms
16 gig1-0.esr-b-10-9-1.ash.ops.us.uu.net (198.5.240.35) 48.096 ms 48.107 ms 48.008 ms
17 neo-ftp.uu.net (198.5.241.101) 48.246 ms 48.258 ms 48.123 ms

By the way, here is the lan card info of both servers:

P4:

parport0: PC-style at 0x378 [PCSPP,TRISTATE,EPP]
parport0: cpp_daisy: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: assign_addrs: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: cpp_daisy: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: assign_addrs: aa5500ff(38)
ip_conntrack (8190 buckets, 65520 max)
Intel(R) PRO/100 Fast Ethernet Adapter - Loadable driver, ver 1.6.22
Copyright (c) 2001 Intel Corporation
PCI: Found IRQ 11 for device 02:08.0

eth0: Intel(R) PRO/100 VE Network ConnectionPLC LOM
Mem:0xff9ff000 IRQ:11 Speed:100 Mbps Dx:Full
Hardware receive checksums disabled
TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 43.232.0.46:43508/80 shrinks window 568488234:568497442. Repaired.
TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 43.232.0.46:43508/80 shrinks window 568488234:568497442. Repaired.
TCP: Treason uncloaked! Peer 43.232.0.46:43508/80 shrinks window 568488234:568497442. Repaired.

XP 1900 :

parport0: PC-style at 0x378 [PCSPP,TRISTATE]
parport0: cpp_daisy: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: assign_addrs: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: cpp_daisy: aa5500ff(38)
parport0: assign_addrs: aa5500ff(38)
sis900.c: v1.07.11 4/10/2001
PCI: Found IRQ 12 for device 00:01.1
eth0: Unknown PHY transceiver found at address 1.
eth0: Using transceiver found at address 1 as default
eth0: SiS 900 PCI Fast Ethernet at 0xd400, IRQ 12, 00:07:95:e9:ee:c2.

Looks like each machine is in a different location from the traceroutes you provided. I think this is an issue for technical support, or the RackShack forums, not the Webhostingtalk forums. Best of luck in getting it resolved to your satisfaction.

Thanks. I will post this in their forum as well.

wow

this is disappointing

wget ftp://ftp.uu.net/uumap.tar.Z
--16:29:26-- ftp://ftp.uu.net/uumap.tar.Z
=> `uumap.tar.Z'
Connecting to ftp.uu.net:21... connected!
Logging in as anonymous ... Logged in!
==> SYST ...
done. ==> PWD ... done.
==> TYPE I ... done. ==> CWD not needed.
==> PORT ... done. ==> RETR uumap.tar.Z ... done.
Length: 8,520,221 (unauthoritative)

0K .......... .......... .......... .......... ....
...... 0% @ 11.11 KB/s
50K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 26.23 KB/s
100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 201.61 KB/s
150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 60.53 KB/s
200K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3% @ 77.76 KB/s
250K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3% @ 36.05 KB/s
300K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 4% @ 44.01 KB/s
350K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 4% @ 91.74 KB/s
400K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 5% @ 53.25 KB/s
450K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 6% @ 72.15 KB/s
500K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 6% @ 126.26 KB/s
550K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 7% @ 28.22 KB/s
600K .......... ......

i have an amd athlon xp 1900 also
interesting

maybe it's just the network its on? or something

check this out

i have a potluck server ( 64.246.38.* )
p4 server (207.218.219.* )
and an amd athlon xp 1900 ( 64.246.36.48 )

on my potluck
15:38:12 (1.16 MB/s) - `uumap.tar.Z' saved [8520221]

on my p4

8150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 98% 0:00 1.31M
8200K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 99% 0:00 1.16M
8250K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 99% 0:00 1.14M
8300K .......... .......... 100% 0:00 21.0M

16:37:23 (1.21 MB/s) - `uumap.tar.Z' saved [8520221]

on my AMD ATHLON XP 1900
its going so slow that imnot even going to let it finish
0K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 11.39 KB/s
50K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 126.26 KB/s
100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 126.90 KB/s
150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 167.22 KB/s
200K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3% @ 111.36 KB/s
250K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3% @ 47.98 KB/s
300K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 4% @ 91.74 KB/s
350K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 4% @ 34.89 KB/s
400K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 5% @ 144.09 KB/s

Hi clocker1996,

what's the speed of your download?

You should have something like:

09:25:14 (1.16 MB/s) - `uumap.tar.Z.1 saved [8520221]

Is your speed fast or slow?

uh dude
are you reading what im saying

Yeah, that's right. I think my problem is the same as yours. So what's going wrong? Problem with XP server or problem of the network?

I also notice there is big differecnes beteween the response time of these 2 servers. P4 almost response instantly but I need to wait for XP server to response.

its weird though

the amd server can PUSH out (upload) 900k/sec or higher

easily

to voxel.net anyway

define response.

Yeah, at the time you post, I also post :stickout

Really? but i didn't test the upload speed of XP.

My P4 can go like around 450K to 550K.

Hey

another one, who uses the Webhostingtalk for support issiues for Rackshack.

So do i last night.

why ? You open TT's , you post on RS-Forums - but no serious help.
One post here - outside the RS-forum - the right people read this and you got help.......

As i said before, when RS improved their inhouse TT and forum-help system, costomers will stop posting here and go to the RS-forums/TT's for their problems/cry for help.


It's only my experience. I don't want to flame or blame someone!

OK
What i did was this:

1. setup a webserver, on the amd server.
2. Put a file in the public_html/htdocs directory.
3. then i logged on a voxel.net server, and downloaded the file ONTO the voxel.net server FROM the amd server (Rackshack)
and it went at like 900k/sec+

I was thinking, great!

Then I took a 100mb file on a DERU.net server, and tried to download it ONTO the amd server, and here are the results:
5600K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 15% @ 111.61 KB/s
5650K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 15% @ 126.90 KB/s
5700K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 15% @ 119.33 KB/s
5750K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 15% @ 79.74 KB/s
5800K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 15% @ 111.11 KB/s
5850K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 15% @ 93.63 KB/s
5900K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 111.11 KB/s
5950K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 145.35 KB/s
6000K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 174.22 KB/s
6050K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 111.61 KB/s
6100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 81.43 KB/s
6150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 120.19 KB/s
6200K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 93.11 KB/s
6250K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 16% @ 79.49 KB/s
6300K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 17% @ 91.91 KB/s
6350K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 17% @ 61.88 KB/s
6400K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 17% @ 87.11 KB/s
6450K ..........

Ok, THEN.. i stopped
i went on a voxel.net server, i put a 100mb file on the webserver DIR, and then i downloaded it ONTO the amd server, and here are the results..

0K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 117.10 KB/s
50K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 156.25 KB/s
100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 117.65 KB/s
150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 187.97 KB/s
200K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 234.74 KB/s
250K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 155.28 KB/s
300K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 122.55 KB/s
350K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 148.37 KB/s
400K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 165.02 KB/s
450K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 175.44 KB/s
500K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 121.65 KB/s
550K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 176.68 KB/s
600K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 122.85 KB/s
650K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 216.45 KB/s
700K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 256.41 KB/s
750K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 185.87 KB/s
800K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 133.69 KB/s
850K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 188.68 KB/s
900K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 190.84 KB/s
950K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 134.77 KB/s
1000K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 187.97 KB/s
1050K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 92.42 KB/s
1100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 136.61 KB/s
1150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3% @ 226.24 KB/s

Soit seems to me as though the server can push out a lot, quickly, but downloading seems to be a problem.... i wonder if this is network related, or if this is a network card problem, rj 45, or mobo, anything =/

Actually, I don't us WHT as a RS support forum.

I just want to know is there anyone having the same problem and ask them to check their network speed.

Sorry if I seems to us WHT as a RS support forum.

...and the problems just don't end. :rolleyes: The Duron Plesk dedicated server that I had a few months ago had the same problem, except the speeds were much worse. :mad:

Originally posted by ToastyX
...and the problems just don't end. :rolleyes: The Duron Plesk dedicated server that I had a few months ago had the same problem, except the speeds were much worse. :mad:

so what did you end up doing? i mean like, what did they do ? did they fix the problem ? or what.

I contacted a tech through IRC. He had me paste a couple of traceroutes. Every single traceroute failed at random locations every single time. Since none of the traceroutes happened to fail on one of their routers, he said that he couldn't do anything about it since the problem wasn't in their netowrk, even though this happened no matter where I tracerouted. After I finally got it through his head that there might be a problem in their network, he said that he couldn't do anything about it and wanted me to contact someone else about it.

That wasn't the only issue I had. I didn't want to be given the runaround, and at that point, I didn't want to deal with them anymore, so I ended up canceling the server and requesting a refund which I never received. :mad: They never tried to fix the problem. They just kept pointing me back to the agreement where it states that all payments are non-refundable.

RackShack just takes your money, gives you a crappy box that's not even setup properly, doesn't bother testing them, and lets the customers discover all of the problems. Then when you want to cancel because nothing works right, they point you back to the agreement where it states that all payments are non-refundable. That's why they have a no refund policy. They know they're selling crap.

Sure, there are many happy RackShack customers, but how many of those customers are happy because they don't know that there might be something wrong with their server? Ignorance is bliss...

hrm.. i have the same issue as well

my p3 potluck server:

20:07:11 (481.89 KB/s) - `psp704ev.exe' saved [31637760/31637760]


my clients xp1900 plesk server:

0K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 37.82 KB/s
50K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 140.45 KB/s
100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 35.24 KB/s
150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 259.07 KB/s
200K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 194.55 KB/s
250K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% @ 37.88 KB/s
300K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 37.17 KB/s
350K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 20.51 KB/s
400K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 11.23 KB/s
450K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 118.76 KB/s
500K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 36.93 KB/s
550K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% @ 222.22 KB/s
600K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 221.24 KB/s
650K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% @ 256.41 KB/s


i gave up after awhile cuz it kept lagging.. it fluctuates a lot, goes really fast, really slow, etc etc

Wouldn't this be good most of the time? You want people to download as fast as possible, as ftp times are minimal (unless you own a file server.)

I'm probably very wrong.

Rackshack also runs a buissness as an ISP, and it's possible that you're routed on a subnet in which the ISP use is high on one server.

Once again, I'm probably very wrong.

Is there anyone who make a test and don't have the problem? I just want to know whether it's the problem for specific server.

20 bucks says all amd athlon xp 1900 servers that they sold have this problem

again, sad part is a good majority of the people who bought it probably don't realize it.

im still waiting for my trouble ticket ot be answered too

well, they said they were "investigating" it. but that was it.

My P4 can go like around 450K to 550K.
Do you notice that your P4 has an inbound speed of 1M + but a much lower outbound speed of 500 as quoted? Any idea on why this is? Just network traffic?

The upload speed of P4 server is around 550K to 650K to one of my server at rackspace

But the upload speed for XP 1900 server is only 210K. So both upload and download speed of the XP 1900 is not normal.

Though I am not our network admin, I can tell you this doesnt appear to be a problem on all of them, I picked a few unsold boxes and tried downloads, got 200-700k/s downloads on them with no problem, so please make sure you submit trouble tickets detailing your traceroutes and download speeds and it will be passed on to the networking team who will get it resolved as soon as they possibly can.

And I would not agree that most of our customers are ignorant, we have easily thousands of people who havent had any major issues and many of them are very competent admins, I think basing an entire company's product line on the complaints of under 100 people in a forum is a very wide generalization.

What I reckon is, before you sell the dedicated server, you should always test each of them before you hand it to the clients, to avoid any of the problems... It is not that hard... just a few simple command to do it, won't take more than few minute and save many hours of support work.

I used to have the same problem in my P4 server at Webreseller. The download speed was great at first (over 1 MB/s), then suddenly it's dropped to only a few hundreds KB/s. I contacted Webreseller about it and they told me that the network segment of my server has exceeded its capacity and they were waiting for a replacement switch that would allow for more packets per second to be processed. Once the new switch installed, the speed was flying again!

I'm not sure if this is the same case with your XP 1900 server on Rackshack, but there's nothing wrong to ask them about it.

Yeah, there might be some chance that they are having problem on their switch.

I know it's not a problem to get the files for 200-700k/s. But if one server can get the files for 1.1mb/s and another server can have 95k/s download, and both of the servers are on the same network, do you think that there must be something wrong in the 95k/s machine?

By the way, I open a TT a few days ago, but they seems don't know what's going on and didn't tell me what's going wrong.

interesting..

I have a RackShack amd 1900. I raced it yesterday against my RackShack P3 on the Tucows link. P3 480's and the amd 380's
I did this a few times with the amd slowing way down one time to the 180's. I put in a trouble ticket yesterday about the ram only showing 866 instead of a gig. Now that it shows 1 gig of ram the speeds increased to 488 average with some well over 500 and the p3 still downloading right at 483.