FORUMS
Remove All Ads from XDA
Honor 7x
Win an Honor 7X!

WiFi Bandwidth and Router considerations

2,486 posts
Thanks Meter: 1,026
 
By bhiga, Recognized Contributor on 9th January 2014, 11:57 PM
Post Reply Email Thread
15th February 2014, 01:27 AM |#11  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 46
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhiga

Interesting... You're correct that YouTube grabs the stream directly and determines the best settings. But if you have a 1080p TV and YouTube is pulling a 480p stream, it'll definitely be noticeable - especially on things like text.

My Chrome is Version 32.0.1700.107 m
and Google Cast Extension is 14.123.1.4

My system is relatively old, but it was a powerhouse in its day and still fine for what I do with it.

Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Dual Quad-Core AMD Opteron 8389 2.9 GHz
32 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 7750

I'm running 35.0.1840.2 of Chrome and 14.123.1.5 of the extension.
I just tried installing regular chrome and had the same results.

your computer is def more powerful than mine, but I don't think thats the issue with such a low cpu utilization.
 
 
15th February 2014, 01:34 AM |#12  
bhiga's Avatar
OP Recognized Contributor
Thanks Meter: 1,026
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricong

I'm running 35.0.1840.2 of Chrome and 14.123.1.5 of the extension.
I just tried installing regular chrome and had the same results.

your computer is def more powerful than mine, but I don't think thats the issue with such a low cpu utilization.

Weird... do you have the Automatically resize the browser to best fit the receiver screen when casting a tab option enabled? That should provide lowest impact as it should eliminate the need to scale.

Does it make a difference if your laptop is plugged into wall power, or on a wired instead of wireless connection?
15th February 2014, 03:00 AM |#13  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 46
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhiga

Weird... do you have the Automatically resize the browser to best fit the receiver screen when casting a tab option enabled? That should provide lowest impact as it should eliminate the need to scale.

Does it make a difference if your laptop is plugged into wall power, or on a wired instead of wireless connection?

ok, I just tried the wired connection and got some results. on 480p I got 150kbps, 720p got 300kbps, and extreme got around 600kbps.
720 and above started looking a little choppy. Picture Quality even at extreme was quite poor.
15th February 2014, 03:17 AM |#14  
bhiga's Avatar
OP Recognized Contributor
Thanks Meter: 1,026
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricong

ok, I just tried the wired connection and got some results. on 480p I got 150kbps, 720p got 300kbps, and extreme got around 600kbps.
720 and above started looking a little choppy. Picture Quality even at extreme was quite poor.

My CPU load jumps about 15-20% when casting too, so that seems in-line.

Weird, it's almost like something in Windows is throttling something...

You don't have some kind of third-party firewall or anything, do you?
If you're using the Windows Firewall, check the Advanced Settings for Inbound and Outbound rules on Wireless Portable Devices. My rules for those are disabled, but some folks have reported toggling them helped.
15th February 2014, 03:26 AM |#15  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 46
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhiga

My CPU load jumps about 15-20% when casting too, so that seems in-line.

Weird, it's almost like something in Windows is throttling something...

You don't have some kind of third-party firewall or anything, do you?
If you're using the Windows Firewall, check the Advanced Settings for Inbound and Outbound rules on Wireless Portable Devices. My rules for those are disabled, but some folks have reported toggling them helped.

I have Avast which has some network protection
Tried toggling the settings in Windows firewall

I even tried disabling the firewall and anti-virus completely.

no difference
15th February 2014, 06:50 AM |#16  
bhiga's Avatar
OP Recognized Contributor
Thanks Meter: 1,026
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricong

I have Avast which has some network protection
Tried toggling the settings in Windows firewall

I even tried disabling the firewall and anti-virus completely.

no difference

Only other thing I can think of is to try unbinding Avast's network filter from the network interface (Properties the device itself and try un-checking any extra computer-looking icons) and trying it, often times disabling the firewall doesn't fully disable the network filter.
15th February 2014, 02:47 PM |#17  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 46
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhiga

It's likely not a wireless connection issue but rather a processing limitation on the computer you're casting from.

I just casted a 480p tab of full-tab video and my network utilization ranged from about 1.25 Mbps to bursts of 12 Mbps. The average was around 2-3 Mbps. What's the CPU utilization look like when you're casting?

Do other Chromecast apps like YouTube work okay with 720p or 1080p videos?

Just to clarify, are you referring to BITS or BYTES?
I refer to bytes, 150kbytes/sec = approx 1mbit/sec
15th February 2014, 11:33 PM |#18  
bhiga's Avatar
OP Recognized Contributor
Thanks Meter: 1,026
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricong

Just to clarify, are you referring to BITS or BYTES?
I refer to bytes, 150kbytes/sec = approx 1mbit/sec

I'm usually pretty careful about MB (Megabytes) vs Mb (Megabits) so I'm referring to megabits. so divide my figures by 8 for bytes.
15th February 2014, 11:36 PM |#19  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 46
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by bhiga

I'm usually pretty careful about MB (Megabytes) vs Mb (Megabits) so I'm referring to megabits. so divide my figures by 8 for bytes.

well, even with bits, you're still faster than me.
I submitted a support ticket to google. still trying to get through the general "is it plugged in?" questions.
16th February 2014, 07:18 AM |#20  
bhiga's Avatar
OP Recognized Contributor
Thanks Meter: 1,026
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by enricong

well, even with bits, you're still faster than me.
I submitted a support ticket to google. still trying to get through the general "is it plugged in?" questions.

Yeah, it took me 2 or 3 rounds to get past the basics... Please keep us updated on what you find out.
16th February 2014, 04:17 PM |#21  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 114
 
More
Sounds like you're repeating the tests that many people have already done. Tab-casting is not perfectly smooth even on a very fast computer running at less than 12% CPU utilization in my experience. I would guess that the most likely explanation is a poor implementation in Google's "beta" code combined with too little buffering. You can easily see and hear that there is only a fraction of a second of buffering if the TV is in audio/video range of your computer. The video stream stutters and loses frames for an instant whenever Google's code can't keep up with a momentary increase in workload, even though the overall CPU utilization is low. Proper buffering should fix it, but Google hasn't seen fit to do that in the last 7 months.
The Following User Says Thank You to DJames1 For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift DJames1 Ad-Free
Post Reply Subscribe to Thread

Guest Quick Reply (no urls or BBcode)
Message:
Previous Thread Next Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes