BackCountry Navigator Forum

OK...seems like maybe there is a lot of difference in download times.  Lets conduct a test.  Here is what we'll do:

Download a 1:4 scale map with both Topos & Aerials

Make it 5 X 5

Use coordinates
  029 01.6836 N
  081 18.1998 W

Time starts when you tap the YES button for appending data.

Well....I finished before I got this typed out.

Just over 4:01 That's in minutes

Just wondering if it's just me......or what.  Give it a try.
I'll try one on my Wifi too.

Ok here I go:  Just on 4MDRF which is slower--- at 10 min I'm on 4MDOQ----think I can take a nap now---- about 14 min.  You are fast.  I also got a Tile request is invalid  Scene id is incorrect. ???

Don't we need a directional?  ???

Explain Directional....Please

DUH!!!  I see what you mean......I fixed it in the origingal post.  I forgot to put the North and West in.  Sorry.

OK  It took 11 min. What do you think is making the difference?  Card speed, PC speed, ISP?  :-\

SUPPOSEDLY....Card speed is not an issue... As the Ax is supposed to be choked down on the thruput....but I don't know. What kind of connection do you have? Oh, by the way, I have aTranscend 150X 2GB SD Card for my BCN MAPS.

I have a cable wired connection.  I am using a Dell Inspiron 1100 Laptop (this could be my slowdown)  Using a Ridata 4GB 120 SD card. :-X

If you are on a cable modem you should be AT LEAST as fast as I am.  Hmmmmm what do you think, Nathan?  Could it be the laptop?  I wouldn't think so......the Insperion has USB-2, doesn't it?  I'm on a USB-1 connection on mine.  You're not running thru a USB hub are you?

My ActiveSyny connection is to one of my 2 main USB main not the Hub.  I'm not sure.  Nathan:  any ideas? ???

I am learning as much as you are through these exercises.

I will say some things to note:
To see what your limitations are in your card write speed and USB connection, copy a large file from your desktop to your Pocket.

There is something else to keep in mind: Latency. I can't prove it at this time, but I believe latency may be the limiting factor in many downloads.

This is something to try: go to a command prompt on the desktop, and type "tracert terraserver-usa.com". It may be interesting what you find. Not all the hops will reveal themselves, but I found that there are at least 10 hops between me and the msn network. The latency will be more of a function of the number of hops than the physical distance to the server.   

Nathan:

I am not savvy enough to understand what I am looking at?

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.


Tracing route to terraserver-usa.com [65.54.135.103]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    16 ms    17 ms    19 ms  c24-143-67-1.sea2.cablespeed.com [24.143.67.1]
  2     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  3    12 ms     8 ms    17 ms  iuscwestnc7501-f2-1-0.cp.msft.net [198.32.180.30
]
  4    10 ms     8 ms     7 ms  ten8-3.wst-76cb-1b.ntwk.msn.net [207.46.35.109]

  5   188 ms   132 ms    48 ms  ten7-2.tuk-76cb-1b.ntwk.msn.net [207.46.35.161]

  6   124 ms   208 ms   203 ms  ten1-1.tuk-76c-1b.ntwk.msn.net [207.46.35.69]
  7     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  8     *        *        *     Request timed out.
------ all the same thru the end.
 
 28     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 29     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 30     *        *        *     Request timed out.

Trace complete.

I'm a novice at looking at these, too. But it does show that you have about 6 hops to get as far as can be traced into the microsoft network, and that the last two of then tend to be slow. 

It is only meaningful if compared to someone else, and even then, maybe not.

Pathping is supposed to be more helpful, but didn't do much for me. 

Let's see if Jeeperman can join in on this too.  I'm not complaining about the time, BCN is great and you continue your great support  :D  It is just interesting that Jeeperman is so much faster than I am and I keep trying to get faster and learn.

UPDATE
I just tried the speed test again sending it to a different card.  I got 5 min.  Maybe my card write speed is making a difference. :-\

I'm on the road right now..... But when I get home I'll give this test a try. Glad to hear switching cards helps.

Hey guys........gave it a try. No good. All I get on a ping or trcrt is my wireless router....won't go any farther.  I guess it's because I can't be ping'ed back.  Someone told me once that that is a problem with routers if you don't have them set up to allow it. 

It looks like the storage card made a difference.

I've read that storage can differ in write times by as much as 10x. What I don't is how to tell if you have a fast or slow one without trying it.

Part of the time in downloading is writing to the storage card when you've downloaded an image. While I don't think this is a bottleneck much of the time, apparently it can be. 

Nathan

I don't know, Nathan.  Even when I was using a 512mb card with no X factor added on I still didn't have any kind of trouble with downloads....Just ran out of space too fast.

Nathatn....I was really hoping to get more people involved than just the 3 of us.  I'm always wanting to know how other people's experiences are going. Did you try the test?  If so, how did you do?

These are the results I got using SKTools Speed Test.  What is strange is the CF is really a SD 4GB AData 150x in an adaptor.  The SD is a 4GB RiData 150x.  The 5 min. time was with the CF Adaptor SD.  Doesn't make sense to me.  I would think the SD would be faster for write as well as read but it isn't.

Jan. 31

Main storage (write); 462.79;KB/sec
Main storage (read);2102.67;KB/sec
SD Card (write);  42.17;KB/sec
SD Card (read);1161.66;KB/sec
CF Card (write); 111.59;KB/sec
CF Card (read);1120.76;KB/sec

Feb. 1

Main storage (write); 594.77;KB/sec
Main storage (read);2518.03;KB/sec
SD Card (write);  46.24;KB/sec
SD Card (read);1165.18;KB/sec
CF Card (write); 122.65;KB/sec
CF Card (read);1320.15;KB/sec

We have HUGELY different numbers.....I just benchmarked my SD card using Pocket Mechanic and got these results:

Unbuffered read Avg - 5.35MB/sec
Buffered Read Avg - 5.93MB/sec
Unbuffered Write Avg - 2.87MB/sec
Buffered Wrige Avg - 4.40MB/sec

Did you test your cards in your Ax or on your laptop?

In the Ax.  Maybe I should try PM and see what I get.  Hang on.

Just ran my CF card.....A Transcend 120X 2GB

Unbuffered Read Avg - 1.83MB/sec
Buffered Read Avg - 1.82MB/sec
Unbuffered Write Avg - 685.78KB/sec
Buffered Write Avg - 2.44MB/sec

I know my SD seems to be tons faster to me than my CF.
It's way past bedtime here.....I'll check you out tomorrow.  BTW....Give the Wifi test a shot...I'm curious to see how the #'s compare.
Later.

OK Pocket Mechanic:

SD Unbuffered Read 1.45 MB/Sec
SD Buffered Read 1.8 MB/Sec
SD Unbuffered Write 1.21 MB/Sec
SD Buffered Write 2.47 MB/Sec

CF Unbuffered Read 1.53 MB/Sec
CF Buffered Read 1.55 MB/Sec
CF Unbuffered Write 1.09 MB/Sec
CF Buffered Write 2.42 MB/Sec

Hope you had a good nite. 
PS  I don't have WiFi so I can't test stuff there.

Mine are not reported as average, settings difference?

On the PocketMechanic under Card Benchmark I just had all the boxes checked.  As far as I can tell, those are the only settings. And when it finished I didn't check the boxes to skip the graphics.  It's hard to believe that there could be that much difference between 2 150X cards. Surely, the fact that yours is a 4GB wouldn't slow it down, would it? 

I ran the PM test again and got much different results??? But the CF still has better write speed.
SD in SD slot:
5.25 MB/sec
6.64 MB/sec
773.82 kb/sec
2.74 MB/sec
SD in CF adaptor:
1.57 MB/sec
1.57 MB/sec
1.18 MB/sec
2.39 MB/sec

I'm not sure what is going on but from my download speed test of yours and the SKTools test Maps download better to the SD Card in the CF adaptor in the CF slot.
The main thing is Back Country works great.  ;)

Glad our test worked out for you. I just wonder how other people compare.  Have a good weekend.

Hi All:

I would love to see some more folks try this test.  I reformatted my SD and now it is as fast as my SD in the CF adaptor.  Most important is getting information for Nathan on how the program is working.  I think great but it would really be nice if more people would try Jeeperman's original speed test. ;)

I will try the original test in the first post tonight and post the results later.

Ok, I did download the test map with ActivSync. My time is: 18:15. Eighteen minutes, 15 seconds.

Is that at 1:4 or 1:1?

1:4

What kind of Internet connection do you have and how fast is it? What kind & size card? SD or CF? And what kind of hardware(AND processor speed)? That will help us compare apples to apples, so to speak.

Internet connection is cable. Card is an SD, 1 GB, PNY brand. Using an Axim X51v at 624 MHz.

From what I can read on the TerraServer site, you should expect speeds of 1 to 10 KB/second or 60 to 600 KB/Minute.  At times you may receive better or worse speeds, but that is their "rule of thumb".

Really sucks on a file over 100MB, but it's a free service.

6:47, Six minutes, 47 seconds.  I have tried a couple of different SD cards and have seen no difference.  I'm guessing Drum is right, the bottleneck is terraserver.

I think the trick with the downloads it to take small bites.  Don't try to download 300 Sq miles at one shot. Start out small with Topo only and add sections to it.  At the slow speed, I can let my pda download all day at work and no one will notice or care.

might be a lot of programming work, but downloading with multiple requests at the same time could improve downloadspeed.

downloading of the test maps took me over 12 minutes on my pc (installed the windows mobile emulator)