Sierra slow ethernet speeds

[doncarlos]

Hi,

I'm on a fresh install of 10.12.5. I'm using a Synology NAS for file storage. Under windows I got around 100Mb/s read and writes. With Sierra I got:

• 930 Mbit/s "write" and 53 Mbit/s "read" raw speed measured by iPerf
• 100 Mb/s write and 8 Mb/s read using AFP
• 62 Mb/s write and 3 Mb/s read using SMB.

You can find attached the screenshots of my measurements.

I tried various suggestions for fixing this issue but nothing really bring back my full read speed. The only thing what caused a minor improvement when I changed the following sysctl value:

sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack=2

I have a Intel I219V2 NIC on my B250 mobo. I changed the default drivers to RehabMan's mausi kext, no change.

What can cause this issue? I'm happy to post any debug info or run some more tests. Thanks for any help in advance!

Regards,
Zsolti

 

[AndreasPapavasiliou]

Same problem plus after sleep the ethernet is no working at all

 

[VioletDragon]

Hi,

I'm on a fresh install of 10.12.5. I'm using a Synology NAS for file storage. Under windows I got around 100Mb/s read and writes. With Sierra I got:

• 930 Mbit/s "write" and 53 Mbit/s "read" raw speed measured by iPerf
• 100 Mb/s write and 8 Mb/s read using AFP
• 62 Mb/s write and 3 Mb/s read using SMB.

You can find attached the screenshots of my measurements.

I tried various suggestions for fixing this issue but nothing really bring back my full read speed. The only thing what caused a minor improvement when I changed the following sysctl value:

sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack=2

I have a Intel I219V2 NIC on my B250 mobo. I changed the default drivers to RehabMan's mausi kext, no change.

What can cause this issue? I'm happy to post any debug info or run some more tests. Thanks for any help in advance!

Regards,
Zsolti

Common problem. Me and WonkeyDonkey found that disabling one or the other fixes the problem. Recommend using AFP instead of SAMBA (SMB) in OS X/macOS. Although I've got both enabled with the Server app installed and seems to be okay for me. Take a look at the NAS Build in my Sig.

In iPerf i get these.

 

[WonkeyDonkey]

Common problem. Me and WonkeyDonkey found that disabling one or the other fixes the problem. Recommend using AFP instead of SAMBA (SMB) in OS X/macOS. Although I've got both enabled with the Server app installed and seems to be okay for me. Take a look at the NAS Build in my Sig.

In iPerf i get these.

View attachment 269822

+1

I've done a lot of network stuff in OSX, and my best advice is to keep things simple. If possible stick to either AFP or Samba but not both unless you absolutely need them. I would NOT advise messing with sysctl in OSX for networking.

Also check for jumbo frame support in both OSX and on the NAS - they should be matching values. You can do a quick and dirty test from the command line using :

ping -s <framesize> <ipaddress of remote computer>

e.g

ping -s 1500 192.168.1.1

Note the default frame size is 1500 but if both devices support a higher size (They can go up to around 9000) then you can see a dramatic increase in network performance.

Also see if you can do network speed testing on the synology end as well as the OSX end - you may find you get different values.

Edit : The iperf command above in Violetdragons post may also help you get a more true reflection of your network speeds.

 

[doncarlos]

Hi,

Thanks for all the messages. The MTU is the same for both computers, even though it's just 1500, same as under windows, there I got the right speeds. I disabled the "other" protocol when I tested afp and smb, so only one of them was active at the time. I'll be more than happy if I can copy from the NAS at least 50mb/s using SMB (I have other windows machines so afp is not ideal).

I tried both, ftp and sftp the speeds were similar.

The strange thing was I did the same test with the black magic utility on a MacBook Air using a thunderbolt-ethernet adapter and I saw the exact same result (both SMB and AFP).

What I'm curious about why only the read speed is slow like hell, and I can write with around a 100Mb/s?

Update:
I switched to Windows 10 just to make sure everything is fine and it is. Still using SMBv1 and 1500 MTU. Posted some screenshots.

 

[VioletDragon]

Hi,

Thanks for all the messages. The MTU is the same for both computers, even though it's just 1500, same as under windows, there I got the right speeds. I disabled the "other" protocol when I tested afp and smb, so only one of them was active at the time. I'll be more than happy if I can copy from the NAS at least 50mb/s using SMB (I have other windows machines so afp is not ideal).

I tried both, ftp and sftp the speeds were similar.

The strange thing was I did the same test with the black magic utility on a MacBook Air using a thunderbolt-ethernet adapter and I saw the exact same result (both SMB and AFP).

What I'm curious about why only the read speed is slow like hell, and I can write with around a 100Mb/s?

Update:
I switched to Windows 10 just to make sure everything is fine and it is. Still using SMBv1 and 1500 MTU. Posted some screenshots.

Looks fine to me. Looks about right. What exactly is the problem?

 

[WonkeyDonkey]

Hi,

Thanks for all the messages. The MTU is the same for both computers, even though it's just 1500, same as under windows, there I got the right speeds. I disabled the "other" protocol when I tested afp and smb, so only one of them was active at the time. I'll be more than happy if I can copy from the NAS at least 50mb/s using SMB (I have other windows machines so afp is not ideal).

I tried both, ftp and sftp the speeds were similar.

The strange thing was I did the same test with the black magic utility on a MacBook Air using a thunderbolt-ethernet adapter and I saw the exact same result (both SMB and AFP).

What I'm curious about why only the read speed is slow like hell, and I can write with around a 100Mb/s?

Update:
I switched to Windows 10 just to make sure everything is fine and it is. Still using SMBv1 and 1500 MTU. Posted some screenshots.

The speeds you are seeing actually look quite decent when you consider the read and write speeds of the drives you are using. Also dont forget you are seeing some measurements in megabits and some in megabytes; these are very different.

 

[doncarlos]

Yes, under windows everything is fine, that is why I posted those Windows screenshots to have some comparison and for testing that this is not a network or hardware related problem.

My problem is when you look at the blackmagic speed test which was done under Sierra you can see in megabytes that the read speed is 2.9 MB/s and then you look the file copy dialog from windows, which is again in megabytes that read speed is 113 MB/s from the same NAS, same drive, same folder, same network "infra". So there is an almost 40x difference in the read speed. And I could accept that the speed was maybe half or third but this kind of difference is made osx useless for me.

And I opened this thread to see if there is some kind of solution for this issue, because I tried almost everything what I can find on google. And the asynchronous-ness of the read/write speed is what makes this issue more interesting IMO. And the fact I got the same result on a macbook air makes this even more interesting.

 

[VioletDragon]

Yes, under windows everything is fine, that is why I posted those Windows screenshots to have some comparison and for testing that this is not a network or hardware related problem.

My problem is when you look at the blackmagic speed test which was done under Sierra you can see in megabytes that the read speed is 2.9 MB/s and then you look the file copy dialog from windows, which is again in megabytes that read speed is 113 MB/s from the same NAS, same drive, same folder, same network "infra". So there is an almost 40x difference in the read speed. And I could accept that the speed was maybe half or third but this kind of difference is made osx useless for me.

And I opened this thread to see if there is some kind of solution for this issue, because I tried almost everything what I can find on google. And the asynchronous-ness of the read/write speed is what makes this issue more interesting IMO. And the fact I got the same result on a macbook air makes this even more interesting.

Remember that you don't benchmark a network using Blackmagic. Which Ethernet kext are you using? Have you tried connecting your desktop straight to the NAS instead of a Router or Network Switch? Attach ioreg. [Guide] How to Make a Copy of IOReg | tonymacx86.com.

 

[doncarlos]

Blackmagic is not a network benchmark tool indeed, but basically it's testing the connection for what I would use it so it's a perfect test for it. And if I copy something using finder, I can see the same speeds. This is just a bit more nice representation.

I haven't tried to connect the pc to the NAS directly, and I'm not planning to do right now because given the circumstances it would be a big undertaking. This is why I tested this under windows, just to make sure the network itself is okay or not. But I'll try with the macbook air, it will be much simpler.

Currently I'm using RehabMan's intel mausi kext, but before that I used the ?default? one, because I had working ethernet after installing Sierra oob.

Please find attached the ioreg.