Playing media over a home network

[RACKnRAIL]

I have two XP computers networked wirelessly. The main computer is wired to the router and modem in my office. The living room puter connects wirelessly.

I want to be able to watch downloaded media on my big screen TV in my living room. I have an XP tower connected to my TV and stereo and created the network. This XP pro tower has a 2 gb athlon, 1gb ram, 128 mb graphics. I connected the graphics using a DVI input and sound using an Edirol UA-25 usb device.

I have no problem seeing my network and sharing between the two. My network works fine for mp3 and most music extensions. I am able to play my office music library on my living room computer and stereo, but playing video is another story. I have tried various media players and codecs, but the vids are too slow.

I would welcome any suggestions.

[Krell]

What are the bitrates of the media you are trying to stream? Is this an mkv file? You can view the average and max throughput on players such as CyberlinkPowerDVD etc.

Copy one of those files to the XP tower connected to your TV.

Play the file on that PC, and see if you have the proper results. If not, configure PC for proper codecs etc. I use the CCCP which is all you need.

If the copied file plays with no problem, it could be that the bitrate of the file exceeds the throughput of your wireless connection, which means you cant stream that type of file, you will need to use the XP tower connected to your TV as a temp cache server each time you want to play HD.

Before everyone speculates this guy to death, give him a chance to do the tests I ask. This is not a "my codec is greater than your codec" thread.



.

[cheapprick]

You nede to upgraid yer Ram! And switch to firefox! OR dvix and lindows!>!?! Have you tried looking into your cat5 eye?

Man the torpedos!

[ratcat]

No tech support here.......

But jealous of the set up you've got.

*dreaming of a set up like that one day.*

[carpefile]

Betting its his wireless thruput. Thats the only part of your setup you didn't spec, RnR.

This is a little costly, but an excellent solution
http://www.netgear.com/Products/PowerlineNetworking/PowerlineEthernetAdapters/HDXB101.aspx

If you don't require HD, theres a cheaper 85mbps package (I use it, works fine for my needs)

[RACKnRAIL]

What are the bitrates of the media you are trying to stream? Is this an mkv file? You can view the average and max throughput on players such as CyberlinkPowerDVD etc.

Copy one of those files to the XP tower connected to your TV.

Play the file on that PC, and see if you have the proper results. If not, configure PC for proper codecs etc. I use the CCCP which is all you need.

If the copied file plays with no problem, it could be that the bitrate of the file exceeds the throughput of your wireless connection, which means you cant stream that type of file, you will need to use the XP tower connected to your TV as a temp cache server each time you want to play HD.

.

The .AVI bit rates vary from 145 to 448 kbps. The files play 100% when I copy them to my HD, which leaves me with the question, how do I go about using the XP tower connected to my TV as a temp cache server each time you want to play HD?

I'm using a Linksys WRT54G with the latest firmware. My TV tower has a linksys wireless adapter.

[carpefile]

Yeah wireless g doesn't have the nads to stream HD vid, even on an ideal connection, which you likely don't have. I'm interested in learning how to setup a pc as a cache server too.
One other thing you could go with if you don't like the epl solution I offered is to upgrade your wireless setup to N, which offers speeds up to 200mbps.

The cheapest solution is to make a cat5 run from your living room to your office.

[RACKnRAIL]

Yeah wireless g doesn't have the nads to stream HD vid, even on an ideal connection, which you likely don't have. I'm interested in learning how to setup a pc as a cache server too.
One other thing you could go with if you don't like the epl solution I offered is to upgrade your wireless setup to N, which offers speeds up to 200mbps.

The cheapest solution is to make a cat5 run from your living room to your office.


I am curious as to Krell's solution by way of a cache server. I would like to try this first and if all else fails...cat5 like you said will be the cheapest solution, since spending more money kind of defeats the whole purpose of this.

[Feather]

You should be able to just change the buffer size in the program you are using to play the video. Kind of like the way quick time buffers enough of the video before it starts playing.

[Andrew110]

Yeah wireless g doesn't have the nads to stream HD vid, even on an ideal connection, which you likely don't have.

I have to disagree there. I share files wirelessly on my network anywhere between 2.5 to 3 MBps and I have a WRT54GL router. That should be plenty of bandwidth.

[Krell]

You should be able to just change the buffer size in the program you are using to play the video. Kind of like the way quick time buffers enough of the video before it starts playing.

That will definately work IF the pipe is big enough, but you'd have to cache 3\4 of a film if the wifi throughput was too slow, and that's one hella cache.

Also - when you copy a 4.3gb movie to the XP tower connected to your TV, how long does it take to xfer the movie? Time it in seconds. And before you start the transfer, open Task Manager ans then click on the networking tab, watch this as the file completes. Does it moterboat up and down a lot, or pretty steady What is the avergarage rate?

145 to 448 kbps is quite low, and should not exceed the wifi throughput, something is wrong there. Are you using IO "input output" on BT etc while you are trying to move files? What else are you doing on these PC? You cant play HD Monkey porn and transfer files, it will crawl along.

1) time in seconds
2) transfer rate from network payne in Task Manager
3) IO used by any other means




.

[RACKnRAIL]

I ran a speed test out of curiosity.

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c57/8005657421/speedtest.jpg

1) I'd be here all day waiting for a 4.3 gb file to transfer over this network.


2) This was snapped while transferring a large file.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c57/8005657421/taskman.jpg

3) I am using this computer for surfing and media, but not at the same time. I am only running BT on my office computer, where I did the speed test.




Are you using IO "input output" on BT etc while you are trying to move files? What else are you doing on these PC? You cant play HD Monkey porn and transfer files, it will crawl along.

1) time in seconds
2) transfer rate from network payne in Task Manager
3) IO used by any other means




.

[Andrew110]

What kind of wireless adapter do you have? And how far away is that from your router?

[Krell]

Clearly, 3% of a 24mbs connection isnt going to stream much. If it would take all day to copy a 4.3gb file over, then it would take you all day to watch it . . . in slow motion.

Either negotiate a higher connection with the hardware you have

or Buy newer hardware that is faster

or Run a network cable, for which 10mbs still isnt going to stream some HDTV, but better than what you have

or Copy the files to the PC ahead of time for later viewing




.

[RACKnRAIL]

Either negotiate a higher connection with the hardware you have:
Not sure what you mean, negotiate. What can I do?

or Buy newer hardware that is faster:
Do you mean a new router and network card or the device carpefile suggested?

or Run a network cable, for which 10mbs still isnt going to stream some HDTV, but better than what you have:
Seriously? What would you suggest? What way to go?



I honestly don't want to spend a heap of cash, but I would consider an upgrade of some sort.

[Andrew110]

Either negotiate a higher connection with the hardware you have:
Not sure what you mean, negotiate. What can I do?

Are you running the latest driver for your wireless network card?

Do you mean a new router and network card or the device carpefile suggested?

Well it would be pointless to get a wireless N product if you only have a G router.

Like I asked above, how FAR away is the computer in your living room from the router?

[RACKnRAIL]

Are you running the latest driver for your wireless network card?



Well it would be pointless to get a wireless N product if you only have a G router.

Like I asked above, how FAR away is the computer in your living room from the router?


Not far...40' perhaps. I have all the latest drivers and firmware

[Andrew110]

Is the network adapter USB? If it is you have 2.0 right?

[Krell]

What color is it?



jk


where are you going with this Andrew110?



.

[w31n3r]

the only reason i post is because we have a wifi setup (of sorts) in my shop and i thought i'd put in my two cents from experience. feel free to discard this at your convenience.

seems to me your throughput is too low...this could be due to a number of reasons, all of which are due to interference. the longer the distance between your PCs, the slower it'll get. 40 feet may not seem like much, but if there's a room in between, thats two walls to deal with.

add to the fact that since you're using wireless g, a lot of house items compound the problem since it uses the same frequency. even a microwave (can you believe it?!) can interfere with the network. i'm not, sure but check if there's anything else you're using that can do the same (just found out that cordless phones can also disrupt wireless g).

so basically, your router will renegotiate your speed taking these things into account. if theres interference(distance,obstacles,electrical), you'll get a lower throughput proportional to the the amount of interference. you can try forcing it to renegotiate by repairing the wireless connection icon in network connections, but it won't do you any good unless you've removed the source of interference.

if it's possible, i'd advice you to move your living room puter closer to the router within line of sight, remove suspect interfering appliances from the equation, and see if it does the trick. HD content will always give you issues on wireless g since it needs a throughput close to wireless g's ideal one(do we, i say do we live in an ideal world?), but bitrates of 448kbps should work.

if that gets you back in business, then i'd suggest you get a good access point or go the cat 5 way as carpefile suggested. if it doesn't, don't sue me for the broken back you got from lugging your tower and TV around, i'll settle out of court with some of my legendary chilli, guaranteed to leave you speechless!

[DigitalJunkie]

@w31n3r,

Have you tried the Wireless N yet? Even though you can buy those products already but people I talked to, told me they not "perfected yet" at this time. I've been waiting for about a year already, should we wait for next generation of Wireless N products?

Basically, I wanted to know if you tried it. Have you had a lot of problems with it?

[w31n3r]

@w31n3r,

Have you tried the Wireless N yet? Even though you can buy those products already but people I talked to, told me they not "perfected yet" at this time. I've been waiting for about a year already, should we wait for next generation of Wireless N products?

Basically, I wanted to know if you tried it. Have you had a lot of problems with it?

nope, i haven't tried it yet, but i'm waiting. i have a wired network at home and i think i'll wait before upgrading till experts say it's good to go...but i'm in no hurry anyway. still, a few friends told me you could buy a wireless g config today and still get a good ROI, thats how long it could take. heard wireless n hardware is still a little half baked, though when it's sorted it'll kick some serious butt.

[DigitalJunkie]

Thanks for your reply! :)

Wireless N sounds great, but I think I would wait.

[RACKnRAIL]

What color is it?



jk


where are you going with this Andrew110?



.

It's blue with black trim and naturally has usb 2.

It looks like I am going to crawl under the house with a cable, as it seems to be the least expensive fix.

[carpefile]

I'm not understanding why you only have a 10mbps connection on your lan, unless you are using some rather old NICs.
The router you have has 10/100 capabilities over lan, and you should have a 100mbps lan connection. Check your lan card settings in your control panel>system>hardware>device manager>network adapters. Select your nic and then click the advanced tab and then pull down the value menu. make sure its set to either 100base tx full duplex or autosense.
G is never gonna be able to stream HD video, and you'll need a very good connection to stream even any non HD video smoothly at all.

Assuming your nics are 100base able, cat5 is gonna be the only way to git'r done short of dumping a wad of cash into network upgrades.

[enter8]

add to the fact that since you're using wireless g, a lot of house items compound the problem since it uses the same frequency. even a microwave (can you believe it?!) can interfere with the network. i'm not, sure but check if there's anything else you're using that can do the same (just found out that cordless phones can also disrupt wireless g).

2.4 ghz cordless phones (and microwave ovens) will conflict with wireless networks when they're in use. If there are signs of constant interference, that could very well be another wireless network on a conflicting channel. I would do a scan for wireless networks in your area and, if you find one, see what channel it's on.

From what I've read, the WRT54G is inferior to the WRT54GL, due mainly to the fact that the GL has some kickass third party firmware to choose from, firmware that will let you do some pretty sweet stuff such as amplify the signal. If you do decide to upgrade your equipment, rather than taking the N plunge, I'd recommend spending $70 on a GL. Until Buffalo can resolve their legal issues, the GL is the only wireless router I'd spend money on.

A higher dBi antenna might get you a stronger signal. I've seen fairly well rated antennas in the $10 range. If you're handy, I've also seen instructions for building your own parabolic reflectors out of foil. Since you only have two rigs 'talking' to each other, directional is the way to go. With reflector(s) (or directional antennas), you can focus your signals at each other.

Overall, though, I'm +1 for the wired solution. 50' of cable will run you about 10 bucks shipped. If you can move the modem to a central spot, it might be better to do two 20'+ runs rather than one long run, as long runs can sometimes weaken signal strength (for Cat5).

Once the LR is wired, you might want to think about doing BT on the that rig rather than the office. That way you won't have to worry about streaming- the files will be there. This also might give you a more secure setup- having your file sharing/'fun' stuff on one box and your personal/business material on another. That way if you do DL something malicious, the LR will get trashed, but your office data will still be alright.

[Andrew110]

Well USB 1.1 is only 12 Mbps. Thats where I was getting at. Another fix would be to get a wireless repeater, but your looking at around $50. It would still be cheaper than N equipment though.

[Andrew110]

From what I've read, the WRT54G is inferior to the WRT54GL, due mainly to the fact that the GL has some kickass third party firmware to choose from, firmware that will let you do some pretty sweet stuff such as amplify the signal. If you do decide to upgrade your equipment, rather than taking the N plunge, I'd recommend spending $70 on a GL. Until Buffalo can resolve their legal issues, the GL is the only wireless router I'd spend money on.

Forgot to mention I'm running DD-WRT and I bumped the X-mit power to 70. DD-WRT kicks ass. You can even put it on your regular WRT54G if it's an older version. Read more about what versions are supported here http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Index:FAQ

Btw network utilization has nothing to do with how much of the connection speed you can receive, it's how much you ARE receiving. When you aren't doing anything on the internet of course it's only going to say 2 or 3%.

[freakye]

I use a Dlink... Not sure the model number, but mine works GREAT... No lags or anything. It's wireless... If you'd like when I get home I'll look at the model number, and let you know.

[RACKnRAIL]

Thanks for all the suggestions. After crawling under my house, it's now a wired network and plays all my media, so far, without any delay. I haven't tried a HD vid yet, but I will let you know.

I did the same test as yesterday and the now 100 Mbps connection transfers at 79%.

Thanks again!!

Gotta like this speed test:
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c57/8005657421/Speed.jpg

and this is huge improvement:
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c57/8005657421/TM.jpg