@Fijiochuch45

It’s great that it works now even though the 5G reception isn’t exactly the best.

True, but that doesn’t really bother us. We are in the back half of Val Lumnezia. The 5G reception on the cell phone is also about as good as the box can manage. We hardly ever need more than the performance measured now (between 300-500 Gbits/s down and between 80-120 Gbits/s up) (except for 80 GB of videos, which I sometimes have to create and upload, in which case it is more likely YouTube is also the problem). So far it has worked well with a Tektonika router with Swisscom SIM (approx. 150 down and 60 up) for all work, TV via online & Netflix. In my opinion, the current solution is the best for us in terms of technology (copper) and price. Things will get even better if the fiber optics that are already in the next shaft can be put into the house.

---

@Fijiochuch45 wrote:

True, but that doesn’t really bother us. We are in the back half of Val Lumnezia. The 5G reception on the cell phone is also about as good as the box can manage. We hardly ever need more than the performance measured now (between 300-500 Gbits/s down and between 80-120 Gbits/s up) (except for 80 GB of videos, which I sometimes have to create and upload, in which case it is more likely YouTube is also the problem). So far it has worked well with a Tektonika router with Swisscom SIM (approx. 150 down and 60 up) for all work, TV via online & Netflix. In my opinion, the current solution is the best for us in terms of technology (copper) and price. Things will get even better if the fiber optics that are already in the next shaft can be put into the house.

---

But you’ve had 100mbps in the village for a long time, so the wireless solution was unnecessary.

Now the situation in your case is that the new network elements have been in the ground for a year, but due to whatever problems they have never been put into operation. This now seems to have been solved and yesterday the first one was put into operation in the south of the village. This means you will probably soon be shortened to the nearest network element at house “…..20”. Your line hasn’t been inventoried yet (new construction), but it’s estimated that you should get almost 400mbps on copper. However, this will deactivate the booster as it is currently not compatible with g.Fast.

The new backend is expected to go into operation in Q3 2023. So please remove the 5G Booster from the network after the new performance (an email will then be sent), otherwise it can cause interference. You can leave it on the windshield for a while and then put it back into operation to get even more speed.

Best regards

The wireless solution was necessary because I couldn’t put the IB3 into operation until last week. If at some point there is 400 Mbit/s on the copper, all the better. After the experience of waiting for months, I am a bit skeptical about announcements and appointments ;-). The current solution at least works and provides comfortable performance. So let’s see what happens next. Thank you very much & best regards from Vigngon

Good evening, I’m sorry, but while searching the forum - perhaps due to my poor German - I didn’t find a real answer to my curiosity.
Can someone explain to me why, when I measure the connection speed with the 5G Receiver directly with the Nokia app, I always get significantly higher values ​​than with Cnlab or Ookla Speedtest?
To be clear, with the Nokia app I constantly get values ​​between 480 and even almost 600 Mbps, while with Cnlab and Ookla Speedtest I get averages between 380 and 420 Mbps with peaks at 450.
Thank you if you can clarify this curiosity.

@Bubeli78

What is displayed on the link for the availability check at your location?

https://www.swisscom.ch/de/privatkunden/checker.html/

WalterB

Good morning,
650 Mbit/s download and 82 Mbit/s upload. I’m not complaining about the speeds at which I surf, I’m just asking if someone can explain what one program measures and what the other measures, because the differences are significant. It’s a simple technical curiosity…

Bubeli78

Normally, the value that is displayed during the availability check should be reached.

so 650/82 Mbit/s.

Did you carry out the speed measurement directly on the LAN Anschluss from the Internet box?

What will be displayed if you enter 192.168.1.1 in your internet browser and click the top left green dot with the mouse, see example image below?

WalterB

Hello,
ha of course I did the tests directly with a lan cable and with only one device turned on and connected and not downloading various updates etc.
Here is the screenshot you want.

Bubeli78

It looks like you don’t have 5G reception on the Internet box because LTE is on.

Can you put your picture here like the example below.

N.B. I assume you have the “M” subscription?

@Bubeli78

Yes, what about the requested picture above?

Is the antenna from Swisscom?

Maybe @Roger G can give more info.

@Bubeli78 I looked at your network and it’s a little convoluted. For example, you have WLAN box cascades, so use a WLAN box as a repeater on a WLAN box as an AP. I wouldn’t realize it like that. The booster is then connected to the switch of the WLAN Box 2, which works as a repeater. It can’t actually work like that!

You definitely have to pay attention to:

• that all WLAN boxes run as APs in the network if possible
• If you need a repeater, then you have to make sure that no booster or streaming devices are connected there. Sure WiFi speakers work, or the Shellys in the house/apartment, but it’s not recommended.
• The booster is connected to the IB as directly as possible or at most via ONE switch. Everything else is fragile.

If you have modified the net accordingly, the speed should also arrive in the net. The 5G Wide antenna is approx. 200m away, facing exactly south-east at a 45° angle.

Good luck

Hello Roger, thank you for your interest.
I have now connected the 5G receiver directly to the router and turned off the two repeaters on the upper floor.
I still don’t seem to have gained much weight. Maybe 20 Mbps on average.
As for positioning the receiver, I know where the other antenna is. But on this side my house is surrounded by much taller buildings and the signal at the window is not good. For the first two weeks the receiver pointed in that direction, but the results were much worse. On average around 300 Mbps and often the signal was weak.
I’m going to try it like this now, but turn on the two WiFi boxes that are now switched off. They will only be connected via Wi-Fi and will only serve as a “bridge” to the two TV BOXES, but neither of them will be connected to the receiver.
Let’s see what happens.
The whole thing is also still “temporary” as I’m waiting for Cablex to design the fiber optic network that runs through my house (I signed the contract back in June). I hope to finally be able to use it by mid/late next year.

Best regards.

@Bubeli78

Having glass in the house isn’t the end of the matter, as the end devices usually have Gigabit Ethernet ports.

For problem-free, high-performance operation, I recommend connecting all devices (including the WB and TV-Box) to the LAN and only using the WLAN for small devices without a network connection.

Dear @hed, thank you for your interest.
Despite the fact that I sometimes ask seemingly uninformed questions, I am not completely inexperienced: unfortunately, because this passion often leads to spending money that is not always sensible 😉
If I get fiber, the signal input will be completely somewhere else.
Basically, the entrance is now on the ground floor, and from there the network goes to the first floor or basement.
Then he will enter from the basement and only go upstairs. That’s also the reason why I spoke about temporary earlier. I have no intention of continuing to invest in a network, perhaps drilling holes in walls and so on, if after some time everything changes and this investment is no longer necessary.
The network, some of which I have already set up, is prepared for 2.5 Gbit/s: cables, sockets, a switch, two computers and a WiFi Box3 are already prepared for speeds over 1 Gbit/s.
And really all that’s missing is a 10 Gbit/s switch to make it even faster in its “most useful” part. I haven’t bought the Switch yet due to price reasons. There’s no point in me buying it now when I don’t need it when the network might be implemented in 12 months…

Best regards

@Bubeli78

Thank you very much, everything is clear.

If it is only a temporary solution, you can also install the installation on the fly. This is the easiest, fastest and cheapest way.

Regarding 2.5 Gbps or 10 Gbps can be of mixed opinion. In my opinion, you spend a lot of money unnecessarily on a speed that you don’t need. Even companies with many power users still only have 1 Gbps in the access area and they won’t change that anytime soon. In addition, there is the high energy consumption for the equipment at 2.5 respectively. 10Gbps.