Is it possible to measure local network traffic or possible saturation with Fing ??

LuisDIaz

Is it possible to measure local network traffic or possible saturation with Fing ?? 

Robin_Ex_Fing

LuisDIaz said:

Is it possible to measure local network traffic or possible saturation with Fing ?? 

You can refer to this article: https://help.fing.com/knowledge-base/bandwidth-analysis-feature/
Hope it helps.

thomasmerz

But why does Fingbox slow down my computer by around half the speed? Both Fingbox and Computer are connected via LAN-cable to the same switch. When I do an "iperf" with Bandwidth Analysis it's only half the speed than "normal"…

Robin_Ex_Fing

thomasmerz said:

But why does Fingbox slow down my computer by around half the speed? Both Fingbox and Computer are connected via LAN-cable to the same switch. When I do an "iperf" with Bandwidth Analysis it's only half the speed than "normal"…

If Fingbox is slowing down your network then you can refer to this article: https://help.fing.com/knowledge-base/will-fingbox-slow-down-my-network/
I hope it helps.

Popula

thomasmerz said:

But why does Fingbox slow down my computer by around half the speed? Both Fingbox and Computer are connected via LAN-cable to the same switch. When I do an "iperf" with Bandwidth Analysis it's only half the speed than "normal"…

First and foremost, FING is a passive device and won't generate network activity, other than the occasional speed-test (if you enabled that), so it should not affect your bandwidth.

Using IPERF is rather situational. Did you use a typical local client-server setup?

Anyway, I did a few tests myself. Allow me to show you the results.

The server for the first two runs is a high-end core i9 11900K w/ 64MB, all SSD, CAT7 cable on a professional CISCO managed switch.
The client for the first two runs is a 7th gen Intel i7 (Surface Pro) on a USB 3.0 ethernet adapter, CAT7 connected to the same managed switch.

First, a typical client-server IPERF run, wired, on a 1 Gbps local network (managed switch) and FING fully functional.
The report shows this:



Next, exactly the same IPERF run, but now with FING disconnected.
The report shows this:



Hardly any difference. A tad slower, even (888Mbps vs. 874Mbps). But neglectable.


However, when I do a REVERSE run of IPERF (switched client and server), the following happened, still WITHOUT an active FING:



See the difference? A whopping 40% drop, compared to the first two runs.
Apparently, the server quality greatly determines the bandwidth.

If you do the same experiment, you may observe similar results.

That's why I always say that speed-tests, no matter how consistent it looks, are always very situational.

But I think the conclusion can be, that FING does not impact the bandwidth of your network.

thomasmerz

@Popula , it may not be clear that I used bandwidth-analysis-feature of Fingbox which seems to have an impact on bandwidth of the host that is analysed:

• Without this feature, all iperf3 jobs are great and as expected and stable around/between 300-400 Mbit/s (which is very near the maximum that I'm expecting).

• But as soon as I start to analyse bandwidth with fingbox for one of my hosts involved in iperf3, the performance is more than halving most the time , sometimes it's near the expected maximum.

thomasmerz

@Popula , it may not be clear that I used bandwidth-analysis-feature of Fingbox which seems to have an impact on bandwidth of the host that is analysed:

• Without this feature, all iperf3 jobs are great and as expected and stable around/between 300-400 Mbit/s (which is very near the maximum that I'm expecting).

• But as soon as I start to analyse bandwidth with fingbox for one of my hosts involved in iperf3, the performance is more than halving most the time , sometimes it's near the expected maximum.