Comtrend PG-9172 Powerline Adapter Review: G.hn Gets Primed for Retail Push
by Ganesh T S on May 3, 2016 8:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Powerline Adapters
- Networking
- Marvell
- G.hn
- HomePlug
- Comtrend
Evaluation Setup and Testing Methodology
G.hn's claims of being better than HomePlug AV2 in real-world scenarios was always something we had wanted to test out for ourselves. In order to evaluate the claims, we took out all the powerline adapters that had come in for review over the last four years and subjected all of them to the same iperf benchmarks under the same conditions across different power outlets in a residence. Prior to going into the details of the evaluation, let us take a look at the features of the different powerline adapters being considered today.
| Comparative PLC Configurations | ||
| Aspect | Comtrend PG-9172 | |
| Technology | G.hn | HomePlug AV2 |
| Chipset | Marvell 88LX3142 for G.hn Digital Baseband Marvell 88LX2718 Analog Front End |
Qualcomm Atheros QCA7500 |
| Encryption | 128-bit AES | 128-bit AES |
| Performance | 1200 Mbps (PHY) / 1000 Mbps | 1000 Mbps (PHY) / 1033 Mbps (AV2 MIMO Powerline 0 - 65 MHz Theoretical Max.) |
| Miscellaneous Features | MIMO (Multiple Input Multiple Output) G.hn / HPAV Co-existence Technology |
MIMO (Multiple Input Multiple Output) |
| Dimensions | 93mm x 59.6mm x 35mm | 90mm x 60mm x 27mm |
| Weight | 100g | 95g |
| Retail Availability | May 2015 | December 2014 |
| Current Street Price (Kit) | USD 77 | USD 83 |
All the testing was carried out in a 1800 sq. ft. single-level detached California residence built in the 1970s. The rough floorplan of the house, along with the testing locations, is presented below.
The evaluation of the adapters was done in an isolated network. A NUC with an Intel NIC (running Windows 10 Pro x64) was configured to act as a DHCP server, and placed at location 'M' (in red) in the above picture. The 'master node' powerline adapter was connected to it. Yet another NUC with an Intel NIC (running Windows 10 Pro x64) was connected to the other adapter in the network. The location of this NUC / adapter combination was varied for each adapter pair's evaluation run. We considered typical powerline adapter usage scenarios in deciding upon the locations for the testing (A - F in green in the picture above). All major rooms, including the garage, were covered.
The purpose of our benchmarking was not to tune the stream configuration for obtaining maximum possible bandwidth. Rather, we wanted to replay the same stream for multiple adapter sets in order to determine comparative performance. iperf with default parameters was used for benchmarking. On the 'server', we ran the following command:
TCP: iperf -s -B 10.1.1.2
UDP: iperf -s -u -B 10.1.1.2
The 'client' was connected to it using the following command:
TCP: iperf -c 10.1.1.2 -P ${num_parallel_streams} -t 30
UDP: iperf -c 10.1.1.2 -u -b ${curr_bw_to_test}m -t 30
The number of parallel streams were tested between 20 and 25 for the TCP case. The maximum obtained bandwidth was recorded. For the UDP case, we altered the bandwidth to test in order to arrive at the value that resulted in less than 1% packet loss during transmission. The roles of the server and client were then reversed, and the same benchmarks were processed.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
48 Comments
View All Comments
gobaers - Tuesday, May 3, 2016 - link
My current setup is two Ubiquiti Unifi access points, one connected directly into the firewall and the other connected via TP-Link HomePlug adapters, as well as an IP phone via HomePlug adapter as well. They're somewhat reliable, but I see one of the powerline adapters drop connectivity every few days. Really, I should wire the house with Cat6, but it's going to be a messy job.Replacing the consumer Netgear WNDR3400 with a Cisco ASA5505, and adding Unifi WAPs has been an awesome. Running the Unifi controller software on a desktop, live handoffs and great wifi through the house, it has been rock solid at least until the powerline adapter disconnects.
Acarney - Tuesday, May 3, 2016 - link
Any word on ping times with just a single brand/point to point network setup? I'm mainly looking to hardware my TV/AppleTV/PlayStation 4 with my network. I have an old G wifi hub connecting via bridge mode to my router which is about two rooms over. I need to hard connect these devices because if I don't they decide to connect to the wifi access point upstairs... Which is ok, except it randomly drops occasionally to where the one downstairs a couple rooms over is stronger. It's just a pain if gaming or streaming and a cut out happens. My internet pings are about 25 to 35ms at the best. Would a power line network drastically extend those? (Say into 100ms+) if it was just router -> power line plugin -> power line plugin -> network hub to break it out into 3 plugs for TV, AppleTV, PS4.paranoised - Thursday, May 5, 2016 - link
I have a Homeplug AV2 device and the latency I see is typically in the 2-4 milliseconds. Using powerline networking will probably increase your throughput and reduce latency tangibly.rtho782 - Tuesday, May 3, 2016 - link
I wish I could find testing like this in a UK setup.As our electrical wiring is significantly different (ring mains rather than radial circuits, leading to signal reflections etc, much more common use of RCBOs for individual rings, meaning that to go upstairs to downstairs, or either to the kitchen, you travel through two RCBOs) you can't directly compare the results, and UK/Europe seems to be an afterthought to the US!
Lepton87 - Wednesday, May 4, 2016 - link
I concur, I actually looked up what G.hn means once the author used it because he didn't explain what he meant by that. I don't like reading something and not be sure what I'm reading about so even though it would be clear after a while what G.hn means just from the article it still makes the first page more confusing that it should be. Please change it so the others don't have to look it up or not be sure at first what they are reading about.Lepton87 - Wednesday, May 4, 2016 - link
I concur, I actually looked up what G.hn means once the author used it because he didn't explain what he meant by that. I don't like reading something and not be sure what I'm reading about so even though it would be clear after a while what G.hn means just from the article it still makes the first page more confusing that it should be. Please change it so the others don't have to look it up or not be sure at first what they are reading about.jardows2 - Wednesday, May 4, 2016 - link
**Disclaimer: I work for ARRIS consumer support**We received samples of the G.hn products to test and learn for support purposes. We were unable to do any detailed tests, but were able to take some units home for pre-release trials. So far, everything seems to work well for everyone that tested, even those who had old wiring and fuse boxes! No word on speed, but connectivity seemed to be fine, except certain surge protectors were problematic. I am looking forward to AnandTech's full evaluation of the products!
sepecat - Wednesday, May 11, 2016 - link
The most problematic weakness of all RF-based tech (including powerline, MoCA, and wireless) for me is high latency. I've tried multiple iterations of each of these and always have a latency of at least 2ms and often over 10ms. This is a showstopper for my primary application, streaming from my PC to a SHIELD console. I don't see how that could be resolved without a dedicated, noise-free medium, though.