On file transfers, turbo boost will throttle you down after the first so many MB of transmission on each 2-way exchange. You can test your internet speed with a simple internet speed or internet fluctuation test.
So, we sometimes use internet speed and download speed interchangeably. We’re more apt to spend time watching movies and listening to music than we are uploading images, as an example. I would doubt that the actual speeds are as consistently high as being reported above on the 150 or 250 plans, even with turboboost benefits. Most consumers rely on download speeds more than upload speeds.
If you're on a windows platform, 7/8/8.1 I have found the Task Manager network monitoring feature to be fairly precise (I would say about 98%) after doings several tests and I use that to monitor actual download/upload speeds. I have found the ASUS traffic manager to be very imprecise with speeds being reported along with the data counts for overall transmissions so I don't use it and I also don't use QOS outside of default settings.
I also have the same traffic manager/QOS features described above.
I too have a CGN3 in bridged mode along with an ASUS router, but an earlier generation, RT-N56U (running native ASUS WRT) which can still move a lot of data to/from internet, well above the speeds you can suscribe to as long as the hardware NAT is still enabled. That was on a google fibre network connection. I've read a report of a router with a Broadcom chipset running somewhere above 900 Mb/s with the acceleration enabled. So the choice is speed and data throughput versus functionality. But, at a much higher rate, the processor wouldn't have the horsepower to do it all, so if you were looking for data throughput, you would select "NAT Acceleration" which bypasses the processor except for the any minimally required processing. The question is, when you enable that function, does it kick off other functions like QOS or Traffic Monitoring for example, which requires the data to route through the processor as there is further processing to be done on the data, as dictated by the specific function that is selected.įor lower data rates it probably wouldn't make any difference, as the processor would have enough horsepower to accept the inbound data packets, do whatever processing has to be done, and then push the data out to the specfic LAN port and still meet the expected data rate.
That would at least be marginally more instructive. Don't know why they just don't label it Broadcom CTF and be done with it.