P paulbates Regular Contributor Nov 7, 2017 #2 I've used it for about a year and I prefer it. We share our home ms office documents, pictures and stream music. It is worth avoiding if your router is already CPU bound, and/or your use is more than casual file sharing. Paul Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've used it for about a year and I prefer it. We share our home ms office documents, pictures and stream music. It is worth avoiding if your router is already CPU bound, and/or your use is more than casual file sharing. Paul Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RMerlin Asuswrt-Merlin dev Staff member Nov 7, 2017 #3 Up to you. SMB2 will reduce throughput, so it depends on whether you need higher throughout or SMB2 support.
Up to you. SMB2 will reduce throughput, so it depends on whether you need higher throughout or SMB2 support.
hank81 Regular Contributor Nov 7, 2017 #4 I've checked SMB vs SMB2 throughput downloading a large file from HDD attached to RT-AC68U SMB: 60MB/s. Almost full CPU and MEM usage (Core1: 75%-85%. Core2: 100%) SMB2: 45-50MB/s. Occasionally it slows down to 0-1MB/s during seconds. Similar CPU/MEM usage (Core1: 60%-75%. Core2: 100%). Definitely i'd better keep SMB2 disabled. Sent from my XT1635-02 via Tapatalk
I've checked SMB vs SMB2 throughput downloading a large file from HDD attached to RT-AC68U SMB: 60MB/s. Almost full CPU and MEM usage (Core1: 75%-85%. Core2: 100%) SMB2: 45-50MB/s. Occasionally it slows down to 0-1MB/s during seconds. Similar CPU/MEM usage (Core1: 60%-75%. Core2: 100%). Definitely i'd better keep SMB2 disabled. Sent from my XT1635-02 via Tapatalk