[JBRONCFAN]

Want to know how to tweak your registry to get a Maximum Speed of 230400
instead of that old possible 115200? Here are the steps:

**Warning, you will be changing your registry settings. I cannot be held responsible
for any issues that may arise by keying in this information****

This one over-clocks your modem from a measly 115200 bps to a possible 230400 bps! That's double the speed! This tweak requires some fancy regedit steps and …err, nothing else much but knowledge. Now listen carefully. Go to your modem's reg key (HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\Class\Modem\000#\) and look for a setting lled "Properties" (not a key name, just a bin within the modem's key). The best way to find it for Windows is going to Start>Find>IN the registry and in the bottom corner click the button, "registry editor". It should have a long list of numbers and letters, two by two… double click on it to edit it. Near the last row of those numbers (Seventh from the end,usually) should be the combinations "C2 01" or a close resemblance. If you see these nod your head, if not then look harder. Now click your mouse cursor before those and press the delete key twice to get rid of them. In their place put in "84" and "03". Now exit out of regedit and go into your Dial-Up Networking properties and click to "Configure…" your modem. Where it reads "Maximum Speed" click the pull down menu and look below 115200 to find a new number… 230400!
Now your modem can send and receive stuff twice as fast [from it's buffer, not ISP].
System may require a restart for settings to take effect and don't forget, this doesn't affect the transfer rate just speeds the rate at which your computer handles the info when it gets there.

[Bryan]

While I guess the tweak can't hurt anything and may make you feel better, the rate at which your PC communicates with the modem is not the bottleneck. The bottleneck is the modem and phonelines so you've really not accomplished anything making that change. Your download rate is still going have a maximum of 53000 or 53kbps so making the computer and the modem operate at 4x that speed doesn't really make much sense but maybe someone can convince me that I missing something here.

[JBRONCFAN]

Dude, did you read the post at all or go straight to the reply? NOWHERE did I say this tweak would influence the transfer rate coming into the computer. The heading mentions dial-up because it's mostly for people using a dial up connection that will see the most difference. Did you try it? If you didn't, than you are missing something. If you have high speed, you probably won't notice a difference but then again, maybe you will. So, instead of trying the tweak yourself and posting a result, you would rather guesstamate that it won't work....very productive. All I know is that I did it and my pages load almost twice as fast. Still stays 49,000bps in the corner....but my computer handles the incoming info noticeably faster. Please, obviously your time is way too valueable to have some fun and try this tweak. I'm sure there are other people posting threads about enhancing the performance of their computer that you can reply to and tell them you "think" they won't work.

[Bryan]

First off, I read all posts in their entirety. Secondly, I don't "guesstamate". I reason with the use of a logical thought process and as I mentioned in my post, in no uncertain terms, the logic doesn't make any sense to me. Your page loading time has nothing what so ever to do with the setting your tweaking and unless someone else can present me with the logic that supports it other than your anecdotal evidence, I'll stick to what I have logically concluded. And thirdly, I'm just voicing my opposing view without all of the cute little comments you've mixed in to suggest I don't know what I'm talking about. Sorry if my decenting view offended you but that's what I do when I see something that doesn't make any logical sense. Anyway, unlike your previous post in the Tips/Tricks forum that suggested people set a fixed swapfile and a fixed vcache size, this one seems relatively harmless. So if it makes you feel better and it seems to improve your performance, enjoy. And anyone else that may want to try it, have fun, too. I've been wrong before but at this point, the tweak makes absolutely no sense to me.

BTW, you or anyone else that may think this would be feasable, explain this to me. If you can only receive data at a maximum 53kbps clip, then what difference does it make if the pipeline at the receiving end can handle 224kbps when it's only receiving data in 53kbps streams? Unless I'm totally missing something here, your still only pushing 53kbps through a 224kbps channel but I'm open to having my mind changed if the proof is convincing.

[JBRONCFAN]

"BTW, you or anyone else that may think this would be feasable, explain this to me. If you can only receive data at a maximum 53kbps clip, then what difference does it make if the pipeline at the end can handle 224kbps when it's only receiving data in 53kbps streams? Unless I'm totally missing something here, your still only pushing 53kbps through a 224kbps channel but I'm open to having my mind changed if the proof is convincing."

This reg tweak simply overrides what your modem MAX can possibly connect from it's buffer, not ISP.This tweak is in reference to data compression and is recommended for newer modems that can handle it. I just installed last month a US Robotics 56k Performance PCI Pro Modem v.92. I don't think my old Lucent Win Modem could handle the tweak. It might have, never got a chance to try, which is what this is all about. All of the time it took you to post your replies about how this might not work, you could have tried it out for yourself. I hope as a moderator, Byran, you can understand this by now.

[Bryan]

As a moderator I understand it enough to know it doesn't make a bit of sense to increase one side of a channel to handle 224kbps when it can only be fed by a 53kbps stream.

This is my last response to this since I can see I'm never going to convince you that it makes no sense. I've explained it in the best terms I know how but just to put it into terms that anyone can understand. If you stare at a standard kitchen funnel and imagine the small ends your 53kbps modem stream and large end is your 224kbps channel to your computer, you can't help but see it. To further make the point, stick the small end of the funnel into the bottom of a faucet and turn on the water. How much water comes out the large end at one time? Would less would come out if the large end was the same diameter as the small end? Or better yet, would more come out if the large end were twice the size than it currently is? The answer is the same comes out of the large end as goes into the small end. If you apply it to your tweak, a 53kbps stream comes out of the 224kbps diameter end that's only 1/4 of the way full because your not feeding 224kbps into it. You accomplish absolutely nothing by having it set to 224kbps.

BTW, you mentioned this tweak is recommend for newer modems. Is there a link you can post where it's recommended? I'd sure like to understand why anyone would recommend it because it just doesn't make any sense but I could be wrong.

[Bryan]

Well I see where you found the Tweak. And the authors correct, you won't find that tweak on any other websites and I'm pretty sure I know why.


http://www.3dgamegear.com/features/m...ak/index.shtml

[JBRONCFAN]

Hopefully that link you found explained it to you best because I'm tired of typing out the entire explanation to you. Hopefully an adventurous reader will tweak this setting and enjoy the benefits and report their results. BTW Byran, did you ever get around to actually trying it yourself instead of running around and reading everyone else's explanation on how it works? Be brave, take a chance, live life, don't be afraid....

ps. I found this tweak on another forum and what drew my attention was the FIVE pages of responses from people who benefitted from this tweak.

[Bryan]

Sorry if your tired of explaining it. Do you think we should just let everyone post Tweaks and never question the logic of them if they seem to not make any sense?

Anyway, you keep asking me if I tried it so I'll ask you, why would I make a change to accomplish something that makes no sense? I'd feel foolish doing it.

Anyway, I give up, too. Ok here it goes,

Anyone that wants to create a 224kbps channel that will only be 1/4 of the way full at any given time because it's only being fed by a 56kbps stream then go for it. It makes no logical sense to me but hey I've been wrong before. I've thought about it from every possible angle and the tweak just doesn't make any logical sense to me. I've even questioned some long time collegues of mine in the computer industry to be sure I've not missed something and they also agreed it makes no sense.

Good luck and maybe this tweak will reach the same heights on the net as the famed "VXD Fix" tweak of 1999. As far as FIVE pages from people that benefited from the tweak, I can lead you to Thousands of pages of people that "benefited" from the famed "VXD Fix" tweak of 1999-2000, too. I guess only time will tell if this tweak has the same legs as that one had. One can only hope.

[JBRONCFAN]

I think my heading for this thread is throwing you off. It's not a tweak for the connection, it's for people who use a dialup and would notice the difference the most. You're obviously never going to increase the speed of the info coming in, unless you bump up to high speed. You are changing the way your modem transfers info it gets from your phoneline to your PC.....that's it. Again, did you try it yourself at all? If you have a high speed connect, you probably won't notice much but who knows.....one thing is for sure.....YOU'LL NEVER KNOW UNLESS YOU TRY!!!! Hint: when you do the reg edit, go to Modem in Control Panel and adjust the speed there. The tweak will give you the new option you didn't have before of 230kps. Don't tweak the modem properties in the actual dial up connection you have created. I did and it locks up. The ISP can only go so high and like I said before, this tweak is for speeding up the info AFTER it gets to your system.

[wen]

gentlemen
it is 7.55 us time, 12.55 am uk, over 190 people have viewed this exchange of views.

whereare you going with this?

you are going backwards and forwards on whether this works or not.

i think it is time to call it a day with honours even and 190 ish of us to decide for ourselves whether to use or not.

wen

[Bryan]

Actually I'm finished debating this but I see nothing in this thread that should bother you. We're debating the validity of a tweak that was put forth. Unless a thread gets vulgar and includes personal attacks, we leave them open here. This thread includes neither. If it did, I'd close it, but I can't close it because you think it's gone on too long.

BTW, the 190 views number you see on the thread doesn't translate into 190 people. Everytime I click on the thread, it increments the counter so it's probably more like 40 people, if that. Everyone that's viewed it and came back to view it again, is counted again and again ........

[frenat]

I have to agree with Bryan on this one. I have tried it on dialup and there was no difference at all. What Bryan is saying is also correct. With the standard max setting of 115200, the computer is already getting the info from the modem at least 2 times as fast as the modem is getting the info from the isp. What is the point in doubling that? You still will be waiting for the modem to download what it needs to.

[wen]

so sorry bryan, i should have realised, in future i'll keep my opinion to myself.

obviously women should be seen and not heard.

wen

does it really matter that i actually agreed with YOU.

oh well! back to the kitchen sink i suppose.

[Bryan]

Wen, it appeared to me that you'd seen enough of the thread and wanted us to stop the debate. That's what prompted my response. Your opinion was included in the thread and I simply made the point that it would end when it ends. Nothing more and nothing less. If you took offense from my comments, I'm not sure why that would be. I didn't deny you the right to your opinion, I just explained that the thread would remain open and why it would remain open.

As far as the woman comments, those are your words not mine. I'm not completely sure why you had to include it in your response but if it was to imply I somehow replied as I did because your a woman, I'd like to know how you could come up with that one. I haven't a clue what the sex of the majority of the posters here is and don't really need to know because it's not relavent.

Hope that explains it for you .......