Community

I see.  Yes that could be.  I'm running on 3ghz  quad core level equipment.
CPU is not maxed out though.  So would encryption performance really slow this down if
the CPU isn't maxed out?

Very nice.
Looking forward to that brilliant solution to the complaints on the "Your computer has been connected in a
remote session" .
Thanks for your diligence on all of these matters with timely and clear informatino.
Great job
Honestly there is no other product I'm nvolved with that is this well managed on the customer front.

Douglas,

40 Megabits/s in digital storage is divided by 8 or 5 MebiBytes/s. You will likely not hit that perfect limit due to some network communication overhead and packet loss across distant links.

Your connection transfer speed will be limited to the slowest bottleneck link.

If you were on the same LAN connected directly to the same switch, the speed would be limited to the link speed of the switch minus network overhead.

If transferring over the internet, the speed would be limited not only to the slowest peer, but also the relay servers being used on the internet. For example, even if I have a 1Gbps connection, I'm not going to get those speeds if transferring with someone who only has a 1Mb/s connection. Additionally, even if both sides had a 1Gbps connection, if a router or network device in between (such as a relay server used to bypass firewalls or a slow switch) has a slow link, transfers will be limited to the slower speed.

Based on your reported problem, I would assume you are using Remote Utilities' public relay servers in which case data speeds may be limited / shared with other users. To bypass this, you need to allow direct communication or set up a publicly accessible relay server. This may involve opening firewall ports or forwarding traffic through routers. See the following support pages for more information.

https://www.remoteutilities.com/support/kb/what-is-a-direct-connection/
https://www.remoteutilities.com/support/docs/ports-used-by-remote-utilities/

@All - I originally replied to Douglas thinking the problem was a slow link in between but decided to test the issue myself and confirmed there is slower than expected performance.

I tested peer to peer connections via 1Gb/s wired workstation and 802.11ac 2x2 SU-MIMO 80Mhz 5Ghz.
iPerf3 bandwidth reach 350-450Mb/s up/down. A single TCP Connection reached 75Mb/s. Connection speeds could be limited by MOCA device on my network, but for testing, I would expect around 75Mb/s or 9.375MiB/s transfer rate for a single threaded transfer.

I tested a file transfer using Terminal Services/Remote Desktop and was able to reach ~75mb/s.

I used Remote Utilities and confirmed the direct connection via netstat and other third-party network monitoring tools for file transfer, but the direct connection maxed out around 2.12MiB/s with no CPU limits reached on both the client and host.

I checked performance graphs and see no limits in I/O for storage, memory, or CPU. Analyzing the threads running seem to indicate there are wait DelayExecution and UserRequests states happening often with threads in [process].exe!__dbk_fcall_wrapper.

Hopefully the devs can get this one addressed; perhaps the bug could help improve performance in other areas as well.