Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2017 October 30

= October 30 =

sierra wireless aircard 763s
i have a strong feeling i should be able to setup my sierra 763s aircard as a wifi extender for my existing home network, i simply want the 763s to connect to my wifi at home and rebroadcast(wifi repeater). i understand the intent of these devices is to connect to cellular network through sim card and then broadcast a wifi signal that can be connected to like a router, but i have suspicion this thing has all the hardware and infrastructure to be able to also operate as a wifi repeater(extender) without going thorough the cell network. i know it has port forwarding and peer to peer capability.....i am calling on someone in the big brain community to help me massage this hardware into something i can implement for my desired re purpose.


 * I only have an averaged size brain, but I'll take a shot at responding. A cursory review of the user guide (here) reveals no indication that this device is has any built-in repeater or extender capability, nor could I find any information on modifying it to make it function as such. While (as you suggested) it almost certainly has the necessary hardware (namely a WiFi band Transceiver and programmable controller), it likely does not have the desired functionality built in to the firmware. Without that built-in functionality, it would be necessary to reprogram the device with new firmware to make it do what you want. This is a far from trivial task, and one that would require a detailed understanding of the hardware, processor capabilities, and IEEE 802.11 protocols. Even if you had updated firmware, getting the device to accept the update may be a problem.  It is not uncommon for such devices are to be configured to only accept updates from known trusted sources - i.e., the manufacturer. A big brained person with sufficient skill, motivation and time might be able to take this on, but I wouldn't hold my breath.


 * We do have an articles on Custom firmware and Hacking of consumer electronics, but they are not very well developed and don't specifically address hacking WiFi hot spot devices. We also have List of router firmware projects, but I don't see anything there that immediately stands out for your needs. --  Tom N  talk/contrib 02:27, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

yup, bit too far outside the box for me as well, even if was custom ddwrt or tomato flash there is no way to get it inside the chipset....no cat5 interface......Hmmmmm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.162.176 (talk) 01:30, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

CAS latency for different speeds
Speccy says that my memory is at 800MHz with CL 11-11-11-28. BurnInTest shows that three of my memory sticks are like that but one is 13-13-13-32 at 933Mhz. When the 933 HHz stick is running at 800 MHz, is the CL still 13 or does it drop down to 11? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 23:49, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Assuming you aren't overclocking, that depends what the SPD (or XMP or AMP if itp has one) says for the stick running at 800Mhz. Although the motherboard may choose to relax the timings etc with such a mixed configuration. If reliable software says the memory is running at 800Mhz with CL 11-11-11-28 then that's what it's running at. Remember that few memory controllers support running memory with different frequencies or timings so all memory will be running at that those setting. (In other words, use software which tells you what settings your memory is running at, not software which simply reports the SPD values for your memory. Well technically the software will simply be reporting something like what the memory controller is using, but there's no magic way the memory can be doing something different from the memory controller so unless there is a bug in the memory controller which makes it faile to accurately report what settings it's running at, you can assume it's accurate.) Nil Einne (talk) 06:22, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm not overclocking. I don't know what SPD is.  I suspect that BurnInTest is only reporting what the memory stick says and not what the speed at which it is actually running.  I ran GeekBench on three other computers, which are similar to each other, except for the memory. One has two sticks of CL 9, one has two sticks of CL 11, and the third one has one of each (it actually has a newer chip set, I think).   The CL 9 and CL 11 were just about the same (no significant difference).  The one with the CL 9 and 11 mixed was about 4% slower on memory test (and other tests).  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 14:55, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I assume that you are talking about DDR3? In addition, if Speccy does not show SPD info, you can use other software like CPUZ. Ruslik_ Zero 20:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, DDR3. I have CPU-Z now (on the first-mentioned computer), but I don't know how to interpret it.  The Memory tab says 799MHz and 11-11-11-28.  The SPD tab (I don't know what SPD is) for the first slot shows JEDEC#5 through #8.  Under those it shows frequencies of 685, 761, 838, and 888 MHz.  Under that it shows CAS 9, 10, 11, and 13.  The other slots are different - they show different JEDEC numbers (slot2: #3-#6), frequencies 609, 685, 761, &800, and CAS 8, 9, 10, & 11.  So does that mean that at 800MHz, CL is 11; at 761MHz CL  would be 10, etc?  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:39, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The single stick reports via the Serial presence detect that it can run at CL11 on 838 Mhz, CL10 on 761Mhz etc. The motherboard in collobration with the memory controller on the CPU should then choose what settings to run the memory at. Since your other memory is only reporting it capable of running at 800 Mhz maximu with CL11 the motherboard has chosen to run at 800 Mhz with CL11, as the first stick should be capable of running at this speed (if it's capable of 838Mhz with CL11) as per the memory tab. If you can choose to run at 761 Mhz or lower without manually setting the timings, the motherboard will most likely run them at CL10, and probably they will work fine with these settings. Nil Einne (talk) 03:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, so the memory returns data in a certain number of nanoseconds, and the number of cycles of latency depends on the clock speed, right? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:56, 1 November 2017 (UTC)