Computer to Computer Wireless Data Transfer so Slow

Band width/transfer rate.

Wireless signals are not as efficient as copper, or even thumb drives, at data transfer.

Use a USB cable for high data transfer rates.

..."A common source of confusion is the difference between a bit and a byte. There are 8 bits in 1 byte, so if your transfer speeds are 12 megabits per second, you're really getting 1.5 megabytes per second (12 divided by 8). Some programs report back in bytes, some in bits, it's a matter of which program you're using.

The second thing you need to understand, is you will never get the full advertised speed on your wireless router. If the router says it is 54 megabits per second, you will likely only see half of that in real life situations. This is because of overhead and interference, which you can not get rid of. Even on 100 megabit wired connections, you will likely never see it's full capacity. Most people will see around 2-3 megabytes per second (18-24Mbps) on their 54Mbps (802.11g) router/AP's."

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/23750-43-terribly-slow-wireless-transfer

http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/why-not-wireless/

So what is keeping the networking speed down so low? As I said I have watched the network monitor on both laptops and when connected to each other and transferring files I rarely ever see over 12 - 15% usage at the peaks.

Direct download from an internet source will easily run at at average numbers bouncing around 40 - 70+% (18 - 25 Mb/s) of network capacity.

I was just wondering why the large difference between the two?

If you want a graphical real time monitor of Kbps, I use a freeware tool called Netmeter. It shows graphically both download and upload data rate. I initially installed this back when I had dial up, and had lockups because 'something' was always taking over my computer and downloading stuff (automatic updates). But it's handy when you want to see data rates for program downloads, or photo uploads, or just web page data flow, and verify the network is working. I have it set up at the bottom of the desktop, so the auto hide start bar pops on top of it. I have it set to click through settings so it does not interfere with window program operation. You can have it just show internet data flow, or all data flow.

I've heard 100MHz wired ethernet can only support 28% continuous data flow, that came from a former coworker, he said it's in the 802 spec.

Download and upload are two different animals....upload speeds can be very slow.....you may also have rf noise or interference....

http://kb.linksys.com/Linksys/GetArticle.aspx?docid=266cc1c7b97c458fb04c2da21f985828_List_of_Common_Issues_with_Wireless_N_Routers.xml#c

It appears your onboard wireless communications are half-duplex.

This means the RF (Wireless) signal is either in transmit or receive operation status and cannot ever be transmitting and receiving at the same time which cuts your communication baud rate immediately by 50%.

It is like talking on a radio where you have to hold the microphone (MIC) transmit key/button down while talking then release the button to listen.

When you are directly connected (hardwired) to the internet or other device the communications are full-duplex which allows transmit and receive to occur at the maximum speed of the slowest device connected to.

How are your two computers communicating, ad-hoc or infrastructure? If infrastructre, what does the gateway traffic look like during a large data transfer? What OS are you running on the computers? If you are running the same OS, do you have a trusted network?

What wireless channel(s) are you using? What does your neighborhood channel structure look like?

Your typical b/g/n network is more than fast enough to defeat any USB transfer (USB 3.0 is still only good to 5 gbps). A typical g-wireless can deliver 50 gbps with a high bandwidth cable network). Consider streaming data sources when you look at speed vs. efficiency.

If you go for speed with a mixed-mode g/n and a proper network, your wireless speeds will approach your wired in-home network speeds.

Um... Huh? I dont know.

Windows XP Pro on both units with matching 54 mbs wifi cards.

No neighbors in wifi range and the systems are auto channel select.

THE NSA ARE ALWAYS IN RANGE!!!

idontgethis'it eigther -- 1-ce i printed something through wireless - had some nasty startup delay but was not too long to wait unless you printed as image (100-s of megabaits to send ... this was not "a real time evt.")

. . . i'm still an XP user - perhaps new windows has something "default security scheme" (that slows things down) -- the 54Mbit beacon might be too weak (severe causes) ((((4 (original) OP just a thought -- set up a personal web server or ftp server and try large file transfer))))

This is also out of my realm of knowledge, but when my computer (all by itself, and I am running 16 GB. of RAM) starts to slow down, it's usually a virus that is my problem. When that happens, I run a free software program, MALWARE BYTES, to get any malware deleted. Can't say that that's the problem, but is is a free try to eliminate anything from your computer(s).

Lots of good answers, but everybody, except one (who did not explain why), forgets the data transmission "overheads", that are extra data to "check" the real data.....its usually takes between 50 and 70 % of the theoretical speed, depending upon the block size and the transfer type.

If the block size is variable (many are not!!), then set it to the largest possible, that will gain a lot of extra speed, especially if it has been set to a very small value before.

Its difficult to be exact, but block sizes of 1MBytes will often allow SCSI interfaces (for example only) to start to hum,

Larger is better....the reason being that the overhead is about the same for a small or a large data block transfer, bigger blocks, fewer blocks, fewer/less overhead data.....

Some hardware device types (not WIFI), to maintain a higher mechanical speed actually fabricate data, some industry compatible tape drives for example........

Be aware that if you are running an ad-hoc network between two Windows machines you will be limited to 11Mbps. The Ad-hoc mode does not support 54Mbps even though the hardware may be capable of it. If you are connecting to a wireless access point with a DHCP server (usually in the router or switch) then you should be able to get 54Mbps.
However as others have said this is only a starting point, there is an overhead. Any interference in the band can seriously reduce networking speeds. Many other devices work in the 2.4GHz band including baby alarms, wireless bridges, Bluetooth, TV and video extenders. High level out of band interference may well break through into the WiFi receivers, this could come from microwave ovens, heating systems etc.

Both laptops are identical with windows XP Pro and 54 Mb/s wireless modems

Gygabit networks have been out for years, upgrade your network and adapters on your laptops. You can get tiny NICs/adapters that run off a USB port. You could upgrade your router and two laptops for a bit over $100.

If you connect to the internet with the lap tops you might want to concider upgrading to Win 7. I suspect a huge spike on 0 day malware targeting XP coming out in April. All those 0 day exploits will never get plugged.

One other note of caution, someone may be tapping into your wireless network. Homemade directional antennas using a tomato cans tap in at a few hundred yards and you can buy professional ones on ebay that can tap in from miles.

Do the laptops have ethernet jacks on them?

If so, use a "crossover" cable and create a wired network of just the two computers. No other hardware needed.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3044910&CatId=74

and

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/connect-two-computers-crossover-cable#1TC=windows-7