Use TeamViewer 12 to Be Smarter, Better, Faster, and Stronger

Shafi
Shafi Posts: 3 ✭✭
edited May 2023 in General questions

Faster File Transer : Tested by installing the TeamViewer 12 beta version, but could not see much difference in file transfer speed compare the earlier version.

Comments

  • atmarx
    atmarx Posts: 4 ✭✭

    I agree -- for all the marketing TV does in terms of 'increased speed' with each new version, things still seem to work the same from TV 8 to present.  They wouldn't just be saying that to justify the cost of the upgrade, right? :smileytongue:

  • Katharina
    Katharina Posts: 135 [Former Staff]

    Dear Shafi, dear atmarx, 

    First of all, thanks for your posts and for testing TeamViewer 12!

    Any feedback on our new version is of course always welcome and highly appreciated.

    The performance of our new TeamViewer versions is always tested under ideal conditions, e.g. from server to server with 2x 1Gbit/s LAN or to a device with 1900Mbit/s WiFi.

    The speed you experience when using TeamViewer may, however, be limited by your hardware, for example if you use an HDD:

    hdd_capture.PNG

    Your bandwidth will also play a significant role here (even a 1Gbit/s LAN connection may only give you 125Mbits/s).

    As much as we'd like to, we cannot influcence your general internet connection speed ;)

    If you get a chance to trial TeamViewer 12 under different circumstances, don't hesitate to let us know how it went!

    And don't forget: TeamViewer 12 has a lot more to offer than improved overall performance - have fun discovering all the new features we implemented :)

    Katharina

  • atmarx
    atmarx Posts: 4 ✭✭

    I'm sure you aren't lying about the performance improvements under ideal conditions.  All I meant is that for the remote support work I do, I haven't seen any change in 4-5 versions.  Not that is was ever bad to start with -- it's worked like a champ for the 5+ years I've been using it.

  • ZGralewski
    ZGralewski Posts: 12 ✭✭

    Well, for example first thing i see when connecting to TV8 host is inferior performance to TV11 and lack of some very useful features. Drag and drop from/to remote pc is great, just like shared clipboard. Many features are polished more and more every version.

    Stability is also much better. I had some problems with service crashing on remote pc or my client suddenly crashing during the session. I don't have these problems any more.

  • Shafi
    Shafi Posts: 3 ✭✭

    Thanks Atmarx, Katharina for your reply,

    I was not tested just the TeamViewer alone, even I am and my team is using and was using couple of other competitor products also, compare to all other products we are very happy with TeamViewer performance, not only file transfer other lot more features.  I would like to thank all TeamViewer members to their effort to bring such a beautiful, easy to use and more end user productive product.

    Katharina - as mentioned by you, I agree... product is tested under ideal conditions.  As heading a support team I have to look into how my support team and their productivity while performing remote systems and what I can do to these team to get the best...when talking about remote systems I cannot expect the ideal conditions...most of time network issue, or hardware issue or other issues which will impact the performance of remote tool.  As a overall, TeamViewer is one of the best product I have come across which performance wise and cost wise.

    Thanks all for their comments

  • admars
    admars Posts: 1 ✭

    I've found that dragging and dropping files from my pc to a remote machine doesn't seem to work for the few sites I've tried today, I thinkI could do it on those sites before. using the file transfer menu method worked though.

     

    edit: actually this is v12 not beta

  • guille56
    guille56 Posts: 4 ✭✭

    I just upgraded two machines to V12 because I need to transfer some large files (approx 600MB) a bit quicker.  With earlier versions such transfers were taking about 1.5 hours with a stated transfer rate of 120kB/s.

    With V12 the results are exactly the SAME.  Zero improvement.  What's going on?

    I have speed tested the remote computer's network at 18Mb/s symmetric.  My local network speeds are 30Mb/s download, 1.8Mb/s upload.  I am moving files from remote to local.  Obviously my local upload speed is not so flash, but that is not in the direction of the file transfers.  But is this limiting my overall result?

    Guille

  • guille56
    guille56 Posts: 4 ✭✭

    Thanks for your comments mLipok.

    In regards to my CPU configurations, they are:

    Remote system Intel Core 2 Due T9400 @ 2.53GHz / 4GB / Network 18Mb/s DOWN & UP Ping 4ms (CPU 10% during TV file transfer, N/w send @ 1.1Mb/s to Local system 1 & 2)

    Local system 1 VMware WinXP VM under Win 8.1 host Intel Core i7-4790 @ 3.6GHz / 16GB / Network 30Mb/s DOWN, 1.8Mb/s UP / TV transfer rate 120kB/s
    Local system 2 Win 10 Intel Core i7-6600U @ 2.6GHz / 16GB / Network 30Mb/s DOWN, 1.8Mb/s UP / TV transfer rate 120kB/s

    Local system 2A Win 10 Intel Core i7-6600U @ 2.6GHz / 16GB / Network 95Mb/s DOWN, 28Mb/s UP Ping 28ms / TV transfer rate 2.2MB/s

    The difference between Local system 2 and 2A is that 2A is running on a 4G (LTE) connection with clearly higher Down and Up speeds.  As a result the TV transfer is now up to 2.2MB/s or more than 18 times faster than before using my normal local network ISP!

    So it seems that the limiting factor has been my normal local network even though the transfer is in-bound where the speed rating is 30Mb/s.

    As I've already upgraded to TV12, unfortunately I can't really give any comparison to pre-V12.

    regards, Guille

  • mLipok
    mLipok Posts: 781 ⭐Star⭐
    @guille56 wrote:

    Local system 2@ Win 10 Intel Core i7-6600U @ 2.6GHz / 16GB / Network 30Mb/s DOWN, 1.8Mb/s UP / TV transfer rate 120kB/s
    Local system 2A@ Win 10 Intel Core i7-6600U @ 2.6GHz / 16GB / Network 95Mb/s DOWN, 28Mb/s UP Ping 28ms / TV transfer rate 2.2MB/s
    ......
    So it seems that the limiting factor has been my normal local network even though the transfer is in-bound where the speed rating is 30Mb/s.

    Did you try to
    download from Remote to Local
    or
    Upload from Local to Remote
    ?

    in case LS2:
    This is normal that you have about 120 kBytes/s upolading speed as you have only 1,8Mbit/s of UPLOAD in your ISP connection.

    in case LS2A:
    This is normal that you have about 2,2 MBytes/s upolading speed as you have 28Mbit/s of UPLOAD  in your ISP connection.

     

    Try to make the same test with Downloading the same file from Remote to Local.

    I'm curious about your answer.


    Regards,
    mLipok

    Regards,
    mLipok , AutoIt MVP
  • guille56
    guille56 Posts: 4 ✭✭

    re @mLipok

    To clarify, all of my transfers in this case are referring to Remote to Local. Other than that I agree with your interpretation of my LS2 vs LS2A.

    However, as you suggested, I tested a Local to Remote transfer of the same file (from LS1) and the results were virtually identical.  The TV average transfer rate was 120kB/s.

    Intuitively I had expected that the net bit-rate capacities available would result in a better transfer rate in that direction than Local to Remote.  But is seems that in either direction the worst-case available bit rate limits the achievable speed.  I am not very happy about this.

    regards, Guille

  • Didi
    Didi Posts: 3 ✭✭

    I'm trying to transfer file between 2 modern Win 10 computers ( less than 1 year old, one with an Intel quad core and the other with an intel dual core chip), with proven SMB/CIFS high speed performance in their respective LANs: a speed that can actually fully saturate their NICs 1Gbps bandwidth.
    Internet connections are as follows:

    computer in home 1: dual core: connected through a gigabit ethernet LAN NIC to a VDSL2 WAN connection (100mbps down/20 mbps up)

    computer in home 2: quad core: connected through a gigabit ethernet LAN NIC to a fiber connection (1gbps down/200mbps up).

    Trying to transfer from the home 2 pc (200mbps upload speed) to pc in home 1 (100mbps download speed), all I get in a VPN Windows explorer file copy session is an average download speed (according to infos displayed on the Windows explorer file transfer window) of 355KB/sec (2,77Mbps, 0.346MB/sec), against a theoretical top WAN tranfer speed of 100Mbps (12,5MB/sec). That's 1/36th of the maximum attainable WAN transfer speed. Incidentally, I tried VPN transfers between PCs connected on the same gigabit wired LA,N , and the speed achieved was roughly the same 355KB/sec speed I got in the WAN VPN transfer setup described above, which made me think that the TV VPN is kind of relayed.

    Anyway, since I read that TV12 should allow up to 200MB/sec transfer speed (if computers and network allow it, of course), there surely must be something wrong either with my workflow or with TV12. Notice that, using Ookla speed test, I confirmed that all the WAN connections can transfer data at nearly their theoretical speeds.

Trustpilot

Categories

This Week's Leaders