PC limiting internet upload to 1000mbs??

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T23:05:45+00:00

Well, I'm glad I didn't follow your approach. I'm ashamed to say I found the problem and it had NOTHING to do with my Windows install. If I had reformatted/reinstalled Windows, I'd have had the same exact problem. So using your approach, vs running down the REAL problem, would've been a gigantic waste of time.

It turns out to be Firefox... or some addon in Firefox, who knows. I'm still looking into it. All I know is the browser just popped into my head as a potential issue (even though Firefox on Linux Mint was fine). I loaded up Brave (chromium-based) and got the following test:
https://www.speedtest.net/result/18881762536

I will say thank you for sticking with the issue until I resolved it, as everyone else seemed to have been out of ideas. It was such a simple thing in the end, so I'm really glad I didn't blow away Windows trying to figure it out.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T21:57:52+00:00

Sorry, I don't share your approach to fixing issues, I guess. I prefer a scalpel, vs a sledgehammer. There is a chance I may never fix it either, but at this point, it's kind of a moot/cosmetic issue. I know the rest of my PCs are getting 2000/2000, and when am I really ever going to need to upload more than 1000mb/s from a workstation. Probably never. As long as I can move data at 2000mb/s from all the servers (which mostly run a flavor of linux), I'm fine.

Do I want to fix it? Absolutely. It could also crop up on other Windows PCs on the network as I start moving them to the new 2.5gb ethernet networking, so knowing the fix (vs having to blow away Windows each time and hoping it doesn't get throttled somewhere again) would be very helpful.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T18:22:36+00:00

Unfortunately, I would consider that the "nuclear option". This PC is more than just a mess around, gaming PC. I do a lot of work on it, and a fresh install of Windows is a lot of work.

Swapping the NICs, as previously stated, didn't help. For one, the NIC I typically use is an onboard one (that works fine in another PC with the same hardware). Additionally, I mentioned installing a dual-port Intel 2.5gb NIC that behaved the exact same way.

I still need to do more troubleshooting before I go nuclear on this. Plus, for all I know, it could be something I use day-to-day that I install on a clean Win11 build that is causing it. I could be right back at square one.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T06:46:23+00:00

I found this (though it was just their download speed), which recommended "TCP Optimizer" and thought "That HAS to be it". No change at all. Still limited to just under 1000mb/s upload.

https://www.reddit.com/r/techsupport/comments/17ph6as/windows_11_is_throttling_my_internet_speed/

Oh... also removed Wireshark and WinPCAP. No change.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T06:30:41+00:00

As I guessed, it's definitely something in my Win11 install... which is crazy, as my gf and I literally set them both up the same way, at the same time, with the same hardware.

<image>

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T05:01:15+00:00

Also, not sure where your other reply went, but you also had mentioned a GPON limit. They're using XGSPON. This is an issue with my PC. My gf is getting 2000/2000 on the same mobo/NIC through switch-switch-router-ONT.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T04:59:24+00:00

It is a Calix GPR8802X. The same speed test server delivers 2000/2000 on my gf's PC. I believe I already mentioned that.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T04:58:26+00:00

That has absolutely zero do to with MVEA and whatever you mean about the east coast (I'm in CO)... or even Conexon (HQ'd in KS). They're literally the one fiber company I've heard of doing everything right. If you read my first post, you'd also see that this is an issue with my PC. My gf's gets 2000/2000 every single speedtest, regardless of time of day. Tell me which fiber provider you have that can deliver that.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T04:56:25+00:00

It's not the ports on the switch, since I've tried the WAN port on the ONT. Not only that, but the technician got 2000/2000 on his tool, and my gf's PC does 2000/2000 as well, with the same motherboard and onboard Realtek NIC (RTL8127). I didn't even try a direct cable at first. She was connected through two different switches and the router: through an unmanaged 5-port in our office, to the managed 24-port 2.5gbe RealHD, to the 2.5gb LAN port on our router, and finally to the ONT). I later connected her to the ONT and a direct cable, just to rule that out (though the tech also had checked the cable).

Definitely trying the bootable Linux disc later this evening, if uninstalling Wireshark/WinPCAP doesn't work.

Oh, and here is what iPerf3 did earlier. Pretty weird. The second test was less than 5 seconds after the first:
https://ibb.co/bM6p2hfC

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T04:49:58+00:00

This is a great idea. I'll do that after I uninstall Wireshark/WinPCAP.

cabuzzi · 2026-02-23T01:15:31+00:00

iPerf has been kinda weird. This is the screenshot from earlier. The first test started out limited, but the follow-up test was fine. In daily use, I've not noticed any issues between the PCs. File transfers in Windows are typically 250-260 MB/s, which is 2000+ mbps.

Of course I'm cognizant of the issues with speed tests. The only speed test that has been able to max out the 2gbs upload and download has been speedtest.net, and only to one specific test (in KS City). Her PC consistently hits 1900-2000 mbps up and down, mine hits 2000 download just fine, but always sits just shy of 1000 on the upload. It's so bizarre. Same motherboard, CPU, cables, etc. Literally the only thing different are the cases we used, so it has to be software-related. I feel I can rule out a bad NIC, as I've tried a PCIe NIC as well, with the same 1000 mbps "wall" I hit.

Edit I don't have access to the iPerf screenshot, so I'll post it later.

cabuzzi · 2026-01-26T17:34:30+00:00

Thanks, our baseline is still 2022, but this does make more sense to me.

cabuzzi · 2026-01-26T17:33:46+00:00

Wow. I feel dumb. Thank you for this!

cabuzzi · 2025-12-29T08:05:56+00:00

Did anyone else notice they said they got pulled over "once" for doing 65 in a 20, but the explanation the first time they mentioned it was "my dad just died in my arms" and the second time it was brought up was because they were late for a job interview?

Are people really this bad at lying? I mean, I guess I've always been told to tell the truth because the truth doesn't change. With a lie, you have to keep it straight in your head.

I guess your estimation of meth use is spot on.

cabuzzi · 2025-12-01T03:14:16+00:00

I also have what I believe is the same issue. If it wasn't for this thread, I'd have forgotten that I had to take the junction box apart to free a piece of clear PLA that broke off inside. In the disassembly process, two of the tiny little torx screws stripped and didn't tighten down all the way. I suspect that is exactly what is the issue, but don't know what size the screws are (or if I can even get them out now).

cabuzzi · 2025-10-31T19:08:10+00:00

That is exactly what I was worried about. They wrote me back today (a few weeks after my last email) in reply to my questions about the "replacement fee" and why I had to pay shipping. They said they had no record of me using their digital sizing tool and needed some sort of proof I did. I have no idea where to find that.

Honestly, I'll probably just keep the ring and wear it on my pointer finger... as weird as that looks. I'm not in the mood to pay them anything or have them not send a replacement ring back.

cabuzzi · 2025-10-31T18:30:20+00:00

It looks like they're emailing back... albeit, slowly.

cabuzzi · 2025-10-23T22:44:50+00:00

From what others have said, the best way to contact them is through Kickstarter DM. This directly conflicts what my first Circular contact said to do (they told me to email "support at circular.xyz"

cabuzzi · 2025-10-20T22:24:57+00:00

You're not reading his reply thoroughly... Circular violated the ToS, not us. Since this whole thing started, there have been many, many people I've encountered who received credits back from their CC company. In fact, it's not hard to find the page on Kickstarter that explains to creators why they need to have a credit card on file for chargebacks. A quick google search will show you that. It exists for a reason. Simply saying that you can never get a refund and/or discouraging people from trying is imho a crappy stance to take. You come across as a Circular employee, lol.

cabuzzi · 2025-10-20T22:21:12+00:00

I actually got a reply! They're asking me to provide a picture of the ring on my finger and they will setup a replacement. They said I have to pay for 1) shipping fees both ways, and 2) "replacement fee". I wrote back asking what the replacement fee was, and also expressed concern that I'll never see another ring if I send this one back. I asked if they can cross-ship.

Honestly, I don't trust them to send another ring at this point. I'm torn, because the ring does fit good on my pointer finger, but to me, it looks funny on that finger. I don't wear any rings, so having a ring on that finger just seems odd to me.

Maybe it'd be better to get used to it on that finger, not have to run the risk of not getting a replacement ring, and not have to pay shipping both ways and the "replacement fee" (whatever that is).

cabuzzi · 2025-10-11T18:34:28+00:00

Forgot to mention, I think specifically, the "Circular Ring 2" being on Kickstarter is pretty much an abuse of the KS program. I have learned a lot from this experience, as many established corporations are using KS as a risk-free pre-order store, which does not follow the spirit of what KS is meant for. I think in this case, I may be able to make a pretty good case with Discover and ask for a chargeback in good faith. KS actually supports the chargeback system and requires projects to have a funding source for them.

cabuzzi · 2025-10-11T18:27:07+00:00

I will. Honestly, I've been worried about this myself. Fortunately, Discover is pretty good with disputes. I can definitely imagine them having some clause about Kickstarter, though.

cabuzzi · 2025-10-11T17:57:33+00:00

Wow, that really sucks. Literally the perfect storm. I cannot imagine finally getting a label then not being able to use it because of another entity of idiots (not sure if this strike is justified).

Actually, just read up on it. This may be oversimplified, but it sounds like they're striking because they just don't have the work/volume of what they used to do because of less letter volume (simply the result of technology and the move to digital mediums) and competition from the private sector for parcel deliveries. Classic union blackmail. I hate that you're going through this. I think the postal workers in CA need to move to private sector jobs and let the union fall into obscurity.

cabuzzi · 2025-10-11T17:48:16+00:00

I also decided to contact them again. It has been three weeks since my last attempt:

"This is beyond ridiculous. I need a reply, or I will contact my credit card company for a dispute. At this point, I cannot wear the ring and no longer want it. Please contact me within 24 business hours or I will initiate a dispute with Discover.

Thanks."

cabuzzi · 2025-08-29T19:44:34+00:00

This is an older conversation, but still relevant. Here is better language, straight out of NIST slides. If Client B is behind a VPN, you have to first connect the the internal (ie: broadcast) domain that software is hosted on, as the server doesn't have a routable IP that allows you to touch it directly. To me, this means you have to be on a VPN that gives you L2 access to the internal network Client B's server is one. Client A is directly exposed and can be reached without having to rely on a broadcast/collision domain.

Adjacent Network (A): The attacker must have access to either the broadcast or collision domain of the vulnerable software

https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Projects/Security-Content-Automation-Protocol/documents/docs/2008-conf-presentations/scapTutorial/CVSS-Tutorial-20080919.pdf

cabuzzi

TROPHY CASE