@soupy wrote:
Just installed a new TG4482A modem, and my downstream values seem to be in spec, but I get no values at all for upstream. Any thoughts? Thanks.
Wow! I have no idea, but congratulations! 🏅 I believe that you are the first person here to report getting an Arris/CommScope XB7 gateway. Others have the Technicolor version of the XB7.
This modem is based on a MaxLinear chipset, which none of us have any practical working experience with, so it's not surprising that it may have some noticeable functional differences.
@soupy the XB7 should be using the Intel Puma 7 chipset, not the Puma 6 chipset. The Puma 7 chipset is nothing like the Puma 6 chipset and does not suffer from the latency issues found in that chipset.
As for the Approved Modem list web site, its garbage, to put it politely. Its written to appear as if the author knows what he's talking about, but its complete garbage. It also plagiarizes off of other peoples work without accreditation. For example, while all of the ruckus was going on about the Puma 6 modem, here's the initial list that I put together at the end of 2016 from a wide variety of public sources:
https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r31134484-
There is also the Bad Modem's site which was developed by xymox1, which uses that data and adds other modems as well even though I disagree with some of those additions. xymox1 was in the thick of the Puma 6 debacle, as were others in that DSLReports thread. The approved modems list plagiarizes off of those lists and all of the work that was done to identify the problem, and adds other modems without any shred of evidence (test results) that shows that similar problems exist in those modems.
So, ......... please disregard that site.
And for what it's worth, I'm not defending Intel.
@Datalink wrote:
@soupy the XB7 should be using the Intel Puma 7 chipset, not the Puma 6 chipset. The Puma 7 chipset is nothing like the Puma 6 chipset and does not suffer from the latency issues found in that chipset.
I think you are right about this.
When I scanned through the internal photos of the TG4482A in the FCC certification documents, when nothing about this gateway was documented on any of the "modem info" sites, I saw the MxL278 cable tuner and MxL236 upstream amplifier chips... but I did not recognize the SoC that was being used.
MaxLinear, however, does specifically list the MxL278 in its Puma7 Dev Kit flyer, which looks a lot like the XB7. (Probably still the same as the Intel-branded version.)
@soupy I have used the (Puma 7-based) Arris XB6 gateway and did not experience any significant performance issues. I have also personally used a few different Puma 6-based gateways over the years, and the Puma 7 does not suffer from the Puma 6's design flaws.
Yup, MaxLinear cable tuners are used by the Puma chipset modems. Broadcom uses its own SoC and a completely different front end tuner which I believe is actually embedded in the SoC. Different hardware and a much different design philosophy.
Looking at both the Arris and Technicolor variants of the XB7 at the component level, I don't think that either is clearly better than the other. Based on my actual experience with both variants of the XB6, all I can say is that each have their pros and cons and their own unique quirks, and I would expect the same with the XB7.
If I ever had the opportunity to pick one or the other for my own personal use, I honestly don't know which one I would choose.
@soupy wrote:
Huh, did not know that. There's some other weirdness as well; they didn't bother to remove the battery meter despite the fact that there's no battery in it.
FYI, this is what the XB6's battery looks like: https://secure.xfinity.com/anon.comcastonline2/support/help/faqs/battery/New/XB6_CGM4140COM.pdf
Comcast targets this (high-priced) option at Xfinity Voice customers to keep their phone service up and running during a power outage. Rogers does not offer it.
-
4640 views
-
0 Likes
-
-
