Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Is The V92 Better Than The V90?????????




  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Is The V92 Better Than The V90?????????

    I Have Tryed Both And Have Not Found And Better.
    Epox 8K3A+
    XP 2100+
    256 Kingmax DDR 400
    Leadtek GF3 Ti500
    SB Live 5.1
    2 X 60gig Seagate 7200
    2 X 40gig Seagate 7200(raid)
    Pioneer DVD-ROM 16X
    Sony 24\10\40

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Yes, V92 is better than V90.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New England Highlands, Australia
    Posts
    21,907

    Default

    V92 is the latest standard which has a few benefits over V90. :smokin:

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    381

    Default

    But, not alot of provider's use v.92 yet. So unless your ISP does, you will be using v.90 and seeing no speed increase. Most small ISP's will use v.92 first. The reason being, larger ISP's have quite a bit more modems to flash or replace. It's a larger process.

    Later

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    2,329

    Default

    Yes, v.92 is better in theory over v.90. But like FA-MAS correctly stated, there is extremely limited support for it currently.

    My AOpen FM56-PM modem has a Conexant HCF chipset, and is v.92 compatible, but no Australian ISP that I know of offers v.92 support yet. I am with Australia's second largest ISP (OptusNet) and the only thing they have done recently is remove K56Flex support from their modem banks. Surprise, surprise - my modem log says "CONNECT 49333 - PROTOCOL V.90"

    FA-MAS, do you know if v.92 is backward compatible with v.90? For instance, if an ISP implements v.92, will their modem racks have to support dual protocols? Because there are a lot of v.90 only modems around, and it would piss a lot of users off if they could only connect at 33,600bps after their ISP performed a v.92 upgrade.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    4,723

    Default

    I believe that v.92 is backwards compatible as the primary advantages of v.92 are in connection time (time it takes to dial and make the initial connection) and upload speed.

    So theoretically it wouldn't be much different than using a 33.6 modem with a v.90 ISP. It would work, just unable to take advantage of the full features of the connection.

    Or I could be wrong:?:
    The reason a diamond shines so brightly is because it has many facets which reflect light.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Albinus
    FA-MAS, do you know if v.92 is backward compatible with v.90? For instance, if an ISP implements v.92, will their modem racks have to support dual protocols?
    I would say the modems that support v.92 are backwards compatible in a way. Being that if it cannot establish a connection @ v.92 the modems "know" to go onto the next protocol. In this case v.90, and it could go to v.34 and lower. Also, there's gonna be no way that v.90 is gonna be made unavailable. They would leave that and just add v.92. Where I work most of our modem racks do support multiple protocols. v.34, X2, K56, V.90, ISDN1 and ISDN2.

    That would be really messed up if they removed v.90 and everyone that had a v.90 modem was forced to upgrade or connect @ v.34.

    Albinus and Mr. C, you're both right with the 33.6 analogy.

    Later.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •