What's the BEST 56k v.90 modem for $50-$100?
- Thread starter Livin4Real
- Start date
Creative ModemBlaster ISA,I know nobody likes ISA but I had 1 and took it back and regret it now because with that I never connected at less than 53k and now I have a Diamond Supramax PCI that connects at 50k steadily. They are both good modems for the $50.00 pricetag.
Modemblaster ISA is not winmodem, but the Supramax is. The best two hardware modems I have come across are the US Robotics external line and the Diamond Supra Express. Express price just dropped 20 bucks by manufacturer 
Any idea if any of the new USB modems could be HSP based? I have a winmodem now.. and I'm really tired of it. I can't tell by reading the specifications the companies offer... I know other external modems can't be HSP based (winmodem), but since USB's bandwidth is so large... I could see them implenting USB winmodems.
Thanks
Thanks
Get a Diamond SupraExpress (not winmodem, SupraMax) ISA, they constantly have those for auction at their site, and I got my retail box SupraExpress for only $30 shipped.
Livin4Real,
If you need a modem under $100.00, I would go 3com. I feel, and everyone I talk to feel that 3com USRs are like the Gods in modems. You can get a 3COM U.S. ROBOTICS 56K V90 INT FAX/MODEM PCI for $80.00 from buy.com. I am sure that you can find them cheaper than that. Also, external modems work well. You are SO right staying away from the WIN/HSP/HCF/HSF modems, I get so many calls from people with connection problems and Win modems. Good Luck.
If you need a modem under $100.00, I would go 3com. I feel, and everyone I talk to feel that 3com USRs are like the Gods in modems. You can get a 3COM U.S. ROBOTICS 56K V90 INT FAX/MODEM PCI for $80.00 from buy.com. I am sure that you can find them cheaper than that. Also, external modems work well. You are SO right staying away from the WIN/HSP/HCF/HSF modems, I get so many calls from people with connection problems and Win modems. Good Luck.
I was happy with the 3COM/U.S. Robotics ISA Faxmodem # 5681.
Most PCI modems are software modems (Winmodem is a trade name of 3COM - the generic term is software modem or softmodem - you want a hardware modem). If the box says you need Windows, it's a software modem, I believe.
One of the best modems is the 3COM/U.S. Robotics V Everything external modem, but it is expensive & overkill. Personally I like the modem inside the box.
You really ought to put your money into xDSL or cable.
Most PCI modems are software modems (Winmodem is a trade name of 3COM - the generic term is software modem or softmodem - you want a hardware modem). If the box says you need Windows, it's a software modem, I believe.
One of the best modems is the 3COM/U.S. Robotics V Everything external modem, but it is expensive & overkill. Personally I like the modem inside the box.
You really ought to put your money into xDSL or cable.
I have a Modem Blaster External and like it.
Serial cable connections are cool, leaves more room in the case for other junk.
Jeremy
Serial cable connections are cool, leaves more room in the case for other junk.
Jeremy
I've been very, very happy with my $75 external Creative Labs Modem Blaster 56K. I consistently connect at 53,333, even from the middle of BFE.
Viper GTS
Viper GTS
I have a US Robotics ISA modem. It's a great modem , however , one time , because of a thunderstorm, it got fried.
3com had great service, and fixed it for me, no questions asked...(didn't mention the thunderstorm
While it was being fixed, I bought a Creative ISA "modem Blaster"....been mentioned a few times above.
I agree, it is a good modem, especially for the price. I really didn't see a difference between it and my US Robotics.
So, I would consider the US Robotics if you have extra to spend, or if you're on a budget, the "Modem Blaster" was a great alternative.
I really enjoy my Actiontec Call Waiting Modem..... works with any operating system... hardware based and good price..bout $60
I love my USR Internet Gaming Modem. It's an excellent hardware PCI modem. The gaming mode really does make a difference in the pings. I got mine for ~$60 during that VA dollar fiasco
I got a Creative Modem Blaster v.90 56k (ISA) for around $35. I have never connected lower than 44k, and I cannot get any higher because of my phone lines.
I'd recommend 3com's V.90 external faxmodem. About $106 at Onvia with free shipping. 3com's modems are usually at or near the top of all the bandwidth/linetests. Good stuff if a bit pricey.
Livin4Real,
I know you specifically said HARDWARE modems, but I'm wondering why. If it's because you've heard bad things about winmodems and their ping times, CPU utilization, throughput, or reliability, you should reconsider.
There are a number of reasons to avoid higher priced "hard modems," especially those made by 3Com/USR, in favor of a common PCI winmodem.
1) Winmodems are dirt cheap.
A quick comparison of average street prices shows that while a good Lucent LT or Rockwell/Conexant HCF winmodem (the AOpen FM56-PM is a nice example) can easily be found for less than $20 US, the cheapest hardware modem costs twice as much: $39 plus shipping and handling. And for a 3Com part, you'll pay even more. By contrast, you can sometimes find winmodems for $5 after rebates at electronics retailers, or even for free with special promotions.
Everything else we put in our computers is subject to a price/performance ratio. In other words, if the performance of a more expensive part does not scale linearly with its price, we don't buy it. (RDRAM, anyone?) The same reasoning must be applied to hardware modems. They certainly don't perform twice as well as winmodems of half the price, and as we'll see, they often don't perform any better at all.
2) Ping times and throughput are not an issue.
Modern Winmodems such as those based on the Lucent LT chipset will display ping times below 100ms and connect speeds around 48000, which is more than adequate for any Internet activity, including online gaming. Any recent softmodem -- especially the HCF variety, where the hardware handles a bit more of the duty -- should exhibit similar performance. Below, a cut and paste job from a generic Lucent LT v.90 PCI, which sells for as low as $17:
C:\WINDOWS>ping -n 10 router.infoserve.net
Pinging router.infoserve.net [199.175.157.4] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=101ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Ping statistics for 199.175.157.4:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 90ms, Maximum = 105ms, Average = 98ms
You may object that pinging an ISP would always yield good results. Actually, it's the only fair way to compare latency between modems. Pinging your ISP reduces the number of variables down to three: your modem's performance, the quality of your phone lines, and the nature of your ISP's modem pool. If we were to compare modems by pinging a fixed point on the Internet, we would quickly introduce several more uncontrolled variables: Internet traffic, server load, number of hops, etc.
Even if you ping your own ISP with an expensive hardware modem, I think you'll find it extremely difficult to match these numbers.
Not bad for $17, eh?
3) CPU utilization is minimal.
One of the main arguments against winmodems has been that they consume CPU cycles. Fortunately, manufacturers have always made sure to set minimum CPU guidelines so that the effect is not noticeable. If CPU usage was ever a problem, it certainly isn't today.
CPU power has increased many, many times faster than the technology behind softmodems. For instance, the CPU usage of a typical winmodem hovers below 5% on a Celeron 333. This is in the range of the power required by Windows to spin an hourglass cursor; it's certainly not something that will eat into your game play significantly. And now we have people running around with 1 GHz processors. Any drop in frame rate will barely be measurable, let alone visible.
4) They are reliable.
In my consulting business, I've sold dozens of PC's equipped with the cheapest Winmodems I could find. Only one has ever come back with a genuine hardware defect.
Many ISP support techs have a grudge against winmodems because they feel these types of modems are responsible for an innordinate number of support calls. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, almost all new computers sold today use winmodems; a person with a new computer and a modem problem will likely be using a winmodem, simply because they are more prevalent. Second, winmodems actually require the drivers they ship with. A new PC user who can't tell the difference between his RAM and his hard drive space will feel his eyes glaze over when confronted with a manual telling him how to install softmodem drivers. Instinct tells him to phone his "Internet guys" and get them to help.
In truth, winmodems are no more apt to fail than hardware modems, and probably less so, because they have fewer electronic components.
5) Driver/OS support is excellent.
The Lucent LT, for example, supports Windows 2000, Windows 9x, Linux (see http://www.linmodems.org under the Vendor section), and even the obscure BeOS. Lucent also seems comitted to releasing a new driver every few months, which means your modem's performance will always be as high as possible.
6) Affordable broadband Internet technology puts any analogue modem to shame.
Anyone using the Internet for more than email and chat sees the need for widely available broadband Internet access to replace our antiquated 56k connections. Trying to enjoy streaming audio or video over a modem connection is like trying to sip a thick milkshake through a thin straw. With the availability and affordability of high speed Internet access growing at a steady rate, it would be foolish to invest more than the minimum amount in modem technology that is already obsolete.
So when you consider the facts, there are very few valid reasons to avoid winmodems.
Modus
I know you specifically said HARDWARE modems, but I'm wondering why. If it's because you've heard bad things about winmodems and their ping times, CPU utilization, throughput, or reliability, you should reconsider.
There are a number of reasons to avoid higher priced "hard modems," especially those made by 3Com/USR, in favor of a common PCI winmodem.
1) Winmodems are dirt cheap.
A quick comparison of average street prices shows that while a good Lucent LT or Rockwell/Conexant HCF winmodem (the AOpen FM56-PM is a nice example) can easily be found for less than $20 US, the cheapest hardware modem costs twice as much: $39 plus shipping and handling. And for a 3Com part, you'll pay even more. By contrast, you can sometimes find winmodems for $5 after rebates at electronics retailers, or even for free with special promotions.
Everything else we put in our computers is subject to a price/performance ratio. In other words, if the performance of a more expensive part does not scale linearly with its price, we don't buy it. (RDRAM, anyone?) The same reasoning must be applied to hardware modems. They certainly don't perform twice as well as winmodems of half the price, and as we'll see, they often don't perform any better at all.
2) Ping times and throughput are not an issue.
Modern Winmodems such as those based on the Lucent LT chipset will display ping times below 100ms and connect speeds around 48000, which is more than adequate for any Internet activity, including online gaming. Any recent softmodem -- especially the HCF variety, where the hardware handles a bit more of the duty -- should exhibit similar performance. Below, a cut and paste job from a generic Lucent LT v.90 PCI, which sells for as low as $17:
C:\WINDOWS>ping -n 10 router.infoserve.net
Pinging router.infoserve.net [199.175.157.4] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=101ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=253
Reply from 199.175.157.4: bytes=32 time=105ms TTL=253
Ping statistics for 199.175.157.4:
Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 90ms, Maximum = 105ms, Average = 98ms
You may object that pinging an ISP would always yield good results. Actually, it's the only fair way to compare latency between modems. Pinging your ISP reduces the number of variables down to three: your modem's performance, the quality of your phone lines, and the nature of your ISP's modem pool. If we were to compare modems by pinging a fixed point on the Internet, we would quickly introduce several more uncontrolled variables: Internet traffic, server load, number of hops, etc.
Even if you ping your own ISP with an expensive hardware modem, I think you'll find it extremely difficult to match these numbers.
Not bad for $17, eh?
3) CPU utilization is minimal.
One of the main arguments against winmodems has been that they consume CPU cycles. Fortunately, manufacturers have always made sure to set minimum CPU guidelines so that the effect is not noticeable. If CPU usage was ever a problem, it certainly isn't today.
CPU power has increased many, many times faster than the technology behind softmodems. For instance, the CPU usage of a typical winmodem hovers below 5% on a Celeron 333. This is in the range of the power required by Windows to spin an hourglass cursor; it's certainly not something that will eat into your game play significantly. And now we have people running around with 1 GHz processors. Any drop in frame rate will barely be measurable, let alone visible.
4) They are reliable.
In my consulting business, I've sold dozens of PC's equipped with the cheapest Winmodems I could find. Only one has ever come back with a genuine hardware defect.
Many ISP support techs have a grudge against winmodems because they feel these types of modems are responsible for an innordinate number of support calls. There are a couple of reasons for this. First, almost all new computers sold today use winmodems; a person with a new computer and a modem problem will likely be using a winmodem, simply because they are more prevalent. Second, winmodems actually require the drivers they ship with. A new PC user who can't tell the difference between his RAM and his hard drive space will feel his eyes glaze over when confronted with a manual telling him how to install softmodem drivers. Instinct tells him to phone his "Internet guys" and get them to help.
In truth, winmodems are no more apt to fail than hardware modems, and probably less so, because they have fewer electronic components.
5) Driver/OS support is excellent.
The Lucent LT, for example, supports Windows 2000, Windows 9x, Linux (see http://www.linmodems.org under the Vendor section), and even the obscure BeOS. Lucent also seems comitted to releasing a new driver every few months, which means your modem's performance will always be as high as possible.
6) Affordable broadband Internet technology puts any analogue modem to shame.
Anyone using the Internet for more than email and chat sees the need for widely available broadband Internet access to replace our antiquated 56k connections. Trying to enjoy streaming audio or video over a modem connection is like trying to sip a thick milkshake through a thin straw. With the availability and affordability of high speed Internet access growing at a steady rate, it would be foolish to invest more than the minimum amount in modem technology that is already obsolete.
So when you consider the facts, there are very few valid reasons to avoid winmodems.
Modus
personal advise: USR Robotics Sportster 56K ISA.
Don't listen to people who say to go with winmodem, all those HCFs, PCTels use your CPU to do data modulation/demodulation and they hug your system like crazy. Winmodems are cheaper, but in this business you pretty much get what you pay for. Trust me, USR Sportster ISA and you wont' regret it.
Don't listen to people who say to go with winmodem, all those HCFs, PCTels use your CPU to do data modulation/demodulation and they hug your system like crazy. Winmodems are cheaper, but in this business you pretty much get what you pay for. Trust me, USR Sportster ISA and you wont' regret it.
Ditto what Thorin says above.
Zoom said months ago that they would be coming out with a hardware PCI modem but I haven't seen it yet.
Zoom said months ago that they would be coming out with a hardware PCI modem but I haven't seen it yet.
I just got a 3Com model 5687 ISA 56K modem, and it works great. It was kinda pricy though at $90.
ive got both the modem blaster isa 5601 and the pci 5630-4 and they rock for 56k modems 38.00 for one and 46.00 for the other rockwell chipsets
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter