• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Info Windows Update automatic download limiter

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
4,109
682
126
Just found out why Windows Update felt so slow lately. MS has apparently implemented a 45/90% (background/foreground) limit to Update download speeds. There is an overide control under delivery optimisation->advanced settings.

Just a heads-up for those of us who didn't notice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikeymikec

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
14,637
4,774
136
Just found out why Windows Update felt so slow lately. MS has apparently implemented a 45/90% (background/foreground) limit to Update download speeds. There is an overide control under delivery optimisation->advanced settings.

Just a heads-up for those of us who didn't notice.
A couple of months ago I had a feature update on new computers taking about ten times longer than usual to download and install that I gave up and used the Update Assistant. It returned to normal after a week or so though.

The setting you mentioned though: On my spare PC, no limits have been set (and I've never seen that set of options before). I wonder how yours got set.
 

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
4,109
682
126
The setting you mentioned though: On my spare PC, no limits have been set (and I've never seen that set of options before). I wonder how yours got set.
From what I've seen so far, the limit appears to be the default if you don't set things manually. Tried on 5 systems so far, using the traffic monitor feature on my router to show actual download speeds.

This could have an enormous impact for people on slow connections, 45% of f.x. 10mbit isn't much when you're downloading a feature update. Or even the regular variety. MS could at least set a minimum allowed. Or do QoS with priority to browsing or video.

I wonder how this slipped through QA. Are we so used to fast internet connections that nobody cares?
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
14,637
4,774
136
I assume foreground means if you triggered a Windows update check yourself and background is the rest of the time?
 

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
4,109
682
126
I assume foreground means if you triggered a Windows update check yourself and background is the rest of the time?
I do not know what they mean by "foreground", because even if I trigger an update, download speed is still at 45% of the connections capacity. In this case ~21Mbit, which works out at about 9-10Mbit.

With that option set to 100%, it downloads at 21Mbit. My home connection is 350Mbit, so you don't notice it much there.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
51,337
6,573
126
Well, this might be a solution to Windows Update taking ALL of the bandwidth on lower-bandwidth (15Mbit/sec) connections for itself, interfering with streaming radio, mining software, YouTube, etc. (Which I have personally experienced.) IMHO, this is a much-needed addition.
 

mikeymikec

Lifer
May 19, 2011
14,637
4,774
136
Well, this might be a solution to Windows Update taking ALL of the bandwidth on lower-bandwidth (15Mbit/sec) connections for itself, interfering with streaming radio, mining software, YouTube, etc. (Which I have personally experienced.) IMHO, this is a much-needed addition.
I agree. I have a few customers on such slow Internet connections (e.g. 0.5 mbit/sec) that in order to use their computers, I've had customers using the 'metered connection' or 'pause updates' options until after they've finished using their computer, then to leave it running. Otherwise the computer is unusable on the Internet.
 
Last edited:

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
4,109
682
126
Well, this might be a solution to Windows Update taking ALL of the bandwidth on lower-bandwidth (15Mbit/sec) connections for itself, interfering with streaming radio, mining software, YouTube, etc. (Which I have personally experienced.) IMHO, this is a much-needed addition.
The idea is good, but Windows should be able to either ask for or detect connection speed before setting this limit. Perhaps ask if you want to download updates at full speed. At least detecting when there is user activity, and prioritise that. Bulk download should always be the absolutely lowest possible priority.

This isn't a problem if you leave your PC running 24/7, it'll eventually download. But I don't know many people who leave their laptops running overnight. Then there is the problem of battery power. Windows deciding to download and install a major update can already wreck battery life, there is no reason to string out the download itself further then necessary. What happened to hurry up, and get back to idle? (This is why you should always set "pause updates" on a laptop when you need battery, but most people are unable to do simple things like this)

Just curious, what sort of router are you using? I can't say I've had trouble in the last 10 years with downloading interfering with browsing, streaming or anything else while downloading. Even back when using a slow-as-molasses Asus RT-N12D1 on a 6/1Mbit ADSL connection.

I agree. I have a few customers on such slow Internet connections (e.g. 0.5 mbit/sec) that in order to use their computers, I've had customers using the 'metered connection' or 'pause updates' options until after they've finished using their computer, then to leave it running. Otherwise the computer is unusable on the Internet.
On such slow connections, that is really the only option. Adding an adblocker is also helpful, if you haven't already. Cuts down on unnecessary downloads.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY