Downloading videos files directly from camera via web interface (using other than IE) seems to be capped at *TEN* Mbps

A

alekk

Getting comfortable
Aug 13, 2018
297
447
Republic of Boulder
2025_10_18 UPDATE: This problem still exists with the new T54PRO-ZE ... using both @EMPIRETECANDY and Dahua firmware.

It's very easy to demonstrate. Login to the camera web interface with any of Chrome, Edge, Firefox in Windoze. First, pretty much everything works ... WITHOUT the plug-in ... good work Dahua.

Click the Snapshot button and you'll see the ~10 MBYTE PNG download in a second ... that's 100 Mbits/sec. And try uploading some firmware - 700 MBYTE's takes just over a minute - again, the full wire-speed of 100 Mbits/second is doable bi-directionality.

Now download a video recording from the SD card (Record->Search->Select a clip->Download) which results in a speed 10X slower - it's just barely faster than TEN Mbps. ... with a 457.9 MBYTE .dav taking about 350 seconds as timing with my phone.

That is 1.31 MBYTES/second - converting that to Mbit/seconds isn't quite a 8:1 (or 10:1) as there is a bit of overhead on the wire ... plus 1 MBYTE = 1,024 KBYTES = 1,085,764 BYTES. BTW, this is at least (slightly) faster than the 5442-S3 which clocks in at 0.91 MBYTES/sec. But both are WAAYYY below was 100Mbps should deliver.

Yes, you can "fix" this by using the plug-in ... but there's no reason in 2025 you should have to do that. And as outlined above, the camera/network/computer is clearly capable of running at 100Mbps.

I'm thinking if a Dahua engineer looked at the browser integration code, they would either find a bug (or maybe an intentional throttle?!?) as it would be nice to get this fixed since while the video files eventually download, it's a bit annoying (and unnecessary) to wait that long.

BTW, there definitely has been some work on this code base ... because on the 5442-S3, I would get "download blocked" if I did multiple snapshots ... and if I try to download multiple .dav files at the same time, that would not work. But I don't see either of those issues with the 54PRO-ZE ... and also the speeds are (slightly) faster ... so good progress! ;-)

FYI that the specs on the camera are 10/100 ... as both @TheOtherMike and @steve1225 point out, the interface is NOT Gbit. I'm NOT expected those speeds - just 100 Mbps rather than the pokey ~10Mbps.


2023_12_23 UPDATE: If you use Internet Explorer (with plug-in), you can download videos via the web interface at the full 100Mbps speed - note you can't go any faster because the NIC doesn't support GigE. Thanks @TheOtherMike for pointing that out on the data sheet (maybe for 2024, Dahua will go with 10/100/1000 interfaces) and thanks @wittaj for your (yet another) good suggestion to use Internet Explorer. This can be done by creating a desktop short-cut that has a Target of ""C:\Program Files (x86)\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe" ienotdead -embedding"

Note that there is still an issue that in newer browsers (which mostly work without the plug-in), the download speed appears to be capped at 10Mbps.
Hopefully a future firmware release will fix this.


I recently got a T54IR-ZE-S3 ... two of them actually ... nice camera's.

It seems that if you use web interface to download videos directly from the camera (Record->Search->Select a clip->Download), the speed is capped at TEN Mbps.

The download popup shows KBytes/sec which quickly hits ~1,000 and stays there for the duration of the several minute download.

However, if use SmartPSS, the download is at least 10X faster - measured by stopwatch since it doesn't show rate. So clearly the cable/camera is capable of much faster download speeds ... so why is the web interface so slow?

I see the same behavior with Edge and Chrome. Since 1 MBYTE/second is (basically) 10Mbps, makes me wonder if some limitation is being applied?
Or maybe I'm just doing something obviously wrong ... but this is very straightforward.

On the camera, I'm running the latest 11/27/2023 Firmware from @EMPIRETECANDY.
SmartPSS is version V2.003.0000004.0.R.201021
Plenty powerful Windoze PC with GigE connection.
All internal LAN connected to same switch on same subnet.

P.S. Is there any way to determine (syslog bootup message?) what the NIC has negotiated for 10/100/1000 MBps?
Update: Answer appears to be NO from the camera itself, but you can, of course, look at the switch if it is managed and/or has an LED showing the link speed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sybertiger
Please don't capitalize the B in megabits. Capital B means bytes ;)

So 10 MBps is (very roughly) 100 Mbps.

1703525108719.png


To determine the NIC speed negotiated, I assume the easiest way would be to use a managed PoE switch and look at the port status. Unmanaged switches also tend to have lights to indicate the negotiated speed, but they do not typically differentiate between 10 and 100 anymore. Maybe they would if you had a non-gigabit PoE switch.

Anyway, if it sends the clips 10x faster to SmartPSS, then this is not a matter of the network speed negotiation. Probably it is a matter of the web server being coded to use a much smaller buffer for data sending in this case. I assume the connection with SmartPSS uses very different code than the cam's regular web server.
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns, Sybertiger, JDreaming and 2 others
Ooops ... as a network guy, it's embarrassing that I made that typo ... and yes, MBps is (about) 10X Mbps.
Thanks for pointing out @bp2008 and fixed in in OP.

While it would not surprise me that there is a different code path (good point on buffer size), it's amazingly coincidental that the speed is 10Mbps (Bits, not Bytes!) which I saw from both camera's (using different cables) ... so I'm wondering if there is some sort of limit buried in the code.

Is this what other people see also?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sybertiger
bp2008 said:
To determine the NIC speed negotiated, I assume the easiest way would be to use a managed PoE switch and look at the port status. Unmanaged switches also tend to have lights to indicate the negotiated speed, but they do not typically differentiate between 10 and 100 anymore. Maybe they would if you had a non-gigabit PoE switch.
Click to expand...
Good suggestion ... but unfortunately I don't have switches that show that info. My "solution" is to hook my laptop up to the end of the cable run and run Speedtest. If it comes back at 100 Mbps, I know there is "something" limiting going on. But if I see 500+Mbps (I have GigE to the house), then I know the NIC negotiated to 1000Mbps ... so the cable/switch/etc. is capable ... and (ideally!) the camera should go GigE too.
 
Try Explorer and see if it is any faster (yeah we know LOL), but these things are still shown to be the most responsive in Explorer, not Edge or Chrome with IE tab.

Or as pointed out, it could simply be the webserver is the bottleneck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alekk
Great point @TheOtherMike - I never thought to look at the data sheet since I assumed it would be 10/100/1000 ... since most stuff is these days. For example, I just looked up the specs on the 5 year old Hikvision 5526 that it supports 10/100/1000.

When I did the test with SmartPSS, it took a minute to download a bit over 500 MBytes ... which is pretty close to 100Mbps ... so my guess is that is limited by wire speed - actually the NIC since it won't do GigE.

Still puzzling why the heck the web interface to download videos directly from the camera (Record->Search->Select a clip->Download) results in a speed 10X slower - it seems to be exactlyTEN Mbps.

@wittaj - Internet Exploder isn't part of Windows 11 anymore. There is an "Internet Explorer MODE" as part of Edge ... which I tried ... but downloads (and Live View) didn't work without installing plug-ins ... so I decided not go down that route.

BTW, hats off to Dahua with their Web 5.0 interface (is that what it is called?) that doesn't require all that plug-in crap. It's does "bark" at me about "To use this function, please download and install the plug-in. Click here to download" (for webplugin.exe) at various points, but most stuff seems to work.
 
Last edited:
It barks at you about the plug-in because despite all their efforts to make it work with other browsers, those that can get under the hood of the firmware can see that Explorer is still the best browser to use. As you found out, that plug-in is for Explorer....Maybe for your needs another browser works or maybe not...

Explorer is still there and there are ways to get Explorer again.

The simple way is to change the BHO folder to another name like oldBHO and BAM Explorer is back...and this thread also shows other ways...

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft\Edge\Application\110.0.1512.48\

Then change BHO to oldBHO or something else and Explorer will open

Looks Like Internet Explorer Died Today

This morning it was working fine to view my Hikvision NVR's. Then this afternoon I wanted to look at something and when I clicked to open IE it reverted me back to Windows Edge. I could not browse the NVRs using the IP addresses. So, come to find out Edge does have a section that will open in...
ipcamtalk.com ipcamtalk.com

Or this way:

Trouble with new DS-2CD3B86G2T-IZHSY -missing part of menu

I tested it home and everything seemed OK, but when I installed it at my summer cottage, something dont work. All setup was done at home and the only change hereafter was SADP to change gateway and ip No. I have a large memory card - 256 GB and can be seen in storage and worked at home. But...
ipcamtalk.com ipcamtalk.com



"But I upgraded to Win11" .... yep still available:

Internet Explorer via W11

Internet Explorer was never supposed to work on Windows 11. Microsoft disabled IE in Windows 11, making it the first version of Windows without IE for more than 20 years. In fact, if you even try to launch Internet Explorer in Windows 11, the OS simply forces you into Microsoft Edge. But...
ipcamtalk.com ipcamtalk.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDreaming and alekk
As always @wittaj, your suggestions are excellent.

Reading through the threads ... and then doing my own research, it seems the easiest way to run Internet Exploder is by simply creating a desktop short-cut that has a Target of
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe" ienotdead -embedding"
If I fire that up, allow it to install the plug-in, click OK for all the security warnings (YIKES!), and then hit the download button, I don't see a rate meter, but stopwatch timing shows I'm seeing pretty darn close to 100Mbps.

Note that there is still an issue that in newer browsers (which mostly work without the plug-in), the download speed appears to be capped at 10Mbps. Hopefully a future firmware release will fix this.

I have updated the OP (and thread title) with this info plus @TheOtherMike observation that the Dahua NIC only supports 10/100 ... maybe for 2024, they'll add GigE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDreaming
All cameras on the market (except some Ultra models) supports only Fast Ethernet (100 mbit/s). Not gigabit!

Support for gigabit eats around 0.5W more on camera side plus another 0.5W on switch side. Measured for ethernet port doing nothing.

Also older / cheaper cameras don't have enough strong CPU to support full gigabit of data transmission (even without encryption like HTTPS).

Cams usually generates something like 8-10 mbit/s so there is no need for gigabit
 
Roger there is no Gbit (see posts #6 and #7) ... but the issue is that using the web interface to download .dav files directly from the camera's SD card is at 10 (TEN) Mbps ... NOT 100Mbps ... even though that wire speed is easily obtained when downloading PNG's (via the snapshot button) or uploading firmware.

And the speed is exactly 10Mbps ... which almost makes me wonder if there is code that caps it at that rate ... based on some legacy reason.
 
Last edited:
I don't use camera interface - but NVRs ones...

But similar thing I found on NVR where remote sync which uploads videos to remote server 24/7 even on higher models of NVRs (608-xi) is caped to 12 MB/s (so about 100 mbit/s) with gigabit interface. And can't work faster... on higher camera count installations sum of camera bandwidth extends 100 mbit/s limit very easy..

it looks like a safeguard to prevent clogging of the camera or camera Fast Ethernet connection (RTSP will not like this at all).

ps. similar limit is with firmware upload on cameras :)
 
alekk said:
Yes (with the plug-in) ... but why in 2025 should that be necessary?

Modern browsers (without plugins) can download PNG's and upload firmware at 100Mbps ... why are video downloads capped at 10Mbps?
Click to expand...

It comes down to IE was the most popular browser when these cameras started to be made, so they centered the firmware around one particular browser and they got lazy and never updated the internals of the program to play nice with other browsers as more became available and IE started to fade.

Back when the firmware was written, it was probably a pain to get it to play nice with every different browser, so they went with the most popular one.

They haven't had a need to address this because a large part of their business are mainly businesses where they have enough light they can stay in default settings so they don't have a need to login to the camera via browser. It is us homeowners that push these to the limits and actually change settings.

As long as their biggest share of the market simply uses the NVR as a recording device and to display it on a monitor, they have no need to change what works for their intended market.

Further, Steve1225, who is an installer and works closely with Dahua, said it best here in this post:

1741262948757.png



Even though Microsoft has sunset Explorer, it is still available in Windows 11 (hidden). Many older programs rely on the old Trident (HTML-) Engine from IE, even stuff as basic as the old Control Panel. Old browsers are old, so unlike modern browsers where the WebView can be its own component, it's either all or nothing. And since the engine is still required not to break Windows functionality and apps from before 2015, it's still included (but mostly hidden). The whole file manager system is still based on IE. That's also why Device Manager and Control Panel are still there too. Similar to Dahua and Hikvision, Microsoft changed the UI and not the core, and added new features to upgrade its OS. A lot of legacy stuff are hidden.
 
Last edited:
I just downloaded a 457.9 MBYTE .dav which took 350 seconds per timing from my phone. SD card is a (fresh) Samsung 512GByte that I just put in the camera that got delivered today, which can certainly go faster!

That is 1.31 MBYTES/second - converting that to Mbit/seconds isn't quite a 8:1 (or 10:1) as there is a bit of overhead on the wire ... plus 1 MBYTE = 1,024 KBYTES = 1,085,764 BYTES.

BTW, this is at least (slightly) faster than the 5442-S3 which clocks in at 0.91 MBYTES/sec.
The numbers for both cameras are repeatable.

This is WAAYYY below what 100Mbps should deliver.


Yea, I "got it" that I can elect to use IE with the plug-in ... and also that many people use NVR's ... but you should be able to get decent speeds via a direct browser download. Am I the only one that thinks in 2025 that should not be necessary! ;-)


As I keep saying, that slowness is confusing because doing a snapshot download of ~10 MBYTE PNG takes about a second ... and uploading firmware goes super fast ... I eye-balled the 700+MBYTE firmware.bin and it was just over minute ... so that was 100 Mbps.

This means the camera<>network<>computer are plenty capable of delivering the wire speed of 100Mbps ... but for reasons unknown, the .dav downloads are still somehow throttled.

There's always the chance I'm doing something incredibly stupid (but this is soooo dead simple) so if you want to try, fire up any modern browser (WITHOUT the plugin) and just do do a Record->Search->Select a clip->Download from the web interface and watch that download progress bar just crawl ... :-(


BTW, there definitely has been some work on this code base for the browser interface ... because on the 5442-S3, I would get "download blocked" if I did multiple snapshots ... and if I try to download multiple .dav files at the same time, that would not work.

But I don't see either of those issues with the 54PRO-ZE ... and also the speeds are (slightly) faster ... so good progress! ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom