Related
Im experiencing very slow tab performance. For instance streaming the Colbert Report from a chrome tab is unwatchable even on 480p. I have more than adequate internet speed, just wondering if I'm expecting too much. Netflix and Youtube are silky smooth.
I too am having the same issue. Great wifi connection and speed and both YouTube Netflix are silky smooth. I have my tabs showing 480p and while it plays the embedded videos in the chrome browser, it gets choppy and most times video and audio get out of sync. (the video plays great on my desktop) Trying to find a fix for this as well but understand since it's still in the beta phase. Hopefully an update will come out soon enough.
Sent from my HTC Sensation using xda app-developers app
If you are trying to cast a tab/screen your computer might not be able to handle it, Google posted some streaming requirements.
I'd post the link but the forums won't let me, look for answer 3209990 on the Chromecast support page.
The bottleneck is a bit of both the casting PC and the WIFI. When casting Netflix or Youtube, the stream goes directly to the CCast. When you cast a tab, the stream is going from the cloud, to your PC, then getting transcoded on your PC, then your PC is streaming the whole thing to the CCast. If your WIFI is pretty robust, it can handle it. Understanding how packets are switched on a WIFI network, there is a lot of overhead. Divide your wifi network's bandwidth by each device, then divide that by two... or something like that.
reverenddak said:
The bottleneck is a bit of both the casting PC and the WIFI. When casting Netflix or Youtube, the stream goes directly to the CCast. When you cast a tab, the stream is going from the cloud, to your PC, then getting transcoded on your PC, then your PC is streaming the whole thing to the CCast. If your WIFI is pretty robust, it can handle it. Understanding how packets are switched on a WIFI network, there is a lot of overhead. Divide your wifi network's bandwidth by each device, then divide that by two... or something like that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why I wasn't so excited with the from Chrome tab to Chromecast feature.
It can be nice to watch some websites on our TV's, but I'm sure that it won't work very well when we send tabs where we are playing a HD videos. So we just can hope that every video app add CCast support.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Because Chromecast communicates solely via WiFi, the minimum sustained wireless bandwidth is critical for streaming quality.
This is usually not a problem for "normal" Chromecast applications that pull streams from the Internet - those services are designed to adapt to and scale with the available connection speed.
Content streaming from local devices is a different scenario altogether.
Chromecast doesn't necessarily work the same as traditional set-top media players (Apple TV, WDTV, Roku, etc) when streaming media from your phone/tablet/computer (device-local) and LAN-based (from a server) media can consume more bandwidth than you would expect.
Depending on where the media is located and how it is being sent to Chromecast, up to 3x the media's bitrate may be consumed (and required) on the WiFi network. If you have high bitrate media, this can easily overload an 802.11g connection or even an 802.11n connection.
Keep in mind that connection speed is not constant, and is limited by both your environment and your router.
Other nearby WiFi devices can cause interference, and the 2.4 GHz wireless band that Chromecast uses is "crowded" with many devices like cordless telephones and microwave ovens using overlapping frequencies.
Also, routers vary in the wireless speeds they can maintain. Just because you have a 802.11n 150 Mbps connection, that does not mean your router can truly sustain 150 Mbps throughput.
Better routers advertise use cases for "HD streaming" and have Gigabit LAN ports rather than 100 Mbps LAN ports found on cheaper models.
Just like a Gigabit Ethernet USB 2.0 adapter will never reach full Gigabit speed due the USB 2.0 bottleneck (480 Mbps), cheaper routers often are limited by their internal processor's lack of forwarding speed.
See the attachments for use examples and how the required bandwidth can multiply: Note that the 10 Mbps figure is just an example.
Standard Internet stream example
YouTube, Hulu Plus, HBO Go, VEVO, etc use this methodology
Direct stream from LAN storage example
Plex (from a local Plex server) and fling (from a desktop) work this way. Desktop and Tab casting from Chrome also uses this data flow.
Data is sent from the LAN device via WiFi
Chromecast receives data from the LAN device via WiFi
Streaming from wireless device storage example
Casting content stored on the device (device-local) from Avia or RealPlayer Cloud use this method.
Data is sent from the casting device via WiFi to Chromecast
Chromecast receives data via WiFi
Forwarding from LAN storage example
Casting content stored on a LAN device (DLNA, network share, etc) from Avia uses this method.
Data is sent from the LAN device to casting device running Avia via WiFi
Data is sent from the casting device running Avia via WiFi to Chromecast - this is the forwarding piece, data travels through
Chromecast receives data via WiFi
To optimize available bandwidth for Chromecast:
Use an 802.11n dual-band router and put your other wireless devices on the 5 GHz access point whenever possible
or use a separate WiFi access point connected to the wired network for Chromecast
Use wired connections for cast sources (server/desktop/laptop) wherever possible
Reencode high-bitrate media to lower bitrate (4 Mbps should be fine for most use)
Optimize Chromecast's ability to get a stable WiFi signal - move it away from the TV using the HDMI extender or an HDMI extension cable
and/or move your router so it's closer to Chromecast (but not too close - too close can get into a "drowned in the noise" situation)
Great Post this deserves a Pin!
One big thing a lot of people don't realize is that wireless is half duplex...
If you have 2 devices on the same wireless network transferring data between each other, they will do so at half the speed, because only one device can talk at a time.
Say for example you have a PC wired to your router, and another PC on wireless.. You can copy a file between these computers at around 6MB/sec. Now you take the wired PC and connect it to the same wireless network instead. You will notice your copy speed is now around 3MB/sec.
If you are utilizing a wireless repeater to connect any of your devices to your wifi network, those connected to the repeater will experience the same halving of speed as well.
This is why having your local media source on a different band or wired helps so much.
stevewm said:
One big thing a lot of people don't realize is that wireless is half duplex...
If you have 2 devices on the same wireless network transferring data between each other, they will do so at half the speed, because only one device can talk at a time.
Say for example you have a PC wired to your router, and another PC on wireless.. You can copy a file between these computers at around 6MB/sec. Now you take the wired PC and connect it to the same wireless network instead. You will notice your copy speed is now around 3MB/sec.
If you are utilizing a wireless repeater to connect any of your devices to your wifi network, those connected to the repeater will experience the same halving of speed as well.
This is why having your local media source on a different band or wired helps so much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's a scenario I would appreciate your comment on:
I have a bridge that connects to my main router. The media source (laptop) is connected direct to the bridge which is in the living room with my CC, the CC is wireless to the bridge. Will the distance the bridge is from the main router come into play if doing local media?
sherdog16 said:
Here's a scenario I would appreciate your comment on:
I have a bridge that connects to my main router. The media source (laptop) is connected direct to the bridge which is in the living room with my CC, the CC is wireless to the bridge. Will the distance the bridge is from the main router come into play if doing local media?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It shouldn't.... Unless the run to the main router is abnormally long.
My current setup has my plex server across the house from my TV room. Two out of three routers are upstairs and one is in the room with my plex server. All but one router is set up as access points. The distance combined between the three routers is roughly 200 feet. The distance is split between the three. Then roughly 25 feet from the closest router to the ccast. I have no more noticeable lag in the TV room than using the ccast in the back bedroom that the plex server is in.
I am sure if I was going to ping test this I would have a higher latency the further away it goes.... But like I said to real world use I can't tell it slows it down.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
rans0m00 said:
I am sure if I was going to ping test this I would have a higher latency the further away it goes.... But like I said to real world use I can't tell it slows it down.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly that. For home use, distance of wired connections doesn't matter much, as long as it's within specs and packets aren't being lost.
Distances for wireless connections, on the other hand, make a huge difference both in terms of latency and sustained transfer speed (bandwidth).
I've noticed that video casted from a tab is barely smooth at 480p. I am upstreaming at approx 150kbps.
When I try 720p, it struggles at 300kbps dropping to 150 alot. Using "extreme" it about the same rate but more choppy.
I have a N network with my laptop connected at 300M. I can usually transfer files around 3-6Mbps.
I'm a little confused why with chromcast, I can barely maintain 150kbps. Even if you multiply by 3, I'm not getting over 1mbps.
enricong said:
I've noticed that video casted from a tab is barely smooth at 480p. I am upstreaming at approx 150kbps.
When I try 720p, it struggles at 300kbps dropping to 150 alot. Using "extreme" it about the same rate but more choppy.
I have a N network with my laptop connected at 300M. I can usually transfer files around 3-6Mbps.
I'm a little confused why with chromcast, I can barely maintain 150kbps. Even if you multiply by 3, I'm not getting over 1mbps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's likely not a wireless connection issue but rather a processing limitation on the computer you're casting from.
I just casted a 480p tab of full-tab video and my network utilization ranged from about 1.25 Mbps to bursts of 12 Mbps. The average was around 2-3 Mbps. What's the CPU utilization look like when you're casting?
Do other Chromecast apps like YouTube work okay with 720p or 1080p videos?
bhiga said:
It's likely not a wireless connection issue but rather a processing limitation on the computer you're casting from.
I just casted a 480p tab of full-tab video and my network utilization ranged from about 1.25 Mbps to bursts of 12 Mbps. The average was around 2-3 Mbps. What's the CPU utilization look like when you're casting?
Do other Chromecast apps like YouTube work okay with 720p or 1080p videos?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CPU is an i5-2520M. Utilization is only around 20-30%. I've tried with and without Nvidia GPU.
Youtube seems ok at 720 and 1080, however, I thought that youtube videos get streamed directly to chromcast vs the laptop.
Also, when I stream a youtube video, I have no idea if chromecast sticks with my browser setting or figures out its own quality setting based on bandwidth. I thought it was the later.
Are you using regular Chrome, or Chrome Canary?
enricong said:
CPU is an i5-2520M. Utilization is only around 20-30%. I've tried with and without Nvidia GPU.
Youtube seems ok at 720 and 1080, however, I thought that youtube videos get streamed directly to chromcast vs the laptop.
Also, when I stream a youtube video, I have no idea if chromecast sticks with my browser setting or figures out its own quality setting based on bandwidth. I thought it was the later.
Are you using regular Chrome, or Chrome Canary?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting... You're correct that YouTube grabs the stream directly and determines the best settings. But if you have a 1080p TV and YouTube is pulling a 480p stream, it'll definitely be noticeable - especially on things like text.
My Chrome is Version 32.0.1700.107 m
and Google Cast Extension is 14.123.1.4
My system is relatively old, but it was a powerhouse in its day and still fine for what I do with it.
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Dual Quad-Core AMD Opteron 8389 2.9 GHz
32 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 7750
bhiga said:
Interesting... You're correct that YouTube grabs the stream directly and determines the best settings. But if you have a 1080p TV and YouTube is pulling a 480p stream, it'll definitely be noticeable - especially on things like text.
My Chrome is Version 32.0.1700.107 m
and Google Cast Extension is 14.123.1.4
My system is relatively old, but it was a powerhouse in its day and still fine for what I do with it.
Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
Dual Quad-Core AMD Opteron 8389 2.9 GHz
32 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 7750
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm running 35.0.1840.2 of Chrome and 14.123.1.5 of the extension.
I just tried installing regular chrome and had the same results.
your computer is def more powerful than mine, but I don't think thats the issue with such a low cpu utilization.
enricong said:
I'm running 35.0.1840.2 of Chrome and 14.123.1.5 of the extension.
I just tried installing regular chrome and had the same results.
your computer is def more powerful than mine, but I don't think thats the issue with such a low cpu utilization.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Weird... do you have the Automatically resize the browser to best fit the receiver screen when casting a tab option enabled? That should provide lowest impact as it should eliminate the need to scale.
Does it make a difference if your laptop is plugged into wall power, or on a wired instead of wireless connection?
bhiga said:
Weird... do you have the Automatically resize the browser to best fit the receiver screen when casting a tab option enabled? That should provide lowest impact as it should eliminate the need to scale.
Does it make a difference if your laptop is plugged into wall power, or on a wired instead of wireless connection?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, I just tried the wired connection and got some results. on 480p I got 150kbps, 720p got 300kbps, and extreme got around 600kbps.
720 and above started looking a little choppy. Picture Quality even at extreme was quite poor.
enricong said:
ok, I just tried the wired connection and got some results. on 480p I got 150kbps, 720p got 300kbps, and extreme got around 600kbps.
720 and above started looking a little choppy. Picture Quality even at extreme was quite poor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My CPU load jumps about 15-20% when casting too, so that seems in-line.
Weird, it's almost like something in Windows is throttling something...
You don't have some kind of third-party firewall or anything, do you?
If you're using the Windows Firewall, check the Advanced Settings for Inbound and Outbound rules on Wireless Portable Devices. My rules for those are disabled, but some folks have reported toggling them helped.
bhiga said:
My CPU load jumps about 15-20% when casting too, so that seems in-line.
Weird, it's almost like something in Windows is throttling something...
You don't have some kind of third-party firewall or anything, do you?
If you're using the Windows Firewall, check the Advanced Settings for Inbound and Outbound rules on Wireless Portable Devices. My rules for those are disabled, but some folks have reported toggling them helped.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have Avast which has some network protection
Tried toggling the settings in Windows firewall
I even tried disabling the firewall and anti-virus completely.
no difference
enricong said:
I have Avast which has some network protection
Tried toggling the settings in Windows firewall
I even tried disabling the firewall and anti-virus completely.
no difference
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only other thing I can think of is to try unbinding Avast's network filter from the network interface (Properties the device itself and try un-checking any extra computer-looking icons) and trying it, often times disabling the firewall doesn't fully disable the network filter.
bhiga said:
It's likely not a wireless connection issue but rather a processing limitation on the computer you're casting from.
I just casted a 480p tab of full-tab video and my network utilization ranged from about 1.25 Mbps to bursts of 12 Mbps. The average was around 2-3 Mbps. What's the CPU utilization look like when you're casting?
Do other Chromecast apps like YouTube work okay with 720p or 1080p videos?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to clarify, are you referring to BITS or BYTES?
I refer to bytes, 150kbytes/sec = approx 1mbit/sec
enricong said:
Just to clarify, are you referring to BITS or BYTES?
I refer to bytes, 150kbytes/sec = approx 1mbit/sec
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm usually pretty careful about MB (Megabytes) vs Mb (Megabits) so I'm referring to megabits. so divide my figures by 8 for bytes.
bhiga said:
I'm usually pretty careful about MB (Megabytes) vs Mb (Megabits) so I'm referring to megabits. so divide my figures by 8 for bytes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, even with bits, you're still faster than me.
I submitted a support ticket to google. still trying to get through the general "is it plugged in?" questions.
enricong said:
well, even with bits, you're still faster than me.
I submitted a support ticket to google. still trying to get through the general "is it plugged in?" questions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, it took me 2 or 3 rounds to get past the basics... Please keep us updated on what you find out.
Hi,
My Chromecast arrived yesterday. I bought it in hopes of playing local media mainly. Due to the fact that at home I use 3G+ internet connection with a limited GB package I cannot use cloud based services to stream media to Chromecast online - i.e. Plex. I am limited to solutions that would stream media directly to it - i.e. Allcast and Chrome Add on.
Unfortunately I tried Allcast and Chrome extension and the media quality is not satisfying. The movies are not fluent. I even set up a WIFI repeater near my TV (50 cm from Chromecast) to increase WIFI signal. I live in a flat with many wifi networks around me - this might be part of the problem - but still things did not get better even when my router and phone were 10 cm from each other.
1. I wanted to ask about your experience with streaming locally to cast? What media quality do you have? Maybe I am doing something wrong....
2. Is there any way to increase signal quality?
3. Which player works best with this kind of connection - In the FAQ there were some mentioned but no comments on the stream quality....
4. Also I read somewhere that one of the way to increase WIFI file transfer speed is to set up router and device into something that is called dual band - will this work for Chromecast? (I am not sure if CC supports it)
5. In one month I will probably switch my internet to fixed line. Is 20 Mbps enough to stream and transcode on the fly?
kordi666 said:
Hi,
My Chromecast arrived yesterday. I bought it in hopes of playing local media mainly. Due to the fact that at home I use 3G+ internet connection with a limited GB package I cannot use cloud based services to stream media to Chromecast online - i.e. Plex. I am limited to solutions that would stream media directly to it - i.e. Allcast and Chrome Add on.
Unfortunately I tried Allcast and Chrome extension and the media quality is not satisfying. The movies are not fluent. I even set up a WIFI repeater near my TV (50 cm from Chromecast) to increase WIFI signal. I live in a flat with many wifi networks around me - this might be part of the problem - but still things did not get better even when my router and phone were 10 cm from each other.
1. I wanted to ask about your experience with streaming locally to cast? What media quality do you have? Maybe I am doing something wrong....
2. Is there any way to increase signal quality?
3. Which player works best with this kind of connection - In the FAQ there were some mentioned but no comments on the stream quality....
4. Also I read somewhere that one of the way to increase WIFI file transfer speed is to set up router and device into something that is called dual band - will this work for Chromecast? (I am not sure if CC supports it)
5. In one month I will probably switch my internet to fixed line. Is 20 Mbps enough to stream and transcode on the fly?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plex is generally not Internet/cloud-based, unless you're pulling channels. Local media files live on your local Plex Media Server and stay within your network.
Cast playback quality depends both on the WiFi signal quality at Chromecast and the casting device as well as the media itself. The higher the bitrate of the file, the less likely you are to have smooth performance. In particular, 1080p videos shot on phones tend to be problematic. 720p videos are usually lower bitrate and work better.
Move Chromecast away from your TV. The TV is a giant metal reflector/scrambler, so at least get Chromecast to position where the TV is not obstructing line-of-sight with your router/repeater.
Use the HDMI extender or an HDMI extension cable. My main Chromecast is attached to a 10-foot extension cable that puts it about a foot to the side of my TV.
Depending on your setup, it might be better to connect Chromecast to your AV receiver instead of directly to the TV.
If your AV components are in a metal shelf or cabinet, definitely move Chromecast so it is outside of the cabinet.
While the media itself doesn't change (unless you use a server that transcodes, like Plex, BubbleUPnP Server or Serviio), some players seem to do a better job with buffering. Buffering delays the start of playback and playback response, but can help to reduce pausing during playback.
A (simultaneous) dual-band router can help by reducing the amount of wireless traffic on the 2.4 GHz band. When sending media from a wireless device, the wireless device is using some bandwidth to send the media, then the Chromecast has to use an equal amount of bandwidth to receive the media, which means you're actually using double the wireless bandwidth.
While Chromecast may be fine getting a 4 Mbps stream directly from YouTube, sending a 4 Mbps stream from your phone on wireless will require 8 Mbps of stable wireless bandwidth.
See WiFi Bandwidth and Router considerations for illustrations and more explanation.
So, back to dual-band... The ideal situation is to have your source media device on a wired connection, but if you cannot do that, if you can have your source device on a 5 GHz connection, that will also remove congestion from the 2.4 GHz band.
Note that despite the marketing allusions, a dual-band router will not necessarily give you faster performance.
You get better performance because the router hardware itself tends to be faster*, the load on each wireless band is reduced if you can spread devices across bands, and the 5 GHz band generally has less interference from other devices (microwave ovens operate in 2.4 GHz, for example).
* Often times lower-end routers cannot achieve advertised/theoretical speeds because their on-board processing is too slow - this is especially true for routers that have only 100 Mbps LAN ports rather than Gigabit LAN ports.
20 Mbps is more than enough for any online streaming source that I can think of. Transcoding is an entirely different and unrelated thing.
Any transcoding will have a target encoded bitrate and that rate will almost always be 20 Mbps or less, especially if it will be sent through the Internet.
Transcoding is CPU-dependent, so it will depend on the machine doing the transcoding as well as the format of your existing media files. If you use a cloud-based service like RealPlayer Cloud, you upload your media and their servers do the transcoding for you, so you really don't have to worry about the transcoding aspect.
If you set up a Plex Media Server or a transcoding DLNA server (BubbleUPnP Server, Serviio, etc) then you will need to see if the machine you are running the server on has sufficient performance for your media formats and expectations.
kordi666 said:
Hi,
My Chromecast arrived yesterday. I bought it in hopes of playing local media mainly. Due to the fact that at home I use 3G+ internet connection with a limited GB package I cannot use cloud based services to stream media to Chromecast online - i.e. Plex. I am limited to solutions that would stream media directly to it - i.e. Allcast and Chrome Add on.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plex doesn't use the Internet to stream media unless your not on the same network as the server. The CCast must have Internet to load the player app but that is true for all apps that cast to the CCast.
If your not on your local network and try to stream from the server then it will use Internet so you should sync titles to the local unit for playback when your not connected to a free WiFi.
To answer your other questions
1 - My experience is great. Other than Googlecast ext crashing randomly to mess up Web based streaming I seem to have avoided the problems most people have had regarding CCast but mostly due to the fact I use Plex and have Plex Pass (no longer required). My media library is almost all CCast compatible MP4/H.264/AAC 4-6Mbs. I have started to move away from the MP4 container recently and starting to save Library in MKV/H.264/AAC to get the Multitrack support for things like Subs and Commentary tracks. Plex now has some support for MKV.
2 - You can try moving things to get a better reception and use the extension plug that comes with the CCast, But in the end if reception is bad the best option is to add an AP Range Extender in the room that has the problem.
3 - Different Players for Different situations. If you have Plex Server obviously Plex for Android is the best choice. If you have content on the device then aVia or Allcast are probably better. If you have other Media Servers or many, BubbleUPnP is a wonderful option to aggregate and integrate all your media and get transcode. I run it along side Plex on my media server and it does a hell of a job!
4 - Dual band can work but only if your 2.4Ghz band is very crowded with 5Ghz devices connecting to it. Then if you make two separate networks with each band you can remove some devices from ever connecting to the 2.4Ghz network leaving all of it's available bandwidth for streaming. It can work but the best way to go is to use a transcoding server like Plex or Bubble.
5 - Is that 20 MB up or down? Lots of places advertise 20MBs but thats just the download rate and the upload rate is more like 700k. It is highly doubtful you are going to get a 20MB Upstream from any provider other than maybe Verizon FIOS or Google (limited markets but soon expanding). 4-6 MBs Upstream is probably required to get HD without a major noticeable quality loss. But that upstream limitation really only applies when your not on your local network. and when that is the case your remote access is probably more limited than your upstream especially if you are on Mobile Data.
bhiga said:
Plex is generally not Internet/cloud-based, unless you're pulling channels. Local media files live on your local Plex Media Server and stay within your network.
Cast playback quality depends both on the WiFi signal quality at Chromecast and the casting device as well as the media itself. The higher the bitrate of the file, the less likely you are to have smooth performance. In particular, 1080p videos shot on phones tend to be problematic. 720p videos are usually lower bitrate and work better.
Move Chromecast away from your TV. The TV is a giant metal reflector/scrambler, so at least get Chromecast to position where the TV is not obstructing line-of-sight with your router/repeater.
Use the HDMI extender or an HDMI extension cable. My main Chromecast is attached to a 10-foot extension cable that puts it about a foot to the side of my TV.
Depending on your setup, it might be better to connect Chromecast to your AV receiver instead of directly to the TV.
If your AV components are in a metal shelf or cabinet, definitely move Chromecast so it is outside of the cabinet.
While the media itself doesn't change (unless you use a server that transcodes, like Plex, BubbleUPnP Server or Serviio), some players seem to do a better job with buffering. Buffering delays the start of playback and playback response, but can help to reduce pausing during playback.
A (simultaneous) dual-band router can help by reducing the amount of wireless traffic on the 2.4 GHz band. When sending media from a wireless device, the wireless device is using some bandwidth to send the media, then the Chromecast has to use an equal amount of bandwidth to receive the media, which means you're actually using double the wireless bandwidth.
While Chromecast may be fine getting a 4 Mbps stream directly from YouTube, sending a 4 Mbps stream from your phone on wireless will require 8 Mbps of stable wireless bandwidth.
See WiFi Bandwidth and Router considerations for illustrations and more explanation.
So, back to dual-band... The ideal situation is to have your source media device on a wired connection, but if you cannot do that, if you can have your source device on a 5 GHz connection, that will also remove congestion from the 2.4 GHz band.
Note that despite the marketing allusions, a dual-band router will not necessarily give you faster performance.
You get better performance because the router hardware itself tends to be faster*, the load on each wireless band is reduced if you can spread devices across bands, and the 5 GHz band generally has less interference from other devices (microwave ovens operate in 2.4 GHz, for example).
* Often times lower-end routers cannot achieve advertised/theoretical speeds because their on-board processing is too slow - this is especially true for routers that have only 100 Mbps LAN ports rather than Gigabit LAN ports.
20 Mbps is more than enough for any online streaming source that I can think of. Transcoding is an entirely different and unrelated thing.
Any transcoding will have a target encoded bitrate and that rate will almost always be 20 Mbps or less, especially if it will be sent through the Internet.
Transcoding is CPU-dependent, so it will depend on the machine doing the transcoding as well as the format of your existing media files. If you use a cloud-based service like RealPlayer Cloud, you upload your media and their servers do the transcoding for you, so you really don't have to worry about the transcoding aspect.
If you set up a Plex Media Server or a transcoding DLNA server (BubbleUPnP Server, Serviio, etc) then you will need to see if the machine you are running the server on has sufficient performance for your media formats and expectations.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Many, many thanks. Did not expect that detailed anwser. Especially the fragments about dual band and HDMI extension are very useful. Should be inlcuded in FAQ, as I believe they are only in the separate post you gave link to.
I believe I start to get a grasp of all of this. My problem is that my internet connection is via Huawei e587 wireless router. This is a pocket sized device that was created to be 3G modem with router functionality and not as stand alone router. It does not support dual band.
I tried going through AP extension (Winstars WN523N2) but with the same result. My AP extension does not support Dual Band either and when I connect chrome thorugh the extension not only my extension has to serve incoming and outgoing stream but also has to connect itself to my wireless router.
However, there is still one thing that I don't quite understand and this is about Plex. Yesterday I spent like 30 mins on youtube and forums trying to figure out what plex is and I couldn't figure out how it works. From what I understand from your post Plex is set on my local computer and streams to Chromecast via my Wifi. The difference is, that transcodes the file in real time allowing to get a stream with less bitrate to be handled by your router more easly? Is this correct?
Asphyx said:
5 - Is that 20 MB up or down? Lots of places advertise 20MBs but thats just the download rate and the upload rate is more like 700k. It is highly doubtful you are going to get a 20MB Upstream from any provider other than maybe Verizon FIOS or Google (limited markets but soon expanding). 4-6 MBs Upstream is probably required to get HD without a major noticeable quality loss. But that upstream limitation really only applies when your not on your local network. and when that is the case your remote access is probably more limited than your upstream especially if you are on Mobile Data.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Many thanks to you as well. Other points I believe I covered. This one, however, you are perfectly right. This is 20 Mbps download but only 1 Mbps upload which probably will not be enough for streaming.... I have to solve problem in some other way or change CC to something else (unfortunately).
P.S.
I am not in US . So I have other cable options available.
kordi666 said:
Many, many thanks. Did not expect that detailed anwser. Especially the fragments about dual band and HDMI extension are very useful. Should be inlcuded in FAQ, as I believe they are only in the separate post you gave link to.
I believe I start to get a grasp of all of this. My problem is that my internet connection is via Huawei e587 wireless router. This is a pocket sized device that was created to be 3G modem with router functionality and not as stand alone router. It does not support dual band.
I tried going through AP extension (Winstars WN523N2) but with the same result. My AP extension does not support Dual Band either and when I connect chrome thorugh the extension not only my extension has to serve incoming and outgoing stream but also has to connect itself to my wireless router.
However, there is still one thing that I don't quite understand and this is about Plex. Yesterday I spent like 30 mins on youtube and forums trying to figure out what plex is and I couldn't figure out how it works. From what I understand from your post Plex is set on my local computer and streams to Chromecast via my Wifi. The difference is, that transcodes the file in real time allowing to get a stream with less bitrate to be handled by your router more easly? Is this correct?
Many thanks to you as well. Other points I believe I covered. This one, however, you are perfectly right. This is 20 Mbps download but only 1 Mbps upload which probably will not be enough for streaming.... I have to solve problem in some other way or change CC to something else (unfortunately).
P.S.
I am not in US . So I have other cable options available.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It won't matter what device you use the results will be the same without the bandwidth to send it to you...
Plex is a Media Server software plain and simple...
But it is a server that can transcode the file to be compatible with any network conditions and hardware.
Not every piece of hardware can play MKV files. But with Plex it will transcode (convert on the fly) the media into a format that is compatible and is streamable based on your network conditions.
CCast doesn't support a wide variety of formats. Plex will send them to CCast so they CAN be played.
If your at home then no internet will be used to make those streams...
If your away from Home Plex will be able to make your media available wherever you are but you will need internet access where you are to get it and I don't suggest using Metered mobile data to do that!
Plex will also SYNC content to your device so you don't have to have your server send it to you when your not local to it.
So in the end I don't think it really matters what device or connection your using Plex has a solution that will work for your hardware and network situation.
I will note that BubbleUPnP will do much the same thing as well, but it does require some UPnP or DLNA source to take it's media from.
Which is essentially what Plex is...
@Asphyx described Plex. I wouldn't worry about dual-band just yet...
The key will be the bitrate of your media. Lower-bitrate stuff is easier for the network and the sending device* to handle.
* just like your router, the sending tablet/phone's hardware may limit how fast it can communicate.
Start your testing with a low-bitrate MP4 (4 Mbps or lower) and see if that works better for you.
Quick estimate of bitrate is:
Filesize (in MegaBytes) * 8 / length of video in seconds
For example, if a 2-minute video is 50 MB, then it's
50 MB * 8 bits/byte / 120 seconds = 400 Mbits / 120 seconds = 3.33 Mbits/second
bhiga said:
@Asphyx described Plex. I wouldn't worry about dual-band just yet...
The key will be the bitrate of your media. Lower-bitrate stuff is easier for the network and the sending device* to handle.
* just like your router, the sending tablet/phone's hardware may limit how fast it can communicate.
Start your testing with a low-bitrate MP4 (4 Mbps or lower) and see if that works better for you.
Quick estimate of bitrate is:
Filesize (in MegaBytes) * 8 / length of video in seconds
For example, if a 2-minute video is 50 MB, then it's
50 MB * 8 bits/byte / 120 seconds = 400 Mbits / 120 seconds = 3.33 Mbits/second
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK. Thanks guys I believe I get it. It also appeared that I solved the puzzle. I streamed files that were of too high quality for wifi chromecast to handle (1920x1020). Now I tried with lower resulution and it worked without a problem.
I believe I understand now what plex does. I will try it out. One question though. Will plex handle RMVB? I have most media in this format and I know it is not the most popular one....
Hope you guys can indulge me by resurrecting this thread. I was intending to replace my AppleTV with the Chromecast, but now I'm not so sure after reading a few things here.
What exactly are the limitations of the Chromecast video spec in terms of bandwidth and h.264 complexity? At the moment I run PlexConnect via the "trailers" app on the AppleTV, and no transcodes (yeah!) are required by Plex for local MKV media on an ethernet-connected PC. Would I need to be concerned with Chromecast to be able to decode these MKVs, which I'm sure exceed 6 Mbps. Is that bitrate an upper limit for the Chromecast? In other words, if there is a 6 Mbps limit on these encodes, then it sounds like Plex would need to transcode. Is that the case?
floepie said:
Hope you guys can indulge me by resurrecting this thread. I was intending to replace my AppleTV with the Chromecast, but now I'm not so sure after reading a few things here.
What exactly are the limitations of the Chromecast video spec in terms of bandwidth and h.264 complexity? At the moment I run PlexConnect via the "trailers" app on the AppleTV, and no transcodes (yeah!) are required by Plex for local MKV media on an ethernet-connected PC. Would I need to be concerned with Chromecast to be able to decode these MKVs, which I'm sure exceed 6 Mbps. Is that bitrate an upper limit for the Chromecast? In other words, if there is a 6 Mbps limit on these encodes, then it sounds like Plex would need to transcode. Is that the case?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The bandwidth limitations are really more influenced by your Network and the 2.4 Ghz Band of the CCast. I have seen people say they have gotten a 20Mbps File to play cleanly on a Chromecast but I would be conservative and say 10Mbps is the top rate.
Plex should handle any Codec and container limitations of the CCast but it will require you have a good transcoding machine to run Plex Media Server on.
I have to ask why if you have Apple TV would you want to replace it with CCast? What do you expect to gain from that switch?
The ATV is probably (mind you, I have no experience with AppleTV so pardon me if I'm wrong on any of this) more versatile in what it can play and doesn't require App support or another device to control it. I believe it also has a wired connection to network which is far superior to Wireless.
Don't get me wrong here I love my CCast, but I don't have any other wired Media boxes or Smart TVs that would do a better job. I do have HTPCs, my main one being souped up and used as a Media/Transcoding Server running both Plex and BubbleUPnP. So on those TVs that have HTPC attached I do not use a CCast.
For the price it sure can't hurt to get a CCast just for the play around cool factor but for that price don't expect the same kind of experience or performance of a box that costs in excess of $50-$100.
If you have an AppleTV or Roku already I would tell you to wait and see if a second Gen CCast is released soon that will improve on the few shortcomings like no wired networking because your not really going to gain much with the current model other than the cool faxtor of flinging media and maybe soon the ability to Mirror your screen.
---------- Post added at 05:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:43 PM ----------
kordi666 said:
One question though. Will plex handle RMVB? I have most media in this format and I know it is not the most popular one....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not think it supports RMVB....
And these days you are much better off keeping your library in MKV/H.264 L4.1+/AAC format for the internal Multi Track and Subtitle support.
Makes for a tidy library file system (as one file holds it all) and is pretty much compatible with any hardware out there because they all pretty much support H.264 via Hardware.
Not all devices support the MKV container but they should at some point because it really is the best container that exists due to it's multitrack and any codec goes capability.
floepie said:
Hope you guys can indulge me by resurrecting this thread. I was intending to replace my AppleTV with the Chromecast, but now I'm not so sure after reading a few things here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
TBH I agree with @Asphyx. I don't think Chromecast would be a good replacement for your AppleTV, unless there's a specific app/service on Chromecast that AppleTV doesn't have, or you really are not using your AppleTV much.
Asphyx said:
I have to ask why if you have Apple TV would you want to replace it with CCast? What do you expect to gain from that switch?
The ATV is probably (mind you, I have no experience with AppleTV so pardon me if I'm wrong on any of this) more versatile in what it can play and doesn't require App support or another device to control it. I believe it also has a wired connection to network which is far superior to Wireless.
Don't get me wrong here I love my CCast, but I don't have any other wired Media boxes or Smart TVs that would do a better job. I do have HTPCs, my main one being souped up and used as a Media/Transcoding Server running both Plex and BubbleUPnP. So on those TVs that have HTPC attached I do not use a CCast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha. I have both an HTPC and an ATV connected to the TV. I grew a little weary of XBMC and its overly clumsy use of the plugin system and its loss of focus at times running W8, even with various tools to keep it in focus, not to mention audio loss every time I RDP'ed into the PC. So, I went with the ATV, and you're right, in combination with its own native apps and PlexConnect taking over the Trailers app, it's great. For music, I run both the Squeeze Server and SqueezePlayer for all local audio and streaming radio services (tune-in, etc.). Now, I'm thinking of replacing both the audio (squeeze) and video (ATV) with one simple Chromecast. The reason behind it is that I my android device is always either in my hand or pocket and the thought of being able to initiate any video file from Plex, online videos from various services, and play all my audio and streaming radio from Google Play sounds very attractive. But, the big downside is the wireless requirement, which might not be a problem per se, as the AP sits in the same cabinet under the TV, so the distance is minimal. I think I'm going to give it a shot. It's just too bad that no one has been able to reverse engineer the CC into a cheap hardwired box.
As for the claim of direct playing a 20 Mbps video file, it seems dubious. Plex for starters caps such files at 12 Mbps to a CC receiver before transcoding to a lower bitrate. They just determined that anything greater than 12 is a crapshoot.
floepie said:
Now, I'm thinking of replacing both the audio (squeeze) and video (ATV) with one simple Chromecast. The reason behind it is that I my android device is always either in my hand or pocket and the thought of being able to initiate any video file from Plex, online videos from various services, and play all my audio and streaming radio from Google Play sounds very attractive. But, the big downside is the wireless requirement, which might not be a problem per se, as the AP sits in the same cabinet under the TV, so the distance is minimal. I think I'm going to give it a shot. It's just too bad that no one has been able to reverse engineer the CC into a cheap hardwired box.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a reasonable reason.
As for wireless, if the AP is truly under where the Chromecast will be, I would plan on using an HDMI extension cable to get the Chromecast off to one side. It doesn't have to be long, but probably will need to be longer than the supplied extension. Directly above/below AP tends to be the poorest spot for WiFi reception, unless your router is in a nonstandard orientation or supports more than one orientation (ie, wall mount + flat countertop).
BTW a couple of projects did reverse-engineer Chromecast. But they fell apart when the V2 SDK launched and required some unique key, likely introduced to address DRM concerns from the content providers.
bhiga said:
That's a reasonable reason.
As for wireless, if the AP is truly under where the Chromecast will be, I would plan on using an HDMI extension cable to get the Chromecast off to one side. It doesn't have to be long, but probably will need to be longer than the supplied extension. Directly above/below AP tends to be the poorest spot for WiFi reception, unless your router is in a nonstandard orientation or supports more than one orientation (ie, wall mount + flat countertop).
BTW a couple of projects did reverse-engineer Chromecast. But they fell apart when the V2 SDK launched and required some unique key, likely introduced to address DRM concerns from the content providers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good tip. I'll keep that in consideration. But the cabinet is a very long and low lying box with router already at one end while the TV sits closer to the middle. The antenna angle at the router can also be re-positioned if needed.
floepie said:
Good tip. I'll keep that in consideration. But the cabinet is a very long and low lying box with router already at one end while the TV sits closer to the middle. The antenna angle at the router can also be re-positioned if needed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds similar to my Salamander unit then. As long as there isn't a lot of metal between you should be fine.
floepie said:
Ha. I have both an HTPC and an ATV connected to the TV. I grew a little weary of XBMC and its overly clumsy use of the plugin system and its loss of focus at times running W8
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That makes a bit more sense but I would suggest scrapping the Windows8 in favor of Win7. You could run all your servers off that machine and get the best of both worlds. Plex seems to use the same Plugin concept, only diff is they call them channels but they are practically identical. There is however a lot more developer support for XBMC compared to Plex in that regard. That is a good thing but can also be a bad thing.
floepie said:
Now, I'm thinking of replacing both the audio (squeeze) and video (ATV) with one simple Chromecast. The reason behind it is that I my android device is always either in my hand or pocket and the thought of being able to initiate any video file from Plex, online videos from various services, and play all my audio and streaming radio from Google Play sounds very attractive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well there is Yatse remote for XBMC to get some of that and Plex App needs to be able to fling media to DLNA targets at some point which would make the XBMC operate very much like a CCast without the problem of wireless connection.
floepie said:
As for the claim of direct playing a 20 Mbps video file, it seems dubious. Plex for starters caps such files at 12 Mbps to a CC receiver before transcoding to a lower bitrate. They just determined that anything greater than 12 is a crapshoot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure it does that for Direct Play capable titles and while Plex Devs have often decided what they think are the Limitations every time they mention one of those limitations it seems weeks later they figure out that it wasn't as limited as they thought.
a Few weeks ago they said MKV could never be direct played and could only be direct streamed...Weeks later they say some MKVs can direct play...
Asphyx said:
That makes a bit more sense but I would suggest scrapping the Windows8 in favor of Win7. You could run all your servers off that machine and get the best of both worlds. Plex seems to use the same Plugin concept, only diff is they call them channels but they are practically identical. There is however a lot more developer support for XBMC compared to Plex in that regard. That is a good thing but can also be a bad thing.
Well there is Yatse remote for XBMC to get some of that and Plex App needs to be able to fling media to DLNA targets at some point which would make the XBMC operate very much like a CCast without the problem of wireless connection.
I'm not sure it does that for Direct Play capable titles and while Plex Devs have often decided what they think are the Limitations every time they mention one of those limitations it seems weeks later they figure out that it wasn't as limited as they thought.
a Few weeks ago they said MKV could never be direct played and could only be direct streamed...Weeks later they say some MKVs can direct play...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, W8 vs W7 isn't the problem with focus. XBMC runs only on the desktop as far as I'm aware, so the same focus issues apply to either W7 or W8. In either case, it's windows we're talking about here.
Yes, I'm aware of Yahtze, which is only really a glorified remote of local content. What you can't do with it is start a stream from within another app on your device without streaming it from the device via a helper app such Allcast (airplay or XBMC DLNA renderer), something I'd rather not do.
As for Plex and its Chromecast decisions, Plex devs in their current version have decided 12 Mbps is the upper limit for direct playable material, and this value seems to be non-editable at the moment. It applies to all h.264-based video files, including MKV-containing AVC files.
https://forums.plex.tv/index.php/topic/106645-mp4h264aac-file-being-transcoded-rather-than-direct/
floepie said:
Nah, W8 vs W7 isn't the problem with focus. XBMC runs only on the desktop as far as I'm aware, so the same focus issues apply to either W7 or W8. In either case, it's windows we're talking about here.
Yes, I'm aware of Yahtze, which is only really a glorified remote of local content. What you can't do with it is start a stream from within another app on your device without streaming it from the device via a helper app such Allcast (airplay or XBMC DLNA renderer), something I'd rather not do.
As for Plex and its Chromecast decisions, Plex devs in their current version have decided 12 Mbps is the upper limit for direct playable material, and this value seems to be non-editable at the moment. It applies to all h.264-based video files, including MKV-containing AVC files.
https://forums.plex.tv/index.php/topic/106645-mp4h264aac-file-being-transcoded-rather-than-direct/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps I'm not sure what you mean by focus. The HTPC should always be displaying the XBMC interface as that is what it is made for. Win7 wouldn't affect that but Win8 will often go back to tile mode when it feels like.
I have two monitors setup on mine. A Small 5"VGA that displays the standard desktop (for reference) and the XBMC display is locked to Monitor 2 (extended Desktop) via HDMI and connected to the TV. Never have an issue with focus ever.
As for Yatse I was referring to controlling the XBMC not just streaming...XBMC has no transcode...
Plex as I said have set arbitrary limits that do NOT really apply to CCast or any other devices...That doesn't mean the hardware or network is the issue it is the decisions made by Plex.
They are really limiting their thinking and I think it has a lot to do with their being an iOS centric development team.
The iOS Plex app is currently using V2 of the CCast receiver while the Android App is STILL using the old pre-SDK released V1 Receiver.
iOS supports Airplay (which in and of itself would allow you to use the XBMC as a target) but that feature is not yet available on Android either.
When I said others have gotten a 20Mbps file to direct play they were NOT using Plex! So like I said it isn't the hardware that really is the issue it is the decisions the Plex devs have made in saying THIS is what we are shooting to meet regardless if the device is capable of much more!
Similar to their decision to hardcode via transcode subtitles when everyone else is supporting them on the receiver side!
They need to stop looking at what they feel are limitations and start looking for ways to remove those limitations. And they also need to come to grips with the fact that the transcoder is not always the best solution considering how many people run their product on an NAS or old computer that is incapable of transcoding properly.
Local video files lag
So would a faster router work better to stream local video files? (by dragging the video file onto a google chrome webpage and casting it to the TV)
I just got Century Link internet installed and am using the router they provided, so I assume it's a pretty basic slow one (300mpbs or slower probably).
If I got a nicer router, lets say like a 1200mbps router, would that help reduce lag when I stream local video files?
I read in this post earlier that setting up a dual band router might help, where CC is on 2.4 and all other devices are on 5.
Thanks
_sam_1990 said:
If I got a nicer router, lets say like a 1200mbps router, would that help reduce lag when I stream local video files?
I read in this post earlier that setting up a dual band router might help, where CC is on 2.4 and all other devices are on 5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More often than not I believe poor Chromecast streaming is due to poor signal reception. Internet streaming will tolerate slow connections as it's designed for that uncertainty. Local streams usually only exist at one rate, so they can't adjust.
Verify that Chromecast is getting at/near your ISP connection speed with speed4cast
If there's a bottleneck here, try a different HDMI port (side port maybe) or HDMI extension.
Do the same with your local streaming source to verify its connection speed
If there's a bottleneck here, move your device to a place with better signal, or use a wired connection if that's a possibility.
Then start your local streaming, and while it's running, check the internet connection speed on another wireless device (not the phone/tablet that's streaming the content to Chromecast)
If your other device gets poor connection speed here, then your wireless router is saturated and you would likely see a benefit with a better router.
Hi
I have a chromecast and I would like to use it to stream video from my local network (I have a HDD connected to my ISP router) at this time I use plex on one of my pc, it works great but I want to stream video without PC (and I don't want to buy a NAS) So I connected a HDD to a USB 2 port of my Livebox 2 (french ISP router) and I try to stream it to my chromecast
I try with allcast on my nexus 4 but when I start streaming some file to my chromecast I saw the video without sound
Is it only a codec problem from the chromecast ?
If yes, is there a alternative with better codec compatibilities ?
Is it posssible that the sound bug come from my network speed (ethernet 100mega and wifi 130 mega) ?
The video I try to play on chromecast with Allcast (I try also local cast) is a mkv file in H264
audio stream : AC-3 192 kbps 48 kHz 16 bits 2 channels
video stream : ACV 4989 kbps 1912*1072 (16/9 25 fps [email protected]) (CABAC / 4 ref frames)
Have you got any solution ?
Thanks
The fastest solution is Plex. Register online, download the media server, put your videos onto the server, log in at plex.com/app to play your home videos.
Easy as an HDMI cable.
as I said in my first post. At the moment I use a plex server on a PC but I want to know if it is possible to watch video on my chromecast without any PC powered on, only with the network
I just got my chromecast last week. The only reason I bought my chromecast is because I have an older (non-smart) tv that has no streaming capabilities, and my ps3 died. I have a PS4 but the ps4 does not support any playback of files (mp3, mp4, avi etc) like you could on the ps3. I had a big library of music and home movies on my ps3., and now I had no way to play this media on my tv. So I bought a chromecast.
Streaming from the PC works great. I use the videostream extension with the remote app for android. And videos/movies stream great with no lagging at all.
So I decided to try and stream data from my android phone. I tried just about every app on the play store. From Avia, to AllCast and everything in between. Yet everything I try lags terribly. Every video that I try and stream (even very short 10-20 second videos) freeze and buffer every few seconds.
I know my network can handle the streaming. I have a wireless AC router and 50+MB/s ISP connection. Also Once again streaming from my pc works flawlessly. Streaming from youtube app on my phone to the tv also works flawlessly. So why is it that I can't stream videos taken by my phone properly?
What is your phone? Can you try to upload a video from the phone to the pc and check the speed?
philip67 said:
What is your phone? Can you try to upload a video from the phone to the pc and check the speed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry I should have specified that. I have the HTC ONE M8.
EDIT:
Using the wifi file transfer app, I downloaded a 126MB video file to my PC and it averaged at around 5.5MB/s (seems slow for wireless AC). Also my PC is hard wired to my router, and I was sitting about 2 feet away from my wireless router. So signal strength shouldn't cause an issue.
The phone has to work as a tool that not only transfers the video to the Chromecast, but it must also work as an on the fly media transcoder and server. This is a lot of strain for one phone.
Try casting a video with format and resolution that is natively supported on chromecast. But the speed from 5.5 Mb is also a bottleneck for casting a video with higher resolution.
The HTC one M8 is still pretty powerful in terms of phones.
I think I figured out the problem. I have a dual band router. I connected the chromecast to the 5G band (for obvious reasons. Faster speeds) but as it turns out I'm having issues with my router
I did a test on my phone. Sitting right next to my router so signal strength was excellent, I checked the link speed of both the 5G band and the 2.4 and the 5G band is only showing 24mbps Where as 2.4 band is maxed out at 74mbps. I'm not sure why my 5GHZ band is so slow. It's wireless AC and should be way faster.
I also did a speed that that confirmed it. While connected to my 5ghz band my speed was It 20mbps download. On 2.4ghz I averaged over 30, and then I suspect that the rest was limited by my isp.
So I believe since I have my chromecast connected to the 5ghz band, this is causing the sluggish playback.
The Chromecast doesn't support 5 GHz, only 2.4 GHz. In any case most people find that the range isn't very good with 5 GHz. If the signal has to go through a few walls, you might be better off with 2.4 GHz anyway.
But keep in mind that if both your phone and the Chromecast are using the 2.4 GHz band, streaming from the phone to the router and then from the router to the Chromecast is using 2x the wireless bandwith compared to your hard-wired PC streaming to the Chromecast.
The M8 is fairly fast for a phone, but nowhere near the performance of a desktop PC, so it might still be lagging due to memory/CPU performance issues.