Does anyone still have 56k on here? [Speed Test Thread]

2166331708.png
 
2177506702.png


Problem?
 
I win! :D
 
This country has been (and still is) ADSL-only for the most part, and the fastest connection you can get is usually 24/1 or 24/2. Real world speeds depend on copper quality and length, of course. The fastest I could get was about 12-14 down and 2 up, so I've been stuck on that for years and years.

The local telephone/cable co started rolling out EuroDocsis 3 cable a year or two ago and it FINALLY came to my neighborhood just a week or two ago. I went to their store yesterday, signed the papers and picked up a modem. The awesome thing with cable is that they don't need to send a guy to hook up a bunch of wires. I was online approximately 32,7 seconds after unboxing the modem. :D

2211922822.png


For some reason the fastest upload speed they sell to cable customers is 5Mbit, which is a bit blech... but better than 2Mbit any day. I seem to top out at about 10.2MB/s down and 520kB/s up.
 
Last edited:
For some reason the fastest upload speed they sell to cable customers is 5Mbit, which is a bit blech...

this is something i don't get. it's the same here... you can get 150Mbit/s down, but only 5 up while on cable. VDSL gives you 50/10 or even more (haven't checked since i signed up 1,5years ago).
 
this is something i don't get.
Well, ADSL has "asymmetric" in its name. There is indeed a technical reason for it, but I am too lazy to look it up and explain. You could get low downstream and high upstream, but nobody wants that, of course. I think it was German provider QSC that actually offered an option to temporarily invert upstream and downstream speeds.

With cable, I think the providers simply carried that over from ADSL. Why offer more than necessary?
 
I think the theoretical max speed for EuroDOCSIS 3.0 is 400/108Mbit or something.

At least back in the days, a common complaint about cable was that "the entire block had to share the same bandwidth" and that it usually created a bottleneck. Not sure why that wouldn't apply to every type of internet connection in the world in one form or another, but it's just what I heard back then.

If that still is the case (cable having bottlenecks, I mean) I guess they're afraid that torrent users would saturate the upstream. We all know how much traffic a popular torrent can generate if there is enough upstream bandwidth to meet demand. Meanwhile, a normal user will run out of disk space sooner or later regardless of how fast his download speed is.

If you happen to live in a building or a housing area where my ISP offers fiber, the pricing is exactly the same as I'm paying for cable... but with faster upload. You get 10/5, 24/5, 50/10 and 100/10 instead of 10/2, 24/2, 50/5 and 100/5.
 
Last edited:
If i remember correctly the cable modems download is just dumped to your segment from the isp, but with your modems id so the other modems just ignore it.
The upload part how ever is limited on the receiving end since the modem has to send the upload data to the same route in a smaller bandwidth (and it would be still "ignored" by the other modems).

Basicly "downloads" are Multicasted into the network, while uploads are Unicasted back to the Isp with very limited amount of bandwidth.

(This is how a company that creates ftth -hardware explained it to our class while we were visiting their factory.)
 
2233827864.png


lol.


Do i get some sort of special award? :D
 
Turns out my ISP was upgrading bandwidth all the time but I never saw any improvement because my cable modem was too old, and my account had some odd configuration settings due to my cable provider being acquired 3 times.

2255043208.png
 
2297727047.png


no fail here D:

ping is obviously wrong, it's generally between 1-5ms

Telstra cable (approximate distance to fibre is 2ft)
 
373213447.png


The 3G network provided by Vodafone on my work smartphone.
 
Top