A bit OT, just tested my downlink speed on 4 different web sites and got

4.5
5.25
7.5
9.06
(Mbit/sec)

and uplink varying from 300 kb/sec to 1 Mbit/sec.

How can they be so different and are any credible ?

rusty

On 04/12/2013 22:44, therustyone wrote:
A bit OT, just tested my downlink speed on 4 different web sites and got

4.5
5.25
7.5
9.06
(Mbit/sec)

and uplink varying from 300 kb/sec to 1 Mbit/sec.

How can they be so different and are any credible ?

rusty

It depends how close the site is to your entry onto the internet. If you
choose an underpowered server on the other side of the world then you
get a much slower speed than to a core server close to your ISP.

When I benchmark mine I get a pretty solid result +/- 10% on any
reasonable UK based tester. I have spent a while tuning my system up to
get the BRAS up to 5Mbps on a rural line.

BT speed tester with advanced diagnostics and BBC iPlayer diagnostics
are both reasonably powerful servers that can really exercise a link.

If you are streaming it over congested local WiFi all bets are off.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

"Martin Brown" wrote in message
...
On 04/12/2013 22:44, therustyone wrote:
A bit OT, just tested my downlink speed on 4 different web sites and got

4.5
5.25
7.5
9.06
(Mbit/sec)

and uplink varying from 300 kb/sec to 1 Mbit/sec.

How can they be so different and are any credible ?

rusty

It depends how close the site is to your entry onto the internet. If you
choose an underpowered server on the other side of the world then you get
a much slower speed than to a core server close to your ISP.

When I benchmark mine I get a pretty solid result +/- 10% on any
reasonable UK based tester. I have spent a while tuning my system up to
get the BRAS up to 5Mbps on a rural line.

BT speed tester with advanced diagnostics and BBC iPlayer diagnostics are
both reasonably powerful servers that can really exercise a link.

If you are streaming it over congested local WiFi all bets are off.



Yes, thats useful, the fastest was BBC which said there was enough for HD
iPlayer.

uswitch, or something similar, was the slowest. Do they have a vested
interest in showing a slow speed and all the competing ISI's rather faster ?

and it was over Wi-Fi with two or three routers visible nearby. I'll give
the direct ethernet connection a test later,though that's 25 m long.


rusty

Besides, the real speed is what can you do. I have supposedly 20 meg, and it
measures if anything faster than this, but there seem to be bottlenecks out
on the internet that cause pauses, not good in live streams.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"therustyone" wrote in message
...
A bit OT, just tested my downlink speed on 4 different web sites and got

4.5
5.25
7.5
9.06
(Mbit/sec)

and uplink varying from 300 kb/sec to 1 Mbit/sec.

How can they be so different and are any credible ?

rusty

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:20:20 -0000, John wrote:

I'll give the direct ethernet connection a test later,though that's 25 m
long.

Assuming there is nothing drastically wrong 100BaseT is speced to 100
Mbps over 100 m of Cat5 cable... I think Gigabit has the same length
limit.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Thursday 05 December 2013 16:57 Dave Liquorice wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:20:20 -0000, John wrote:

I'll give the direct ethernet connection a test later,though that's 25 m
long.

Assuming there is nothing drastically wrong 100BaseT is speced to 100
Mbps over 100 m of Cat5 cable... I think Gigabit has the same length
limit.


Yes - 1000baseT is also 100m max, even over Cat6/7 cable.
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 17:08:28 +0000, Tim Watts wrote:

I'll give the direct ethernet connection a test later,though
that's 25
m long.

Assuming there is nothing drastically wrong 100BaseT is speced to
100
Mbps over 100 m of Cat5 cable... I think Gigabit has the same
length
limit.

Yes - 1000baseT is also 100m max, even over Cat6/7 cable.

I should hope so, Cat6 or Cat7 is "better" than Cat5. B-) I think
you need Cat5e for 1000BaseT (Gigabit) at the long lengths ie the max
100 m, Cat5 won't quite cut it.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Thursday 05 December 2013 18:32 Dave Liquorice wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 17:08:28 +0000, Tim Watts wrote:

I'll give the direct ethernet connection a test later,though
that's 25
m long.

Assuming there is nothing drastically wrong 100BaseT is speced to
100
Mbps over 100 m of Cat5 cable... I think Gigabit has the same
length
limit.

Yes - 1000baseT is also 100m max, even over Cat6/7 cable.

I should hope so, Cat6 or Cat7 is "better" than Cat5. B-) I think
you need Cat5e for 1000BaseT (Gigabit) at the long lengths ie the max
100 m, Cat5 won't quite cut it.


Yep - exactly

My point was that 6/7 does not buy you anything over 5e though - but 6a/7
will get you 10gig speeds!
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

On 05/12/13 16:57, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:20:20 -0000, John wrote:

I'll give the direct ethernet connection a test later,though that's 25 m
long.

Assuming there is nothing drastically wrong 100BaseT is speced to 100
Mbps over 100 m of Cat5 cable... I think Gigabit has the same length
limit.


It will maintain that over a lot longer..

I THOUGHt gigabit was less however

but it seems you are in fact right!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabit_Ethernet


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:35:56 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Assuming there is nothing drastically wrong 100BaseT is speced to
100
Mbps over 100 m of Cat5 cable... I think Gigabit has the same
length
limit.

It will maintain that over a lot longer..

Which "it"? 100BaseT is speced to 100 Mbps at 100 m, it ain't going
to stop at 100 m and 1 mm. B-)

I THOUGHt gigabit was less however

but it seems you are in fact right!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigabit_Ethernet

On Cat5e as well. I looked at this and got moderately confused as
there is afir bit of conflicting information out there, when flooding
this place with network and coax. Decided that Cat5e is good
enough(*) and less finickity about being pulled twisted snagged and
kinked etc when installed by a spark rather than a network
installation bod who ought to know how to treat the cable...

(*) After all the data only comes off a bluray disc at about 50 Mbps
and SDI lives on coax.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Thu, 5 Dec 2013 10:20:20 -0000, "John"
wrote:


"Martin Brown" wrote in message
...
On 04/12/2013 22:44, therustyone wrote:
A bit OT, just tested my downlink speed on 4 different web sites and got

4.5
5.25
7.5
9.06
(Mbit/sec)

and uplink varying from 300 kb/sec to 1 Mbit/sec.

How can they be so different and are any credible ?

rusty

It depends how close the site is to your entry onto the internet. If you
choose an underpowered server on the other side of the world then you get
a much slower speed than to a core server close to your ISP.

When I benchmark mine I get a pretty solid result +/- 10% on any
reasonable UK based tester. I have spent a while tuning my system up to
get the BRAS up to 5Mbps on a rural line.

BT speed tester with advanced diagnostics and BBC iPlayer diagnostics are
both reasonably powerful servers that can really exercise a link.

If you are streaming it over congested local WiFi all bets are off.



Yes, thats useful, the fastest was BBC which said there was enough for HD
iPlayer.

uswitch, or something similar, was the slowest. Do they have a vested
interest in showing a slow speed and all the competing ISI's rather faster ?

Probably - so they can pick up a commission if you switch[1]

and it was over Wi-Fi with two or three routers visible nearby. I'll give
the direct ethernet connection a test later,though that's 25 m long.

[1] Usually switching won't make any difference to your speed since
you are likely to still use the same BT infrastructure.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

On 06/12/13 10:59, Mark wrote:
1] Usually switching won't make any difference to your speed since
you are likely to still use the same BT infrastructure.

synch speed yes, but overall speed can vary a lot.

cheapskate budget ISPs skimp on backhaul and peering links, and throttle
to keep performance barely acceptable.

a 5Mbps link is not a lot of good if the onward speed to some foreign
site is only 10kbps.

It used to be that synch speed alone was the limiting factor - not any more.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.