For years I used the BBC's iPlayer diagnostics site for a quick, simple,
lucid way to see what speed our BB was running at. It did a quick test,
showed you your speeds found, and simply told you what BBC streaming
facilities you'd be able to make use of (from audio up to HD telly iirc).

It used to be at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/diagnostics but for
some reason which I haven't been able to fathom, they have deleted it
utterly.

I'm (actually) not that interested in seeing if I can use iPlayer or
whatever: I'm interested in seeing the current speed for our line.

What do people recommend these days as the simplest, most accurate, and
(like the Beeb's site used to be) the most disinterested site for
displaying your speed?


Plusnet point me at http://www.speedtest.btwholesale.com/ which seems
nice and straightforward, but it's not exactly informative for the
amateur (what does Ping latency mean ffs?).

According to that site, btw, I am getting 4.37Mbps d/l (which seems
fairly good, for us), 0.41Mbps u/l (which seems crap, but I don't upload
stuff much), and 41.75ms ping latency.

Cheers
John

"Another John" wrote in message
]...
For years I used the BBC's iPlayer diagnostics site for a quick, simple,
lucid way to see what speed our BB was running at. It did a quick test,
showed you your speeds found, and simply told you what BBC streaming
facilities you'd be able to make use of (from audio up to HD telly iirc).

It used to be at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/diagnostics but for
some reason which I haven't been able to fathom, they have deleted it
utterly.

I'm (actually) not that interested in seeing if I can use iPlayer or
whatever: I'm interested in seeing the current speed for our line.

What do people recommend these days as the simplest, most accurate, and
(like the Beeb's site used to be) the most disinterested site for
displaying your speed?


Plusnet point me at http://www.speedtest.btwholesale.com/ which seems
nice and straightforward, but it's not exactly informative for the
amateur (what does Ping latency mean ffs?).

According to that site, btw, I am getting 4.37Mbps d/l (which seems
fairly good, for us), 0.41Mbps u/l (which seems crap, but I don't upload
stuff much), and 41.75ms ping latency.

http://www.speedtest.net/

On 16/07/2014 13:04, Another John wrote:
For years I used the BBC's iPlayer diagnostics site for a quick, simple,
lucid way to see what speed our BB was running at. It did a quick test,
showed you your speeds found, and simply told you what BBC streaming
facilities you'd be able to make use of (from audio up to HD telly iirc).

...

I'm (actually) not that interested in seeing if I can use iPlayer or
whatever: I'm interested in seeing the current speed for our line.

What do people recommend these days...?

Plusnet point me at http://www.speedtest.btwholesale.com/ which seems
nice and straightforward, but it's not exactly informative for the
amateur.

I use the ThinkBroadband one at:
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedt...ontent=sidebar

They seem to give differing results. ThinkBroadband is currently
reporting 18 Mbps on my nominal 20 Mbps cable connection whilst the
BT speedtest reports 17 Mbps and www.speedtest.net reports 8 Mbps.
(Though the latter has the best graphics.)

what does Ping latency mean ffs?

It's how long your data packets take to cross the Internet, rather
than how fast they travel. Compare a travel report that tells you
you have a clear 70 mph run down a motorway, but your destination
is 2 hours away.

Latency is important to people playing online games, as the latency
is added on to their reaction time. So a long latency means they've
been shot by an opponent before they can even see their opponent
on-screen. Lowish latency is also useful for 2-way audio/video
calling, such as Skype and equivalents.

If you are streaming data in one direction, such as watching online
video or downloading files/web pages, latency isn't particularly
important (unless it's so long that it interferes with acknowledgement
packets).

--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

In article ,
Graham Nye wrote:

On 16/07/2014 13:04, Another John wrote:
.....
what does Ping latency mean ffs?

It's how long your data packets take to cross the Internet, rather
than how fast they travel. Compare a travel report that tells you
you have a clear 70 mph run down a motorway, but your destination
is 2 hours away.

Latency is important to people playing online games, as the latency
is added on to their reaction time. So a long latency means they've
been shot by an opponent before they can even see their opponent
on-screen. Lowish latency is also useful for 2-way audio/video
calling, such as Skype and equivalents.

If you are streaming data in one direction, such as watching online
video or downloading files/web pages, latency isn't particularly
important (unless it's so long that it interferes with acknowledgement
packets).

Great: you should get BT to pay you to add that nice lucid, real-world
description to their page Graham! Thanks a lot.

BTW I know what a ping is (I was working in computing [as an info
officer] when we routinely used ping to find if a host was alive.
However BT's use of the jargon on that page is not user-friendly, at all.

John

"Graham Nye" wrote in message
...
On 16/07/2014 13:04, Another John wrote:
For years I used the BBC's iPlayer diagnostics site for a quick, simple,
lucid way to see what speed our BB was running at. It did a quick test,
showed you your speeds found, and simply told you what BBC streaming
facilities you'd be able to make use of (from audio up to HD telly iirc).

...

I'm (actually) not that interested in seeing if I can use iPlayer or
whatever: I'm interested in seeing the current speed for our line.

What do people recommend these days...?

Plusnet point me at http://www.speedtest.btwholesale.com/ which seems
nice and straightforward, but it's not exactly informative for the
amateur.

I use the ThinkBroadband one at:
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedt...ontent=sidebar

They seem to give differing results. ThinkBroadband is currently
reporting 18 Mbps on my nominal 20 Mbps cable connection whilst the
BT speedtest reports 17 Mbps and www.speedtest.net reports 8 Mbps.
(Though the latter has the best graphics.)

They both gave me more or less the same speeds.
I'd give www.speedtest.net another go.



what does Ping latency mean ffs?

It's how long your data packets take to cross the Internet, rather
than how fast they travel. Compare a travel report that tells you
you have a clear 70 mph run down a motorway, but your destination
is 2 hours away.

Latency is important to people playing online games, as the latency
is added on to their reaction time. So a long latency means they've
been shot by an opponent before they can even see their opponent
on-screen. Lowish latency is also useful for 2-way audio/video
calling, such as Skype and equivalents.

If you are streaming data in one direction, such as watching online
video or downloading files/web pages, latency isn't particularly
important (unless it's so long that it interferes with acknowledgement
packets).

--
Graham Nye
news(a)thenyes.org.uk

On 16/07/2014 14:12, Mr Pounder wrote:
"Another John" wrote in message
]...
For years I used the BBC's iPlayer diagnostics site for a quick, simple,
lucid way to see what speed our BB was running at. It did a quick test,
showed you your speeds found, and simply told you what BBC streaming
facilities you'd be able to make use of (from audio up to HD telly iirc).

It used to be at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/diagnostics but for
some reason which I haven't been able to fathom, they have deleted it
utterly.

I'm (actually) not that interested in seeing if I can use iPlayer or
whatever: I'm interested in seeing the current speed for our line.

What do people recommend these days as the simplest, most accurate, and
(like the Beeb's site used to be) the most disinterested site for
displaying your speed?


Plusnet point me at http://www.speedtest.btwholesale.com/ which seems
nice and straightforward, but it's not exactly informative for the
amateur (what does Ping latency mean ffs?).

According to that site, btw, I am getting 4.37Mbps d/l (which seems
fairly good, for us), 0.41Mbps u/l (which seems crap, but I don't upload
stuff much), and 41.75ms ping latency.

http://www.speedtest.net/



+1

On 16/07/2014 14:39, Graham Nye wrote:


I use the ThinkBroadband one at:
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedt...ontent=sidebar


+1

That measures download speed in two different ways, and gives a clue as
to what you might expect under various circumstances.
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On 16/07/2014 13:04, Another John wrote:


According to that site, btw, I am getting 4.37Mbps d/l (which seems
fairly good, for us), 0.41Mbps u/l (which seems crap, but I don't upload
stuff much), and 41.75ms ping latency.


Depending on what flavour of ADSL your exchange/ISP is providing, 400k
(ish) may be the highest upload speed available. What are the upstream
and downstream synch rates and noise margins?
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 20:36:07 +0100, Roger Mills
wrote:

On 16/07/2014 13:04, Another John wrote:


According to that site, btw, I am getting 4.37Mbps d/l (which seems
fairly good, for us), 0.41Mbps u/l (which seems crap, but I don't upload
stuff much), and 41.75ms ping latency.


Depending on what flavour of ADSL your exchange/ISP is providing, 400k
(ish) may be the highest upload speed available. What are the upstream
and downstream synch rates and noise margins?

This information would be useful.

However his upload speed may be capped at 448Kbs. Some ISPs will lift
the cap if you ask them. YMMV.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) If a man stands in a forest and no woman is around
(")_(") is he still wrong?

On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:04:09 +0100, Another John
wrote:

For years I used the BBC's iPlayer diagnostics site for a quick, simple,
lucid way to see what speed our BB was running at. It did a quick test,
showed you your speeds found, and simply told you what BBC streaming
facilities you'd be able to make use of (from audio up to HD telly iirc).

It used to be at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/diagnostics but for
some reason which I haven't been able to fathom, they have deleted it
utterly.

I'm (actually) not that interested in seeing if I can use iPlayer or
whatever: I'm interested in seeing the current speed for our line.

What do people recommend these days as the simplest, most accurate, and
(like the Beeb's site used to be) the most disinterested site for
displaying your speed?

http://www.speedtest.net/ seems to be ok and consistent.



Plusnet point me at http://www.speedtest.btwholesale.com/ which seems
nice and straightforward, but it's not exactly informative for the
amateur (what does Ping latency mean ffs?).

According to that site, btw, I am getting 4.37Mbps d/l (which seems
fairly good, for us), 0.41Mbps u/l (which seems crap, but I don't upload
stuff much), and 41.75ms ping latency.

Ping time reflects the round trip time for an end to end response of
the link. It's an important parameter when using the internet
connection in an interactive session such as when playing 1st person
shoot 'em ups with others over the internet (internet play).

Too large a Ping time value, eg 70ms or longer, will leave you at a
disadvantage compared to other players enjoying 30 or 40ms ping times
(between themselves and the game server they've chosen for their
network gameplay) since they'll be able to blow you away before you've
had a chance to dodge incoming fire.

Your figures tell me one thing straight away and that is; you're not
with a cable ISP (effectively VM - are there any other cable companies
in the UK?).

Just to make you feel bad, here's my results from speedtest.net;

Chosen endpoint server is about 45 miles away, hence the tight ping
times.

1st test run;
Ping 9ms
D/L speed 33.55Mbps
U/L speed 1.95Mbps

2nd test run;
Ping 10ms
D/L speed 33.45Mbps
U/L speed 1.94Mbps

3rd test run;
Ping 10ms
D/L speed 33.41Mbps
U/L speed 1.95Mbps

Just for laughs, I chose a closer end point server (also not part of
VM's network) less than ten miles from me;

1st test run;
Ping 28ms
D/L speed 32.71Mbps
U/L speed 1.96Mbps

2nd test run;
Ping 32ms
D/L speed 33.14Mbps
U/L speed 1.97Mbps

As you can see, choosing a closer end point doesn't necessarilly
improve ping times or speed. Although in this second case, the speed
figures are within a percent or so of each other between the chosen
servers, the ping times being the biggest difference (and in the
opposite sense to what one might have expected!).

You don't need me to tell you that I'm on the standard 30Mbps VM
cable broadband service (35,000,000 bps, actually) with the 2Mbps U/L
speed option as opposed to the dearer and slightly less stingy 3Mbps
U/L option.

The speed.net results reflect my local connection speed as supplied
by VM and reported by the VM Superhub cable modem/router.

It might not be too obvious to you but most of the rest of the
internet cannot match those local cable speeds. Indeed, a good portion
of it won't even match your existing D/L speed (yeah, hard to believe,
I know).

BTW, your U/L speed isn't quite as crap as you might suppose (it's
just under 10% of the download speed which is a typical ratio in the
asymetric use of the link bandwidth budget over the local line (be it
ADSL or Cable). In my case, I'm only getting 5.7%, well short of the
'accepted' 10% for the U/L link speed.

HTH & HAND :-)
--
J B Good

On Friday, 18 July 2014 12:43:27 UTC+1, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:04:09 +0100, Another John

wrote:




Just to make you feel bad, here's my results from speedtest.net;

here's mine just default setting after getting my new virgin superhub 2

imac
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3602122443


iPad using 5GHz
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/i/893005055
---------------------------------

at work
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3632704071


it'd be great for game playing :-(

1st test run;
Ping 9ms
D/L speed 33.55Mbps
U/L speed 1.95Mbps

2nd test run;
Ping 10ms
D/L speed 33.45Mbps
U/L speed 1.94Mbps

3rd test run;
Ping 10ms
D/L speed 33.41Mbps
U/L speed 1.95Mbps

Just for laughs, I chose a closer end point server (also not part of
VM's network) less than ten miles from me;

1st test run;
Ping 28ms
D/L speed 32.71Mbps
U/L speed 1.96Mbps

2nd test run;
Ping 32ms
D/L speed 33.14Mbps
U/L speed 1.97Mbps

As you can see, choosing a closer end point doesn't necessarilly
improve ping times or speed. Although in this second case, the speed
figures are within a percent or so of each other between the chosen
servers, the ping times being the biggest difference (and in the
opposite sense to what one might have expected!).

You don't need me to tell you that I'm on the standard 30Mbps VM
cable broadband service (35,000,000 bps, actually) with the 2Mbps U/L
speed option as opposed to the dearer and slightly less stingy 3Mbps
U/L option.

The speed.net results reflect my local connection speed as supplied
by VM and reported by the VM Superhub cable modem/router.

It might not be too obvious to you but most of the rest of the
internet cannot match those local cable speeds. Indeed, a good portion
of it won't even match your existing D/L speed (yeah, hard to believe,
I know).


Nope, its not, its what we get here on VM its only when you get to
servers somewhat outside Europe it drops of a bit etc...

BTW, your U/L speed isn't quite as crap as you might suppose (it's
just under 10% of the download speed which is a typical ratio in the
asymetric use of the link bandwidth budget over the local line (be it
ADSL or Cable). In my case, I'm only getting 5.7%, well short of the
'accepted' 10% for the U/L link speed.

HTH & HAND :-)

--
Tony Sayer

The Beeb used to be good. I wouldn't trust some of the private ones as they may have an interest in you changing ISP and so reporting slower rates on your current one.
Rusty

On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 03:23:15 -0700 (PDT), therustyone wrote:

The Beeb used to be good. I wouldn't trust some of the private ones as they may have an interest in you changing ISP and so reporting slower rates on your current one.
Rusty

Try OOKLA
--
Jim S

therustyone wrote

The Beeb used to be good. I wouldn't trust some of the
private ones as they may have an interest in you changing
ISP and so reporting slower rates on your current one.

Mindlessly silly. How would they ever know whether you
are checking the speed on the one you changed to because
of the previous deliberately misleading speed it gave you ?

Mindlessly silly. How would they ever know whether you

are checking the speed on the one you changed to because

of the previous deliberately misleading speed it gave you ?



Right. Glad that ugly rumour has finally been scotched.

On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 06:33:10 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

On Friday, 18 July 2014 12:43:27 UTC+1, Johny B Good wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:04:09 +0100, Another John

wrote:




Just to make you feel bad, here's my results from speedtest.net;

here's mine just default setting after getting my new virgin superhub 2

imac
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3602122443


Obviously the 150Mbps service. :-)

I doubt whether the mighty Microsoft and Nvidia servers will match
your D/L link speed. You'll probably have to download from a well
seeded torrent to saturate the link (or use one of those download
managers that cheats by pretending to be more than client grabbing the
same but different parts of the file).

iPad using 5GHz
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/i/893005055
---------------------------------

at work
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3632704071


it'd be great for game playing :-(


You're not kidding! I'd assume joining a network game on that
connection would be a "Sackable Offence", or, at the very least,
lumber you with an official warning.

If you're well in with the boss (or you _are_ the Boss) you might be
able to persuade him (or you) to let you try it out of hours. :-)

To be perfectly honest, the 30Mbps service is more than ample for my
needs, even the "Retentions" service (5 or 10Mbps) would do for most
of my interweb activity (it would have seemed like an indulgent luxury
not so many years ago - I remember when the lowest speed offering was
a mere 128Kbps (successively upgraded "For Free" to 150Kbps - 2Mbps
- 4Mbps - 10Mbps - 30Mbps!).
--
J B Good

therustyone wrote:

Mindlessly silly. How would they ever know whether you

are checking the speed on the one you changed to because

of the previous deliberately misleading speed it gave you ?

Right. Glad that ugly rumour has finally been scotched.

Oh no it hasn't.

They can easily determine what ISP you're routed through. If it's one of
their friends they could show a good figure and a poor one if not.

--
Mike Clarke

Mike Clarke wrote
therustyone wrote

Mindlessly silly. How would they ever know whether you
are checking the speed on the one you changed to because
of the previous deliberately misleading speed it gave you ?

Right. Glad that ugly rumour has finally been scotched.

Oh no it hasn't.

They can easily determine what ISP you're routed through. If it's one
of their friends they could show a good figure and a poor one if not.

But would be quickly found out when people start asking why the
reported speed is so different to what other speed checkers report.

On Sunday, 20 July 2014 13:26:34 UTC+1, Johny B Good wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 06:33:10 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave

wrote:

On Friday, 18 July 2014 12:43:27 UTC+1, Johny B Good wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:04:09 +0100, Another John



wrote:

Just to make you feel bad, here's my results from speedtest.net;
here's mine just default setting after getting my new virgin superhub 2

imac

http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3602122443


Obviously the 150Mbps service. :-)

Yep, just felt I had to go for it.




I doubt whether the mighty Microsoft and Nvidia servers will match
your D/L link speed.

yes I'll have to fiodn somethink to give it a test.
A major apple system system update would be good test but I've noticed the apples servers can;t always handle it themselves.

at work

http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3632704071


it'd be great for game playing :-(


You're not kidding! I'd assume joining a network game on that
connection would be a "Sackable Offence", or, at the very least,
lumber you with an official warning.

A difficult one to judge as I think I could at lunchtime, but then perhaps it would adversly affect other services in the lab, although I'm connected to the same switch as are the other 24 or so PCs here.




If you're well in with the boss (or you _are_ the Boss) you might be
able to persuade him (or you) to let you try it out of hours. :-)

Did so a while ago but didn't have a suitable game I could try it on.

To be perfectly honest, the 30Mbps service is more than ample for my
needs, even the "Retentions" service (5 or 10Mbps) would do for most
of my interweb activity (it would have seemed like an indulgent luxury
not so many years ago - I remember when the lowest speed offering was
a mere 128Kbps (successively upgraded "For Free" to 150Kbps - 2Mbps
- 4Mbps - 10Mbps - 30Mbps!).

It is amazing when I think how long it took to copy from one floopy to another on a macplus.

I didn;t really go for the full download speed, it was the upload speed that attracted me as putting video files on youtube seemed to take ages and that was just SD or lower res. let alone what HD would have taken.

On Wed, 23 Jul 2014 03:12:36 -0700 (PDT), whisky-dave
wrote:

====snip====

I didn;t really go for the full download speed, it was the upload speed that attracted me as putting video files on youtube seemed to take ages and that was just SD or lower res. let alone what HD would have taken.

I suppose it's still a lot cheaper than a 12Mbps up, 12Mbps down
symetric DSL service (only you get the bonus of a 150Mbps download
speed).
--
J B Good