How to determine broadband speeds?

John_Gray

kwikbreaks wrote: »

If you are on cable then are you using the VM AV which is based on Kaspersky?
Kaspersky is well known for screwing up speedtests - I think it probably buffers the download, scans it , then releases the buffered data to the application.

I'm actually using KIS1011. I've just Paused protection, then run Speedtest.net again using a server in my city - 84.32 Mbps download on my 10 Mbps! Curiously the upload speed is always correct (AFAICS).
The figures from ThinkBroadband's speed tester are always less than 10 Mbps, usually about 9.4 Mbps, which I believe.

googler

What would generally be regarded as Slow/Medium/Fast speeds?

I'm showing 7,751 kBps downstream, and 994 kBps upstream on a BT HomeHub....

GunJack

^^^^ depends on your line stats.... what's your line attenuation downstream ?? plug it into this for the most accurate estimate of what you could get

http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/max_speed_calc.php

jayme1

GaryS wrote: »

I personally think that the router stats ar more accurate.

Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]:1,261 / 8,188

you can use the router one for ADSL but for virginmedia cable there is no 'speed' quote in the router.

OP you say the internet 'feels slow', what web browser are you using to access the internet? if it is internet explorer then I would bet that is why it feels slow, if you install firefox or google chrome you will notice a significant difference.
also look on your bill what speed you pay for then do several speedtests at different times of the day on several sites/servers, with virgin media cable you should be getting very close to what you are paying for.

GunJack

f it is internet explorer then I would bet that is why it feels slow, if you install firefox or google chrome you will notice a significant difference.


not necessarily......firefox runs the slowest on my pc, opera is faster than IE, but both leave FF stood still.

googler

GunJack wrote: »

^^^^ depends on your line stats....

I thought I was quoting the line stats......

GunJack

googler wrote: »

I thought I was quoting the line stats......

well, part of them. You really need to post the downstream and upstream attenuation figures in dB. What you've posted is the current sync speeds down/up. Whether they are good or bad depends on what your line could connect at, which will depend on the attenuation mainly

googler

The Advanced tab tells me;

Bandwidth (Up/Down) [kbps/kbps]: 994 / 7,751
Data Transferred (Sent/Received) [MB/MB]: 71.54 / 187.97
Output Power (Up/Down) [dBm]: 12.5 / 20.5
Line Attenuation (Up/Down) [dB]: 19.5 / 40.0
SN Margin (Up/Down) [dB]: 5.0 / 3.5
Vendor ID (Local/Remote): TMMB / TSTC
Loss of Framing (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Signal (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Power (Local/Remote): 0 / 0
Loss of Link (Remote): 0
Error Seconds (Local/Remote): 189 / 0
FEC Errors (Up/Down): 10,844,306 / 122,506,536
CRC Errors (Up/Down): 65,656 / 16,563
HEC Errors (Up/Down): 86,651 / 14,987
Line Profile: Fast

Interpretation hints, please?

kwikbreaks

Assuming this is plain ADSL (upto 8Mbps) then the 7,751 downstream sync is about par for the course with your 40dB attenuation.

The current noise margin is running a bit low at 3.5dB (around 6dB is usually the default). The margin will vary anyway though and so long as the connection doesn't drop it's nothing to worry about.

Did you ask for a FAST rather than INTERLEAVED profile? FAST gives lower pings so is favoured by gamers but usually delivers lower overall throughput as there is far less error correction so more packets have to be retransmitted. That said you are also showing FEC errors which I thought only occurred with interleave so it may be that the router is reporting FAST when it isn't.

The bandwidth used suggests only a short time since reboot yet the error counts suggest ages. This is probably some idiosyncracy with the router once again.

penrhyn

Googler, did you take those stats from your test socket?
If not give it a try.