Broadband Speeds

DullGreyGuy

duffman1233211 said:

littleboo said:

^ The other thing to factor in is why do you need that speed? 
Absolutely this. What prompted you to upgrade? There is no point in paying for more bandwidth unless it improves something which you want to improve.  

It was costing an extra 80p a month or something to get the extra speed, so thought why not, but I did not fully understand that the device used and router etc would effect things. 

You are right, 300 is probably enough tbh, but for such a little price increase it seemed worth it.

There is also a concurrency consideration. We dont need 1Gbps really for any one user but with streaming multiple 4K videos, maybe updating software on a couple of phones or laptops etc its the aggregate use of ensuring everyone can get a decent speed for all that they are doing 

vacheron

DullGreyGuy said:

duffman1233211 said:

littleboo said:

^ The other thing to factor in is why do you need that speed? 
Absolutely this. What prompted you to upgrade? There is no point in paying for more bandwidth unless it improves something which you want to improve.  

It was costing an extra 80p a month or something to get the extra speed, so thought why not, but I did not fully understand that the device used and router etc would effect things. 

You are right, 300 is probably enough tbh, but for such a little price increase it seemed worth it.

There is also a concurrency consideration. We dont need 1Gbps really for any one user but with streaming multiple 4K videos, maybe updating software on a couple of phones or laptops etc its the aggregate use of ensuring everyone can get a decent speed for all that they are doing 

The main benefit I can see is for people who are downloading new AAA games to PC's / Consoles etc. and who want them in a hurry, as these can now exceed 30-50GB in size!

Youtube content creators would use it for the proportionally faster upload, but in their case a balanced 150 down / 150 up connection would give faster upload speeds. As I host some media servers at home, and upload large amounts of backup data to the cloud regularly, I would be over the moon to be offered a 150/150mb consumer product rather than a 910/105mb asynchronous connection. 

From my testing a 4K HDR 7.1 YouTube download streaming requires about 50mbps sustained, 1080pHD, barely more than 10-15MBPS, so even with about 4-5 people simultaneously streaming would leave about 85-90% of a gigabit internet connection's download capacity completely unused.

    

MattMattMattUK

vacheron said:

DullGreyGuy said:

duffman1233211 said:

littleboo said:

^ The other thing to factor in is why do you need that speed? 
Absolutely this. What prompted you to upgrade? There is no point in paying for more bandwidth unless it improves something which you want to improve.  

It was costing an extra 80p a month or something to get the extra speed, so thought why not, but I did not fully understand that the device used and router etc would effect things. 

You are right, 300 is probably enough tbh, but for such a little price increase it seemed worth it.

There is also a concurrency consideration. We dont need 1Gbps really for any one user but with streaming multiple 4K videos, maybe updating software on a couple of phones or laptops etc its the aggregate use of ensuring everyone can get a decent speed for all that they are doing 

The main benefit I can see is for people who are downloading new AAA games to PC's / Consoles etc. and who want them in a hurry, as these can now exceed 30-50GB in size!

Many modern releases are 100-200GB these days, 50GB is relatively small. 

vacheron said:

Youtube content creators would use it for the proportionally faster upload, but in their case a balanced 150 down / 150 up connection would give faster upload speeds. As I host some media servers at home, and upload large amounts of backup data to the cloud regularly, I would be over the moon to be offered a 150/150mb consumer product rather than a 910/105mb asynchronous connection. 

Openreach have confirmed that the new symmetric fibre products will launch in April 2025. From what I remember the symmetric product would be a minor cost increase of £2-4 per connection at wholesale depending on base speed, so probably £5-10 retail. 

vacheron said:

From my testing a 4K HDR 7.1 YouTube download streaming requires about 50mbps sustained, 1080pHD, barely more than 10-15MBPS, so even with about 4-5 people simultaneously streaming would leave about 85-90% of a gigabit internet connection's download capacity completely unused.

It is actually really hard to measure because nearly all streaming services throttle bit rate even within a 4K HDR container, YouTube is probably the worst if you lock it to 4k it will throttle the bit rate down and totally ruin image quality, though YouTube compression leaves much to be desired even at maximum bit rates, regularly flattening colour space and experiencing macro blocking. In theory 4k/60 in HDR is around 85Mbps but YouTube will cap out at a maximum of 50Mbps and regularly less even when there is huge amounts of bandwidth to spare. 

vacheron

MattMattMattUK said:

vacheron said:

DullGreyGuy said:

duffman1233211 said:

littleboo said:

^ The other thing to factor in is why do you need that speed? 
Absolutely this. What prompted you to upgrade? There is no point in paying for more bandwidth unless it improves something which you want to improve.  

It was costing an extra 80p a month or something to get the extra speed, so thought why not, but I did not fully understand that the device used and router etc would effect things. 

You are right, 300 is probably enough tbh, but for such a little price increase it seemed worth it.

There is also a concurrency consideration. We dont need 1Gbps really for any one user but with streaming multiple 4K videos, maybe updating software on a couple of phones or laptops etc its the aggregate use of ensuring everyone can get a decent speed for all that they are doing 

The main benefit I can see is for people who are downloading new AAA games to PC's / Consoles etc. and who want them in a hurry, as these can now exceed 30-50GB in size!

vacheron said:

Youtube content creators would use it for the proportionally faster upload, but in their case a balanced 150 down / 150 up connection would give faster upload speeds. As I host some media servers at home, and upload large amounts of backup data to the cloud regularly, I would be over the moon to be offered a 150/150mb consumer product rather than a 910/105mb asynchronous connection. 

Openreach have confirmed that the new symmetric fibre products will launch in April 2025. From what I remember the symmetric product would be a minor cost increase of £2-4 per connection at wholesale depending on base speed, so probably £5-10 retail. 

That's good to know. I'll watch out for that next year. The only products I have seen previously were commercial symmetric DSL lines which came with uptime guarantees etc. and as a result were "relatively" slow yet also hundreds of pounds per month! 

DullGreyGuy

vacheron said:

DullGreyGuy said:

duffman1233211 said:

littleboo said:

^ The other thing to factor in is why do you need that speed? 
Absolutely this. What prompted you to upgrade? There is no point in paying for more bandwidth unless it improves something which you want to improve.  

It was costing an extra 80p a month or something to get the extra speed, so thought why not, but I did not fully understand that the device used and router etc would effect things. 

You are right, 300 is probably enough tbh, but for such a little price increase it seemed worth it.

There is also a concurrency consideration. We dont need 1Gbps really for any one user but with streaming multiple 4K videos, maybe updating software on a couple of phones or laptops etc its the aggregate use of ensuring everyone can get a decent speed for all that they are doing 

The main benefit I can see is for people who are downloading new AAA games to PC's / Consoles etc. and who want them in a hurry, as these can now exceed 30-50GB in size!

Youtube content creators would use it for the proportionally faster upload, but in their case a balanced 150 down / 150 up connection would give faster upload speeds. As I host some media servers at home, and upload large amounts of backup data to the cloud regularly, I would be over the moon to be offered a 150/150mb consumer product rather than a 910/105mb asynchronous connection. 

From my testing a 4K HDR 7.1 YouTube download streaming requires about 50mbps sustained, 1080pHD, barely more than 10-15MBPS, so even with about 4-5 people simultaneously streaming would leave about 85-90% of a gigabit internet connection's download capacity completely unused.

Ours is synchronous so up speeds tend to be around 960mbps at the router and about 650mbps over wifi from laptop. 

4K Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos tends to be highly compressed from online sources hence the 50mbps; if you're looking at 4k bluray thats been ripped it's about 150Mbps. If you've more money than sense and have one of the cinema streaming services their files can be 100-200GB in size. 

When doing DA work can be working on data files that are a few GB, the fast upload certainly is appreciated then! Apple updates tend to be 2-5GB and with multiple phones, tablets, laptops to all update at the same time its useful