300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Hi, im an avid online gamer, and as such do not need tremendous download speeds such as 700k etc, only a nice ping and decent upload to send enough packets for a low ping.

Currently Im on 300/64 and basically when quaking online I have to limit the amount of packets i can send using cl_maxpackets 30 in quake3 game as the upload speed is far too low. This in turn doesnt allow me to get a lowest real draw ping possible, and clan mates from NL etc get a better ping than me to uk game servers such as Jolt.co.uk.

Is it possible to decrease the download from 300 in order so I can have an upload of at least 128k, as this is most efficient for me ?

Regards.

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Sorry I don't think it works that way, someone with more knowledge will be able to tell you in more detail.

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

To Get 128 'up' you would need to upgrade to 750

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Sorry, the ntl home broadband packages come in three flavours only: 300/64, 750/128 and 1536/256. You can't customise them I'm afraid. The business packages can provide synchronous connections (where the upstream is the same as the download), but they tend to be more expensive.

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

the other option would to be to go adsl 512/256 if you can get adsl of course :erm: :D

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Hrm, a blokey I know on the 300k gets superb pings to jolt on SoF2 (Q3 engine) sub-10ms, and bandwidth should be irrelevant to how quickly each datagram gets there.

Recheck them settings, upload speed of 64kbit is MORE THAN satisfactory for Q3, the game was produced when narrowband was still 'the norm' and even with 256k upstream I find the game only uses 24kbit of upstream most of the time.

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Which system - ex C&W or original NTL?
CM or STB?

In ex-C&W, Pace 1000 STB, it seems to be 300/128

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

All STB copper service is 128k up. Don't ask me why (because I don't know, oddly enough, except that it's an artefact from about 1999).

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

i'd say it does that, because the interactive needs 128k upload. just like interactive ran at 256k (so stb customers had 256k when they were on 150k)
that's my thinking :D

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

My nan is with Tiscali and gets 150 down and 256 up!

Maybe worth a look, as its only 17.99 a month :)

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Or maybe not as

a) Pings and bandwidth are nothing to do with each other, especially on cable
b) Tiscali's record as an ISP is appauling - check their ADSLGuide forum
c) ntl's latency will beat Tiscali's 99 times out of 100.

:)

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

The guy was asking about a greater upload speed, I told him about a service that provides it. I apologize for answering the posters question :rolleyes:

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

*Sigh* and he is under the impression this higher upload speed will improve his pings on quake 3, which it will not.

I apologise for daring to disagree with you even though you didn't read his post properly / don't understand why higher uploads are useless / recommend ****e ISPs with appauling records for customer service, speeds and latency. :rolleyes:

I was rushed at the time of posting and didn't have time to flower my response up with crap and just stuck to the facts - sorry if this offends however there's far too much crap flying about how great ADSL and certain providers are, check my corrections to Dr Awesome's all knowing (copy/pasted or completely inaccurate) ADSL thread or any of the other crap flowing on this forum about ADSL, there's tons of misinformation.

To be honest I think the powers that be should consider chucking the ADSL section and replacing it with a link to http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk, that way won't have people putting down as gospel that exchanges with ADSL get better reach by having DSLAMs added, that USB uses PPPoA and ethernet routers PPPoE, etc, nor that Bulldog are great.

Finally I'll repeat again, Q3 packets are of 200-ish bytes in size, most servers only accept ~ 30 updates/sec (the fps switch in the server config) so 200 x 30 - 6kB which is comfortably within the upload cap. The big data transfers are downstream when it gets hectic with loads of players on. Q3 works low pinging on all ntl tiers, and on 64k ISDN, and if OP is concerned about his pings I would have been happy to have a look at his connection and see what's up.

I'll sod off where I'm not criticised for daring to criticise one of the golden b0llocks crew - frankly the pro-DSL tone from certain moderators along with the BS misinformation that thrives and anti-ntl slant placed on various news stories is tiresome, fighting a losing battle is boring, I'll stick to working hard for customers behind the scenes, as I get it thrown in my face on here.

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Would you like me to call someone to help you untwist your knickers? :erm:

The guy asked about a service with a greater upload speed, I told him of one. Nothing more nothing less, if you want to look down your nose at someone for not knowing that upload doesn't equal better pings then have a go at the original poster, after all we shouldn't be so dumb!

If you're going to have an attitude every time you post then maybe it's time I stuck you on ignore, I don't come here to read posts about how dumb we all are and how our opinions don't matter, life's too short. :)

Edit - Thinking about it, when we last had Ntl DTV (that worked) they were advertising on channelNtl that people who wanted to game should have the 1Mbit service as it has the best upload for better pings, more people for you to scowl at. :dozey:

Re: 300/64 To 150/150 or equivalent allowed ?
 

Ignition,

I think you'd better go and chill out.