Excellent speeds. Well done Virgin! - Page 3

mcmanic · 13-06-2007, 19:27

nearly as good as my 10meg
Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:25:56 UTC

1st 512K took 8422 ms = 60.8 KB/sec, approx 501 Kbps, 0.49 Mbps
2nd 512K took 16219 ms = 31.6 KB/sec, approx 260 Kbps, 0.25 Mbps
3rd 512K took 6015 ms = 85.1 KB/sec, approx 701 Kbps, 0.68 Mbps
4th 512K took 8282 ms = 61.8 KB/sec, approx 509 Kbps, 0.5 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 493 Kbps, 0.48 Mbps

Nightwolf · 13-06-2007, 19:39

I'm from manchester and on 10mb connection and and this is what i get

fizgog · 13-06-2007, 19:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

3830 on 4M?? wow....

[snip]

This is more like it at 8:48pm, not bad since I've just booted up the computer so have not been using it since the morning when I left for work.

And don't forget the Nottingham area hasn't been graced with the 20Mb upgrade yet so there is no TM in place.

astra_lestat · 13-06-2007, 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by homealone

you are going to spoil it for all the people who use their broadband purely for downloading speedtest results & complaining they aren't 'getting what they pay for'...

Do you think you are a smartass?
I do the test only when I get bad connection. I don't care if I have 2.5M instead of 4M as long as my connection is stable and I have decent pings. Like tonight. I didn't post the test, although it was 1.3M!!!!!! instead of 4M but latency was OK 63 I think and I could do what I wanted to do. That matters. At the end of the day I do not need 4M, however I do need a stable connection but virgin fails completely to deliver a decent service. I started to experience problems starting from April.

---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:25 ----------

Right now:

---------- Post added at 21:27 ---------- Previous post was at 21:26 ----------

Down is 1/2 but latency is good and it's what that matters.

13-06-2007, 20:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

Do you think you are a smartass?
I do the test only when I get bad connection. I don't care if I have 2.5M instead of 4M as long as my connection is stable and I have decent pings. Like tonight. I didn't post the test, although it was 1.3M!!!!!! instead of 4M but latency was OK 63 I think and I could do what I wanted to do. That matters. At the end of the day I do not need 4M, however I do need a stable connection but virgin fails completely to deliver a decent service. I started to experience problems starting from April.

---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:25 ----------

Right now:

no I think speedtests are a crap way to measure your connection - as demonstrated by the post I replied to, I make no apology for the sarcasm, it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, just that so many posters using only speedtest results to provide 'evidence' for their poor performance is becoming tedious in the extreme.

astra_lestat · 13-06-2007, 20:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by homealone

no I think speedtests are a crap way to measure your connection - as demonstrated by the post I replied to, I make no apology for the sarcasm, it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, just that so many posters using only speedtest results to provide 'evidence' for their poor performance is becoming tedious in the extreme.

Insulting me won't change that opinion

Then you are not smart enough. Sorry about it.
Whenever I have a problem or bad ping in the game speed test clearly supports it. Moreover, its down is always the same as speed test here on the forum, the only reason why I use it instead of the forum's test because I can see latency and up. Down is the same on both tests, so it is pretty accurate.
Now...if you are saying that the test here is crap as well, I start to wonder who is this clever guy who still keeps it here???

fizgog · 13-06-2007, 20:46

I think people use speedtest.net as a basis because they can show a nice piccy to prove that they are not lying.

It doesn't mean that they don't use other forms of speed testing like downloading iso's or other speed testing software.

astra_lestat · 13-06-2007, 20:53

Frankly speaking his claim that the test is crap and people who mention it here have nothing to do but pay money for the Internet only to come here and complain reminds me of poor excuse for bad service and when there is nothing one can say what is the best line of defence? Right, it is an attack.

13-06-2007, 21:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by astra_lestat

Then you are not smart enough. Sorry about it.
Whenever I have a problem or bad ping in the game speed test clearly supports it. Moreover, its down is always the same as speed test here on the forum, the only reason why I use it instead of the forum's test because I can see latency and up. Down is the same on both tests, so it is pretty accurate.
Now...if you are saying that the test here is crap as well, I start to wonder who is this clever guys who still keeps it here???

a speed test is an indicator, if it says you have a good connection, then you have a good connection, if it says you have a bad connection then the speed test may be wrong - that is why I say it is a 'crap' way to measure your connection. You will note I am expressing a opinion, not stating a fact...

The 'clever guy' is one of the site's admin team, if you have a problem, take it up with him.

nfs6600 · 13-06-2007, 21:34

Spot.......on

1st 512K took 219 ms = 2337.9 KB/sec, approx 19264 Kbps, 18.81 Mbps
2nd 512K took 219 ms = 2337.9 KB/sec, approx 19264 Kbps, 18.81 Mbps
3rd 512K took 219 ms = 2337.9 KB/sec, approx 19264 Kbps, 18.81 Mbps
4th 512K took 234 ms = 2188 KB/sec, approx 18029 Kbps, 17.61 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 18955 Kbps, 18.51 Mbps

On another note, I think people need to calm down a touch

MovedGoalPosts · 13-06-2007, 21:40

And as if on cue I arrive and say Chill Out People

As has been pointed out, speed tests can be a useful indicator, but they can also be flawed.

**Paul** · 13-06-2007, 21:55

Speed tests from Speedtest.net can be an indicator, but that's about all they are useful for - you are not just testing the speed of your connection, but the speed of their server, and all the network in between - much of which is not VM's network (and indeed is across the atlantic in the US).

Our speedtest (linked at the top of the page) will give you a better indication as it is located on the VM network - you are still testing more than just your connection, but at least you are internal to the VM network so the results are a better indicator of your actual performance.

Remember that all speed tests (inc ours) are just rough estimates, not accurate measurements.

nfs6600 · 13-06-2007, 22:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

Speed tests from Speedtest.net can be an indicator, but that's about all they are useful for - you are not just testing the speed of your connection, but the speed of their server, and all the network in between - much of which is not VM's network (and indeed is across the atlantic in the US).

Very true. On speedtest I will get around a 14-16Mb result because it's leaving VM's network.

I've never had a complaint about my BB service. Always been top notch. Well done VM

willie · 13-06-2007, 22:14

What is it with people and speed tests they are to say the least unreliable at the best of times especially once it leaves the vm network as they have no control over other networks plus a multitude of other variables to be taken into conideration, contrary to popular belief the servers that the tests are going to they do not have an unlimited connection the majaority are using a 100mb card and if 100 people are doing the speeed test at the same time then you will get a false reading. I would reccomend doing a tracert to the server aswell to see where the problem starts to arise and if it is inside the vm network then by all means moan and groan about it.

nfs6600 · 13-06-2007, 22:16

Cue a tracert results thread over 100 pages long?