Superhub 200Mbit coming soon? (According to a survey) - Page 10

qasdfdsaq · 09-01-2015, 15:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

100Mb -> 120Mb -> 152Mb was relatively easy. 300Mb / 400Mb not so much.

True, but either way they were already well ahead with 100/120 in most areas (as long as you didn't take peak-time congestion into account). Beyond 'pwning BT' there wasn't really any other reason to come up with 152 was there?

Quote:

I'd best pass this on to the guys planning the additional capacity for this year's upgrades with the note that they need to find another ~33%.

Hehe. You and I both know that higher maximum speeds don't result in a proportional increase in utilisation so the actual required capacity will be less than the increase in headline speed.

Ignitionnet · 09-01-2015, 16:34

I'll restate. I'm privy to some capacity planning information and it's not being done on the basis of 400Mb with a 'huge' upstream increase for right now.

pip08456 · 09-01-2015, 23:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

I'll restate. I'm privy to some capacity planning information and it's not being done on the basis of 400Mb with a 'huge' upstream increase for right now.

As it's most likely confidential we won't ask either.

muppetman11 · 10-01-2015, 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Openreach and BT generally have never had any interest in competing with Virgin on speed and this isn't going to change.

Vectoring will happen as and when BT need it to in order to adhere to the Superfast Cymru contract and any others that name 100Mb as a requirement.

It's not just about keeping up with VM , the BT Ceo claims to be interested in making a big push on their TV product.

To qualify for a multi room box you need BB speeds of at least 23 Mbps which in my opinion isn't enough if you have two recordable HD boxes. Recording or watching one Internet HD channel uses around 8 Mbps with two tuners per box that can soon push some upto their maximum infinity connection.

BT have also discussed their aspirations to introduce 4K Sport which would require considerably more , Netflix 4K currently requires a connection of 15 Mbps or greater so you'd imagine fast moving sport would be at least 20.

Ignitionnet · 10-01-2015, 19:38

BT will be delivering about 40Mb to about 50% of the population. I suspect they're fine with that for a while.

To deliver too much more will start to cost some serious money. BT aren't huge fans of spending money on infrastructure, they prefer spending on content these days.

qasdfdsaq · 10-01-2015, 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

BT have also discussed their aspirations to introduce 4K Sport which would require considerably more , Netflix 4K currently requires a connection of 15 Mbps or greater so you'd imagine fast moving sport would be at least 20.

Considering 1080p Blu-ray averages over 30Mbps (taking the example of the LOTR trilogy) decent quality 4K is going to require considerably more than 15-20Mbps.

muppetman11 · 11-01-2015, 10:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Considering 1080p Blu-ray averages over 30Mbps (taking the example of the LOTR trilogy) decent quality 4K is going to require considerably more than 15-20Mbps.

But then your comparing optical media to broadcast/streaming , Netflix streams 4K using the HEVC/H.265 codec and recommends a connection of 25 Mbps although the stream requires around 15 Mbps the results are pretty good in my experience.

qasdfdsaq · 11-01-2015, 15:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetman11

But then your comparing optical media to broadcast/streaming

That's the whole point. Streaming quality is crap. Streaming services are held to pathetically poor standards because everyone is used to sub-720p quality being labelled '1080p' and proper 1080p quality being labelled 4K.

Quote:

Netflix streams 4K using the HEVC/H.265 codec and recommends a connection of 25 Mbps although the stream requires around 15 Mbps the results are pretty good in my experience.

The results are pathetically poor in my experience.

pythagoras · 11-01-2015, 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

100Mb -> 120Mb -> 152Mb was relatively easy. 300Mb / 400Mb not so much.

I'd best pass this on to the guys planning the additional capacity for this year's upgrades with the note that they need to find another ~33%.

So this years upgrade is ~225Mbps? as 33% on top of that is 300Mbps

Ignitionnet · 11-01-2015, 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by pythagoras

So this years upgrade is ~225Mbps? as 33% on top of that is 300Mbps

This year's top tier will be 300

Kushan · 11-01-2015, 20:34

I'd love to see some genuine comparisons with Netflix streamed quality and a blu-ray copy.

Ignitionnet · 11-01-2015, 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kushan

I'd love to see some genuine comparisons with Netflix streamed quality and a blu-ray copy.

Here ya go - 4K streaming versus Blu Ray.

https://www.avforums.com/article/is-...-blu-ray.10589

1080p streaming versus Blu Ray.

http://hometheaterreview.com/why-blu...reaming-today/

qasdfdsaq · 12-01-2015, 01:42

Heh, I forgot about the audio. Blu-ray disks with DTS-HD Master audio (which are widely available today) can use up to 25Mbit/s just for the audio alone. Never mind what upcoming Dolby Atmos audio tracks will use, with up to 128 audio streams...

---------- Post added at 00:42 ---------- Previous post was at 00:41 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kushan

I'd love to see some genuine comparisons with Netflix streamed quality and a blu-ray copy.

I'd offer, but without a Blu-Ray drive in my PC all I can do is take poor quality phone-cam shots of my projector screen while playing it... kinda defeats the point. Also lack of frame control that way.

Ignitionnet · 12-01-2015, 02:08

In the case of the Lord of the Rings trilogy the following bit rates were used for the extended edition Blu Rays:

LOTR: Fellowship of the Ring
Average video: 29.84Mbps
Average audio: 4.717Mbps

LOTR: The Two Towers
Average video: 29.9Mbps
Average audio: 4.427Mbps

LOTR: The Return of the King
Average video: 30.23Mbps
Average audio: 4.474Mbps

The comparisons I linked were notable in mentioning the difference in audio quality.

Fingers crossed that, at some point fairly soon, enhanced lossy codecs and lower bit rates aren't needed to compensate for sub-standard networks.

Kushan · 12-01-2015, 10:25

Yeah, I wasn't trying to dispute the streaming vs Blu-ray argument at all, I was genuinely curious to see how things like streamed h.265 stacks up against say an MPEG-2 blu-ray. It's one thing to mention bit rates but if the CODEC is naff, then it's not the full picture.