NTL Speeds and Throttling - Page 4

Ignition · 12-03-2006, 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

Ah, more conspiracies, some people just love them. You seem to spend so much time doing tests and worrying about traffic shaping, routing, peering, ubr's etc, I often wonder if you ever have time to actually browse the net

and yet still you are with ntl - I think it's all a conspiracy and that you are really an agent of a secret group of ADSL providers, sworn to cause ripples in the very fabric of space/time (and ntl's network).

I think you might want to take a short break Paul the last couple of posts of yours I've read have been giving members grief.

etccarmageddon · 12-03-2006, 21:37

speed test results here dont suggest any problems:-

Sun, 12 Mar 2006 21:36:31 UTC

1st 512K took 4366 ms = 117.3 KB/sec, approx 967 Kbps, 0.94 Mbps
2nd 512K took 4406 ms = 116.2 KB/sec, approx 957 Kbps, 0.93 Mbps
3rd 512K took 4477 ms = 114.4 KB/sec, approx 943 Kbps, 0.92 Mbps
4th 512K took 4216 ms = 121.4 KB/sec, approx 1000 Kbps, 0.98 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 967 Kbps, 0.94 Mbps

altis · 12-03-2006, 22:09

1 Mbps gis going from bad to worse here:

Sun, 12 Mar 2006 19:07:59 GMT

1st 512K took 12960 ms = 39.5 KB/sec, approx 325 Kbps, 0.32 Mbps
2nd 512K took 18020 ms = 28.4 KB/sec, approx 234 Kbps, 0.23 Mbps
3rd 512K took 11530 ms = 44.4 KB/sec, approx 366 Kbps, 0.36 Mbps
4th 512K took 9180 ms = 55.8 KB/sec, approx 460 Kbps, 0.45 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 346 Kbps, 0.34 Mbps

Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:06:31 GMT

1st 512K took 16040 ms = 31.9 KB/sec, approx 263 Kbps, 0.26 Mbps
2nd 512K took 10990 ms = 46.6 KB/sec, approx 384 Kbps, 0.38 Mbps
3rd 512K took 14940 ms = 34.3 KB/sec, approx 283 Kbps, 0.28 Mbps
4th 512K took 13340 ms = 38.4 KB/sec, approx 316 Kbps, 0.31 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 312 Kbps, 0.31 Mbps

12-03-2006, 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by altis

1 Mbps gis going from bad to worse here:

Sun, 12 Mar 2006 19:07:59 GMT

1st 512K took 12960 ms = 39.5 KB/sec, approx 325 Kbps, 0.32 Mbps
2nd 512K took 18020 ms = 28.4 KB/sec, approx 234 Kbps, 0.23 Mbps
3rd 512K took 11530 ms = 44.4 KB/sec, approx 366 Kbps, 0.36 Mbps
4th 512K took 9180 ms = 55.8 KB/sec, approx 460 Kbps, 0.45 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 346 Kbps, 0.34 Mbps

Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:06:31 GMT

1st 512K took 16040 ms = 31.9 KB/sec, approx 263 Kbps, 0.26 Mbps
2nd 512K took 10990 ms = 46.6 KB/sec, approx 384 Kbps, 0.38 Mbps
3rd 512K took 14940 ms = 34.3 KB/sec, approx 283 Kbps, 0.28 Mbps
4th 512K took 13340 ms = 38.4 KB/sec, approx 316 Kbps, 0.31 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 312 Kbps, 0.31 Mbps

Altis

Will kick up a stink in the morning.

Sun, 12 Mar 2006 22:46:05 GMT
1st 128K took 1157 ms = 113286 Bytes/sec = approx 943 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1937 ms = 67668 Bytes/sec = approx 563 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 1078 ms = 121588 Bytes/sec = approx 1012 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 2578 ms = 50843 Bytes/sec = approx 423 kbits/sec

To repeat this test from the source server click here.

This is 2 meg at the moment m8

etccarmageddon · 12-03-2006, 23:10

perhaps there's a high level of people in your area running on 10meg and running their connections at 100% using peer to peer and the like.

Gster · 12-03-2006, 23:55

Quote:

1st 128K took 62 ms = 2114065 Bytes/sec = approx 17589 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 188 ms = 697191 Bytes/sec = approx 5801 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 312 ms = 420103 Bytes/sec = approx 3495 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 766 ms = 171112 Bytes/sec = approx 1424 kbits/sec

w00t

Chrysalis · 13-03-2006, 02:14

its contention alright that we know for sure, the shaping thing is a side issue I think and may not even be happening.

My 8meg was good compared to what you guys were pasting but bear in mind 3am to 8am is the pinnacle of performance here so if 8meg is the pinnacle it doesnt bode well and yes as you may guess if only I got 8meg all day but I dont.

13-03-2006, 06:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by etccarmageddon

perhaps there's a high level of people in your area running on 10meg and running their connections at 100% using peer to peer and the like.

One of the area's close to me used to be one of the heaviest usage area's for the North West

.

Monday morning at 06.42

Mon, 13 Mar 2006 06:41:34 GMT
1st 128K took 922 ms = 142161 Bytes/sec = approx 1183 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 1391 ms = 94229 Bytes/sec = approx 784 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 953 ms = 137536 Bytes/sec = approx 1144 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 3140 ms = 41743 Bytes/sec = approx 347 kbits/sec

Rone · 13-03-2006, 08:08

The guy i spent all night talking to from tech support told me there was almost no traffic at the time he tested my connection.
Funny thing is, if you start a demo download of Halo from the microsoft site, [the techs idea] it starts off great, then starts dwindling down to nothing, and no matter what you try from anywhere it does the same thing, or its just slow from the start.

13-03-2006, 08:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by On

The guy i spent all night talking to from tech support told me there was almost no traffic at the time he tested my connection.
Funny thing is, if you start a demo download of Halo from the Microsoft site, [the techs idea] it starts off great, then starts dwindling down to nothing, and no matter what you try from anywhere it does the same thing, or its just slow from the start.

Having just spent time on the phone to Tech support "India" this is the shortened version of the conversation.

TS. Its your router sir.
ME. I have no router connected at the moment.
TS. Its spyware on your pc.
ME. I am running a fresh install of Linux.
TS. Sorry sir we do not support Linux, thank you for phoning technical support goodbye.

"he did not give me the chance to change to my windows machine."

Reason i phoned tech support is i need the info on my account if i have to go forward with this.

and to think you now have to pay for that.

Thankfully a good friend of mine is checking this out for me at the moment.

etccarmageddon · 13-03-2006, 09:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rone

The guy i spent all night talking to from tech support told me there was almost no traffic at the time he tested my connection...

Indian tech support - perhaps their version of traffic is different to ours! next time he tells you there's almost no traffic ask to clarify if he's refering to your NTL connection or your local roads!

Rone · 13-03-2006, 09:17

Its a shame they have to come out with this made up mumbo jumbo, "its your router\spyware\firewall\ etc etc", who teaches them to fob off paying customers in this way?
If it was'nt ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£35pm it would almost be funny, but my sense of humour has expired.

etccarmageddon · 13-03-2006, 10:59

it should be interesting to see how Bill gets on today re what his contacts have to say. hopefully he will get a date as to when his local ubr is going to get sorted.

13-03-2006, 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by etccarmageddon

it should be interesting to see how Bill gets on today re what his contacts have to say. hopefully he will get a date as to when his local ubr is going to get sorted.

I cannot go into detail at this time and might not be able to anyway, but the figures i have just been given for my UBR have shocked me

.

monkey2468 · 13-03-2006, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill C

I cannot go into detail at this time and might not be able to anyway, but the figures i have just been given for my UBR have shocked me

.

In a good or bad way??