SamKnows report

[lordy]

Pinched from another board...

http://www.samknows.com/broadband/pm/PM_Summer_08.pdf

The results produced over an initial six week period from 223 monitoring units were
certainly interesting. In summary:
- In the majority of metrics there was little discernable difference between most
ISPs;
- Zen Internet offered the fewest failures across all metrics;
- Virgin Media’s cable services and Be/O2’s services provided a consistently
low latency throughout, whilst Virgin.Net (Virgin’s ADSL service) performed
poorly;
- BT provided the fastest throughput when measured as a percentage of implied
line speed (an estimate of the potential maximum speed of the line);
- Be/O2 and Virgin Media produced the greatest raw throughput (in megabits
per second), which can likely be attributed to the nature of their products;
- Virgin Media’s cable throughput remained consistent on their 2, 4 and
10Mbps products, but was quite variable on their 20Mbps product;
- Testing highlighted the use of traffic shaping in the networks of BT and
PlusNet, which resulted in certain classes of traffic slowing significantly
during peak hours.

[BenMcr]

So they are basically saying apart from a few issues with the 20Mb cable service (which is probably why Virgin want to offload that onto the DOCSIS 3 network), Virgin can match O2/Be for performance?

This isn't a Virgin are better than O2/Be comment as I think Be are a fantasic ISP (which is why I am with them), but I think it does show that Virgin are not as bad as people make out

Obviously Virgin.net is a different matter, which I am seriously hoping the LLU stuff that is coming soon with help fix

I am disappointed in PlusNet's traffic shaping though. How the mighty have fallen lol

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

So they are basically saying apart from a few issues with the 20Mb cable service (which is probably why Virgin want to offload that onto the DOCSIS 3 network), Virgin can match O2/Be for performance?

This isn't a Virgin are better than O2/Be comment as I think Be are a fantasic ISP (which is why I am with them), but I think it does show that Virgin are not as bad as people make out

Obviously Virgin.net is a different matter, which I am seriously hoping the LLU stuff that is coming soon with help fix

I am disappointed in PlusNet's traffic shaping though. How the mighty have fallen lol

I'm sure peeps know Virgin aren't that bad, though you do wonder how Be/O2 can match Virgin for performance without a whizzy fibre optic network

As far as Plusnet go they have shaped for years and been pretty open about it. Check their website for more info:

http://www.plus.net/support/broadban...tisation.shtml

You can even see the breakdown of traffic going through their network:

http://www.plus.net/support/displayI...work-usage.gif

And they talk quite candidly about how / why and what they are doing in the future:

http://www.plus.net/support/broadban.../roadmap.shtml

It's not that different from STM, apart that it's far more focussed and potentially intelligent than blunt rules on a CMTS. It does however cost in terms of equipment needed and development time, while STM is a couple of lines of config on the CMTS and costs nothing.

[Impz2002]

none of this suprises me !

VM are the bees knees

nuff said !

Impz

[smeagoly1]

Not surprised about Vm's low latency on cable, when i had it it was a constant 20meg and always between 30-40 ms in gaming, and tbh I never really had a single prob with 20 meg cable.


Virgin.net as i have now, well hmmmmm yep the report is quite accurate on that also, poor poor or should i say sketchy at best. Some high points but 90% low points. I do hope that any changes to the LLu that's been suggested do improve stability somewhat.
When it's running to par which any new changes should help, it is quite stable, keeping that way is a different matter.