• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Speed Test

    My Results

CA3LE last won the day on May 12

CA3LE had the most liked content!

About CA3LE

  • Rank Webmaster
  • Birthday 11/17/1981

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • Yahoo

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Colorado Springs, CO USA
  1. Okay, so in your case you're not able to select an identifier. I'm wondering why all of these come up with the same CompID. If that's true, they should all have the same public IP. You can reverse query and get the CompID from the IP address using IP Tools. So do they all have the same IP or is it possible that you're only pulling stats on one of these connections?
  2. You can use identifiers. Next time, give each of the machines a different identifier. You'll see this option on the homepage or on the download, upload or auto speed test pages. You'll then be able to determine which is which in the results at a glance. (notice the little icon next to the "Dallas" star - can be moused over for more details) If you wanted to group together results from a bunch of different CompID's you can create a group and have the participants join the group before they test.
  3. Now that you have a username, since you signed up, your results will be saved under your username. Users on ISPs who share IP's, frequently change user IPs or connect users through proxies can benefit from a quick registration like you just did. Thank you for the kind words. I hope this helps and hope you tell your friends.
  4. Hey pete424, Go to My Results and look for "___ Days" at the top. Put something like 90 days to only show the more recent. In the past this has defaulted this way... it may change back again in the next version. Hope this helps.
  5. Thank you, guess I'll have to beta test next time.
  6. The auto test was updated recently. I've reverted the changes for now. Please reload the auto speed test and let me know if it's working correctly for you again.
  7. That would be great, post another suggestion under
  8. I could do that for some countries but would have to ask users to enter that information. I think only a fraction of users would participate unless it were forced on them. But there still may be an option in the future to refine. If I were to do it on the detail of postal codes, I'd probably opt of GPS and map selection instead. Options I've already worked with in development. If postal codes were more standardized across the world it would be different. The 100 Miles I was talking about would just limit the user to selecting a more refined location within that area. So that someone outside of that area doesn't come in and skew the data. Because most likely, the IP location detection TMN uses now has placed you pretty close to the general area... just not pinpointed.
  9. Thank you for the suggestion. In the next version I may have a 'refine location' function, where you can manually select alternate cities within 100 miles of your detected city. Hopefully this helps in those situations. It may also ask you on your first visit, "Is this location correct? Do you want to correct it?" I aim to make the database a a whole much higher resolution with many new ways of cross referencing and aggregating the data TMN has amassed. I hope you stick around to see the development.
  10. It's built into the program... basically TMN (the program) is questioning if it's possible so it's not ranking you. It look erroneous to me as well. What did you do differently when those tests were taken? Because your speed seemed normal, it blew up huge then dropped back down again.
  11. Hi novamy, welcome to! The normal, linear download test and upload test use random character generation. The multithread speed test uses jpeg.
  12. I highly recommend thoroughly testing across the mirrors and multithread for more comprehensive conclusion. Being so heavily invested in only testing to that NY server could give you unrealistic numbers. If they're backed up by more results other servers it's better and even better if that's also backed up by multiple devices/computers on the same network. Despite the lack of additional data I'd like to see, I think you're right. Especially since you've proven over 400-600 Mbps on occasion. Even the best bandwidth is not perfect. No such thing, that's why we test. Don't ever forget, the same is true on my end. I'm picky with my providers and I put them under heavy scrutiny but networks can and do become congested on both ends. On my end, I keep only the best performers. Providers that don't make the grade are dropped before the public even knows I was thinking about looking into the company. Only providers who consistently make the grade across key areas are allowed to maintain here. By the way, for anyone who doesn't know, all of TMN's testing servers are consumer grade, 1000 Mbps. The servers are constantly monitored... if one locale requires more bandwidth, more servers are brought online automatically. All with 1000 Mbps connections. You're always going to have resources here. As soon as 10+ Gbps becomes more of a standard, TMN will have it server-side across the network. Some of my servers are already connected well above 1000 Mbps, I just don't advertise it until it's across the entire network. Funny thing is, the people I buy them from don't advertise them that fast either. Probably for the same reason as TMN. Just because I have mad bandwidth doesn't mean that it can necessarily all be utilized at any time, I probably have a better chance than many average consumers but still, it's not perfect. The day it's prefect is the day I'm out of business. --- and truthfully if it betters our Internet, I'm all for it. If I had your results I'd see the 400-600+ Mbps and wonder if those moments were my true baseline. If that's true, everything else is subpar. If you hadn't seen those speeds then you might be able to say that maybe your computer or network were incapable. Can't really say that after seeing those numbers... and it's was in a large string of tests. You were pretty damn capable when those tests happened. At any rate, in my opinion your speed is pretty awesome. You pay $90 for all 3 services? At those speeds! Dude. Lucky. --- although, that doesn't excuse false advertising. Again, it's best to test across more servers and multithread before drawing a complete conclusion. I'd never blame my ISP until checking those boxes. Keep in mind, TMN is hosted across many networks, it would be extremely odd if they all happened to fail or be degraded simultaneously. If they perform similarly across many servers, it's probably your ISP, network or computer to blame. It's gets even more complicated when you factor in that some routes to some servers can become congested while others to the same server at the same moment, aren't. What most often matters is who your provider is peering with and who my providers are peering with. If those coincide we're going to have a better chance of making that GREAT connection that we wish would always happen. Finally saw the video to this song. What the... lol
  13. Something odd definitely happened there, judging from the TiP (the graph of the download speed during the test) your speed should have been around 30 Mbps. Leave it in the database for right now and I'll look closer at it. I've never seen a result do that. Can you run a couple of re-tests and make sure that it was a one time occurrence?
  14. You're obviously 100% correct. I took a few minutes to make global corrections to the site. If you see references on the main site (outside of the forums) to Kbps or Mbps please bring it to my attention. I should have caught all the occurrences but I'm human... hence the reason it needs to be corrected in the first place. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge and pointing this out. has always been built in your feedback. I'm just the person typing, you're the ones building this with your feedback. Can't tell you how many times my users have corrected me. I'll stand corrected each time and smile because it's made my site better. It's what has made TMN what it is today. I'm often wrong but I try to be quick at making corrections and admitting it. Hundreds of millions of visitors, maybe upwards of 1/2 a billion and nobody has said a word about this detail.
  15. Can you post examples? I looked through your results and didn't find any that looked like that. Maybe you deleted them. You were talking about the TiP result, within the individual test results, correct? Keep in mind that your overall score is calculated completely separate from the TiP result. The TiP minimum, maximum and average are taken from calculations that are separated from the main event. Some of your tests are running more smoothly... ...and some look like a struggle to get to the end. Obviously, it's best if it runs like the first scenario most of the time. But if you see an extreme spike either way and then it's followed by normal plots, simply disregard it. If you have time, send me a private message with the TID so I can look at it and use the information to improve the algorithm. But keep in mind when that happens, your overall result is not affected. It's not as if the TiP result aggregates into the final result... TiP is a totally separate entity. I may put a 'report inaccurate results' link in an upcoming version to make it easier for users to flag results for a closer look. In this case, I personally never see spikes like you're seeing. It's hard to program a fix for something when you can never see it yourself. But I do learn from your results and apply it. I often spend hours going through live results to look for anomalies. TiP is already much more accurate than the original concept but I know there's always room for improvement. I think the issue on some machines is that something in your software configuration is causing intermittent delays in browser transactions. When these delays happen during the test it causes a misreporting of the TiP numbers. Probably because the times are taken so closely together. Sometimes the fact that a computer is not able to run TMN like the majority of the population is a clue. Example, my friend _____'s laptop can hardly run TMN right now. It used to run it perfectly (another clue that something new is up) and all of the other computers and devices on his network run TMN to the best of the networks ability. The issue is in loading. The test loads and runs but seems to get hung up on the forwarding around that TMN does during the test. Disabled his virus and internet security protection, because sometimes those programs have been known to cause issues... nope. Still does it. Now if this were anyone else I might dig deeper but he admits that he does things online that he probably shouldn't, opens and clicks things that he shouldn't, etc. Per my recommendation he's backing up his files and I'm going to format it and reinstall windows for him. I guarantee, when it boots up... it will no longer have that issue. Sometimes you don't even have to get to the results page to get a result at TMN. Hell, I often start a test and cancel it part way through because I got the point of how it's running just by how it loaded. Please forward me those results in the future so I can make sure it's not something I can improve on.