• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Speed Test

    My Results

Reputation Activity

  1. wenfinger liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Kelvin bits per second?   
    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.  
  2. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Husky71 in Kelvin bits per second?   
    My upload speed test result was reported with units of Kbps.
    I know the intent was to state the speed in kilo bits per second, but per SI unit rules a capital K is the unit for temperature, kelvin.  The ten to the third power multiplier prefix kilo is abbreviated using a lower case k.  See
    And to be strictly correct, the internationally standardized abbreviation for binary digit is bit.  International standards bodies do not recognize b as a further abbreviation for bit.
    Interesting factoid, John Tukey, who worked at Bell Labs, first suggested the word bit as an abbreviation for binary digit.  Claude Shannon first used the word in publication in his paper A Mathematical Theory of Communications.
    And to go one step further, SI unit usage and grammar rules frown on the use of p to represent per in a unit formulation.
    So strictly the unit would properly be kbit/s or kbit * s^-1
  3. wenfinger liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Remove extreme maximum / minimum from test results   
    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.
  4. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Jennistar in Ken Mills   
    I wanted to tell you that the support was really helpful for me. Thanks 
  5. SlowBarn liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Beta program   
    I have A LOT of upcoming releases, many of which are going to be built around a new concept.  Because there is so much core programming being changed I'm going to do something I've never done.
    I normally work on the site live and things are released as I write them... if your in the right place at the right time and you pay enough attention you can see me building sometimes.  Well, I really feel that the version I have out right now is INCREDIBLY stable... I don't want to disturb any testing or use of the site.  So I'm going to offer a beta program for those who wish to join.
    To join, vote Yes on the poll above. I'll add you to a special member group and you'll be emailed with updates.  You'll also have an option in your menu that will allow you to switch between beta and release.  Smaller updates will be globally available but the major ones will be held back for the beta testers to play with first.  This will help find bugs before public release.  When I'm satisfied with the code I'll offer an option for a while to the general public to turn on the beta... after general public beta testing I'll then release it to the final.  We'll then start the whole process again for another round.
    This is going to be really hard for me to do, I really hate to hold new stuff back.  But maybe doing it this way will help me spend less time on bug checking and more time of actually building.
    I'm one person.  Your help with this is appreciated.  Everyone who has ever submitted a comment... you've already helped build this site.  I started with a vison but you guys expanded it.  If I'm going to keep bringing those ideas to paper I really need your help.  I have at least a couple thousand hours of programming planned just for the next 3-6 months. I need to use my time effectively, spending hundreds of hours searching for bugs is not using my time wisely.  Register (If you haven't already), vote yes above and I'll email you later when I have more information. Then, you can tell your friends that you helped build this site.  
  6. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Switch off users while testing?   
    If the other people on the network are currently downloading or uploading it will affect the result for sure.  Most of the time however it's not necessary to disconnect anyone.  Chances are, they're pretty much idle in the grand scheme of your connection, even if they're hitting webpages at the time.
    Now, if you suspect that one of the users is eating up bandwidth it may help to test first to get a baseline with everything connected normally, then remove the other connections one in order to determine which machine is at fault.  It can be a quick, easy way to troubleshoot.
    It's always accurate.  It's just not going to give you favorable results if other people on your network are using a significant portion of the connection.  That lends to the accuracy.  If you add the speed of what they're doing and your result... then run an identical test without the variable of the other users, unless there are other variables at work, you'll always find that it matches.
    No, you shouldn't.  I never do.  But if my result is way lower than expected... I'll start looking at the other connected machines... and then the internal network before I ever assume it's my providers fault.  9 times out of 10, it's my end.  Something needs a routine reboot, I forget about a file transfer on another machine.. etc.  But the variation in my normal result shows me that there's something not right and helps me track down the culprit every time.  Someone told me about how it helped them figure out that their neighbor was leeching their connection, torrenting.
    Although like mudmanc4 said, there's a definite benefit to isolating variables.  When you're at the end of your rope.  First, get your baseline hooked up normally.  Then if you're on wifi, test directly connected to the router.  No improvement?  Then test directly wired to the modem (if your modem is separate from the router).  If you still have the same issue, connecting a different computer to the same direct connection will prove that it's not isolated to the one machine.  Remember, the modem will need to be power cycled between connecting and disconnecting the modem from anything.  It must be assigned to the new mac address of the device it's plugged into.
  7. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Wiseguy_ in Download and speed Pausing/Hanging   
    Hi all,
    Thanks for all the suggestions.
    I performed a fresh install of windows 10 and that seems to have cleared the problem.
    2.5Mb steady speed with 18% middle variance now.
  8. sd70mac liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in DNS Settings
    I personally use Google's DNS, and and have for many years.  Obviously I highly recommend using that service.  Awesome DNS can make a great difference with reliability and how snappy things load... but it doesn't make your real download or upload speed faster.
  9. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by jct21 in various speeds, different browsers   
    apparently ive found the issue.  since upgrading to windows 10 1607 - anniversary update,  speed tests using ie11 and edge are cut in half.  transfer rates when downloading large files such as drivers from NVidia are half what they should be when using ie and edge.  using firefox all speed tests and download transfer rates are what they should be.
    that is why while using windows 8.1 all browsers on all speed sites worked fine. 
    ive tried all the anniversary update internet fix suggestions for windows 10 but none of them work.  rolling back the update to a previous version fixes the problem in windows 10 and all browsers and download rates are as they should be.  MS needs to fix this.
  10. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Manoj Manilal in TMN speed test vs other speed tests   
    Hi CA3LE
    Thanks, I tried your recommendation, the line reading is 36m (wonderful). Ok great. thanks for other old post as well, makes more sense to me now. I have also installed the TCP optimizer. I'm not sure if it working though, I'm not sure to check it, but all good.
    Thanks again.
  11. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in TMN speed test vs other speed tests   
    Read this
    ... long story short, you most likely have the 7-11 Mbps TMN is telling you.  But you're in South Africa and the closest server you've tested on is in the UK.  I also see that you did multithread tests but selected all of the server, which can bring your score down.
    Try multithread again, this time only select UK or DE servers... you could even try both at the same time.  Just don't select the wide array you did before.  These results will probably be your highest.  Both results are true, they're just tested differently.  The default single thread test will show you how fast single files are able to download and streaming ability.  When you multithread, imagine that it's not downloading a single source, it's grabbing multiple files at the same time.  You may be able to perform better in aggregate but not in a single thread.  You also may be able to perform better on that single thread if the server is closer to you.  By the way, TCP optimizer helps older windows based machines perform better at distance by adjusting MTU and RWIN values.
  12. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by ed_1960 in Introducing myself   
    Hi everyone!!
    I´m ed_1960 and I´m a newcomer. I wanted to join this community because in the past I´ve had quite a few problems with different ISPs. Many of them claim internet speed connections that are not true. By joining this community I hope to learn how internet connections are measured and how to track them, so I´ll have a tool I can use and trust next time I feel I´m not getting the INTERNET speed I´m paying for. Also, I´d like to get to know some other people who I can share information with in order to enrich my little knowledge of INTERNET connections as a whole.
  13. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in What do spiky results indicate about a provider?   
    Probably more likely that it's because Comcast has a wider sample, with more variety.  Doesn't mean that they're worse or less reliable.  They have options for lower packages, the people with the lower scores may be happy.  Without knowing the package speed and the scenario the tests were taken under it would be hard to fully make an assessment like that.
    I have improved charting that's on the way that will give you much more useful information when doing those comparisons.
  14. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in 50 MB max upload file is too small   
    I had temporarily disabled the larger upload tests because I noticed an issue but it appears to be working correctly so you can now test upload up to 100 MB again.
    So you're talking about a different connection from the one you're posting from right now, right?

    Because your test sizes are more than adequate at those speeds.  Even at 100 Mbps (12.5 MB/s) a 100 MB test gives you 8 seconds of testing which is more than enough to get accurate numbers.
    Having said that, larger tests are coming.  Both upload and download. 
  15. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in 50 MB max upload file is too small   
    Log in next time you test at your office so I can find your results on that connection.
  16. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Marvin Herbold in 50 MB max upload file is too small   
    We have a 100x100 Ethernet over copper Internet connection.  Your download test file size caps out at 200 MB which is barely OK (would be better if could do 1 GB).  But your upload test file size caps out at 50 MB which is downright tiny when you have an 100 MB/s upload link speed.  To put this in perspective my firewall bandwidth monitoring tool samples bandwidth every 5 seconds.  The 50 MB upload test barely shows up... not good.  We would love for both the download and upload file sizes to max out at 1 GB so it shows up clearly on our firewall monitoring utilities.
  17. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by ShakTib in Inaccurate speed results?   
    I personally see the other test guys as bloated fluffy and sprinkled with glitter to make your speed look good.
    TMN currently is my top source for actual answers.
    So trying Frankfurt servers with Ookla and getting average 300+, to me is false and completely not possible. I LIVE IN CANADA. My speed SHOULD be lower if I am testing against Europe. I expect that at least some latency or speed drop.
    Have you attempted to connect via Ethernet and speed test again this way? Do the results change? Are you getting completely different numbers altogether?
    Side note:
    Just to clarify, as it may be called something different here or maybe I am not understanding.
    is WLAN sticks just another name for USB WiFi Adaptors for laptops / desktops that don't have network card with WiFi capability built in or is WLAN sticks the 3G/4G Cellular Network USB sticks? (I assume the former, hence why I suggested Ethernet test, since you would have a modem/router hopefully nearby)
  18. ShakTib liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Why Do My Results Differ From / Ookla Speed Tests?   
    What it proves is that you were running slower to that server.  You should test against other servers and also multithread.  I see now that you switched to a server in India (much closer to you) and you were able to get close to 5 Mbps so it looks like you may have already figured that out.  Your speed will vary depending on where you're testing against, that's why I offer those extra servers and options.

    You get much slower speed to New York... pretty common at that distance.  

    You have to route through a lot to get there.  Are there providers that can provide the same level of service at that distance?  Yes, usually on the high end commercial or private.
 isn't wrong.  You just don't like what it told you.   ...if you read around here you'll see it's a pretty common theme, my results don't always match the other guys.  That's because this isn't the other guys test.  I'm not trying to make friends, I'm trying to make a faster Internet.
  19. ShakTib liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Who owns and runs   

    Good Evening Jeff,
    The question is not "What are you?" it's "Who are you?"

    I'm Damon Mueller and I run independently. I also program, design and maintain all aspects of the site. If you like it please tell your friends.

    - Damon -

  20. ShakTib liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in "your speed test is inaccurate"   
    Update: Here's my updated scores.  Updated and optimized network configuration and different provider in a different city.  The computer and it's configuration were untouched from the first set of tests, still default OSX settings.
    Multithread Enabled
    :::.. Download Speed Test Result Details ..::: Download Connection Speed:: 107267 Kbps or 107.3 Mbps  Download Speed Test Size:: 200.9 MB or 205692 kB or 210628710 bytes Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 13408 kB/s or 13.4 MB/s Tested At:: Version 13 Validation:: Multithread Test Utilizing:: Client Stats:: Test Time:: 2014-08-07 11:33:45 Local Time  Client Location:: Colorado Springs, CO US Target:: Global Multithread Client Host:: Comcast Cable Compare:: 16% slower than client avg, 271% faster than host avg, 240% faster than city avg, 484% faster than country avg, 929% faster than world index  1MB Download in 0.08 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~82 Seconds - 1915X faster than 56K This test of exactly 205692 kB took 15.709 seconds to complete User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_4) AppleWebKit/537.77.4 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.5 Safari/537.77.4 [!]   Classic Download Test   :::.. Download Speed Test Result Details ..::: Download Connection Speed:: 103437 Kbps or 103.4 Mbps  Download Speed Test Size:: 200 MB or 204800 kB or 209715200 bytes Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 12930 kB/s or 12.9 MB/s Tested At:: Version 13 Validation:: TiP Measurement Summary:: Min 41.45 Mbps | Middle Avg 111.35 Mbps | Max 113.96 Mbps | 5% Variance TiP Data Points:: 88.15 Mbps, 112.01 Mbps, 112.68 Mbps, 113.79 Mbps, 113.96 Mbps, 113.36 Mbps, 110.05 Mbps, 109.73 Mbps, 112.85 Mbps, 113.44 Mbps, 111.93 Mbps, 107.55 Mbps, 107.93 Mbps, 105.66 Mbps, 106.79 Mbps, 113.87 Mbps, 113.79 Mbps, 113.53 Mbps, 41.45 Mbps Client Stats:: Test Time:: 2014-08-07 11:36:04 Local Time  Client Location:: Colorado Springs, CO US Target:: Dallas, TX US Client Host:: Comcast Cable Compare:: 29% faster than client avg, 251% faster than host avg, 219% faster than city avg, 423% faster than country avg, 885% faster than world index  1MB Download in 0.08 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~82 Seconds - 1847X faster than 56K This test of exactly 204800 kB took 16.226 seconds to complete User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_4) AppleWebKit/537.77.4 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0.5 Safari/537.77.4 [!]  
    That's what you want to see, both numbers in line with each other.  This not only shows that your Internet is performing well... your computer has to be running right also.  I have devices that simply can't perform as well in multithread... most likely being held back by hardware limitations, that test is much more hardware intensive.
    When your computer and network are running as well as mine do online services just work right.  Although, sometimes I'll still have an issue with a streaming service, run a test here and helps illustrate that it's not affecting my whole connection.  Also, it helps having a baseline speed test on a great connection and computer.  Then when you test slower on a different computer on the same network you know that it's not a fault of the connection.  Could still be a wifi issue, that's why you test wired if you can.
  21. ShakTib liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in "your speed test is inaccurate"   
    Sorry, long email... hopefully you read it since I wrote it just for you.  Your connection may be faster if you take the time.
    Hi Ross,
      Don't be so quick to judge.  This isn't my first rodeo.  I've been testing bandwidth since 1996... (the name came about in 2001) I've dedicated myself to the subject and I've built myself line by line.  It IS the most accurate and compatible in browser speed test available and it's able to detect issues that slow you down that other speed tests fail to notice.   Ross, I hear this nearly every day.  Stick with me and I'll explain a few things.   First of all, I too use Usenet, every day.  Giganews to be exact. I also am able to pull faster speeds with Usenet than I get from my results.  There are various reasons for this.  First, your speed on Usenet doesn't instantly ramp up to full speed.  TMN is calculating your speed based on everything that happened from start to finish.  ...that doesn't account for your speed being THAT much slower, I know, but keep that in mind.     Second, Usenet is multithreading the download.  Some providers right now are actually shaping their users bandwidth, limiting single thread transactions.  TMN reflects this... Usenet and Torrents will be unaffected because they are threading.  There is also TCP stack optimizations that can make a HUGE difference.  It looks like you're running windows.  This is more often the case with windows and fixing it is as easy as running TCP Optimizer, it's free with no install... it simply optimizes your TCP stack.  Upon reboot most people have drastically improved speeds.  Thousands of users over the years have emailed me and posted in my forum about the success they have with that.  When I ran windows that was the first thing I did on a fresh install.  Every time it made a huge difference.  Trust me, if your results on TMN are effected, you're effected elsewhere too.  If TCP is the issue, you will find relief and feel a difference in how snappy things are afterwords.   Just because you can achieve 40 Mbps doesn't mean your optimized for that speed. is VERY good at picking up on TCP issues and provider bandwidth shaping because it's a linear, single thread transaction.  It's the ONLY speed test that works the way it does.  I also offer a multithread speed test now.  I encourage you to try this method, it's brand new and the public is barely starting to even notice that I offer it.  Personally.... here, I'll just show you my speed.   Without Multithread enabled   :::.. Download Speed Test Result Details ..::: Download Connection Speed:: 46403 Kbps or 46.4 Mbps  Download Speed Test Size:: 80.8 MB or 82688 kB or 84672512 bytes | Timed:: 14.609 seconds Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 5800 kB/s or 5.8 MB/s Tested At:: Version 13 Validation:: TiP Measurement Summary:: Min 23.65 Mbps | Middle Avg 50.84 Mbps | Max 51.28 Mbps | 44% Variance TiP Data Points:: 24.89 Mbps, 47 Mbps, 51.28 Mbps, 51.19 Mbps, 50.94 Mbps, 51.11 Mbps, 51.19 Mbps, 51.06 Mbps, 50.98 Mbps, 51.28 Mbps, 51.19 Mbps, 51.02 Mbps, 51.15 Mbps, 50.98 Mbps, 50.72 Mbps, 50.81 Mbps, 51.02 Mbps, 51.28 Mbps, 23.65 Mbps More Stats:: Test Time:: 2013-06-26 08:09:47 Local Time  Location:: Phoenix, AZ US >> Destination:: San Jose, CA US 1MB Download in 0.18 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~3 Minutes - 829X faster than 56K This test of exactly 82688 kB took 14.609 seconds to complete Running at 253% of hosts average (Cox Communications  User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_8_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/27.0.1453.93 Safari/537.36 [!]   With Multithread enabled   :::.. Download Speed Test Result Details ..::: Download Connection Speed:: 85954 Kbps or 86 Mbps  Download Speed Test Size:: 80.7 MB or 82668 kB or 84651996 bytes | Timed:: 7.879 seconds Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 10744 kB/s or 10.7 MB/s Tested At:: Version 13 Validation:: Multithread Test Utilizing:: More Stats:: Test Time:: 2013-06-26 08:08:38 Local Time  Location:: Phoenix, AZ US >> Destination:: Global Multithread 1MB Download in 0.1 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~2 Minutes - 1535X faster than 56K This test of exactly 82668 kB took 7.879 seconds to complete Running at 474% of hosts average (Cox Communications  User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_8_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/27.0.1453.93 Safari/537.36 [!]   Both are testing from the same server, same amount of information, moments apart but the test is invoked differently.  Both results are right... put a meter on the line and you'll see.  Some faster connections need to multithread to pull their full speed.  Now, if I optimized my TCP stack just right I would probably be able to get those numbers more in line with each other... I leave settings default on my machines because it aids my development.  Having the issue myself showed me that I needed a multithread test to give people to compare the classic results to. ... so I recently built and released it.  If I always rocked optimal settings myself then I wouldn't be able to test the way the majority of my visitors test.  I have optimal setups I test with too, achieving hundreds of Mbps. (commercial connections, not my home connection... I wish!)   You can multithread to one or all of my servers... giving you the ability to get a global result from a single test.  No other speed test is able to perform this way.  Another feature that really sets TMN apart.   I also see that you're in Scotland, International routes and distance will drop your speeds as well.  I recommend testing off my server in Amsterdam.  Compare the results to what you get to my servers in the US (since you probably visit many sites hosted in the US).  Again, TCP optimization is important.  Because you're adjusting the maximum size of the packets.  Imagine it like this.  You have a bucket and a thimble.  The thimble is what you're working with now... when you increase your MTU you'll be working with a bucket.  You don't have to go back and fourth to the well as many times with the bucket.  At short distance it's less noticeable but testing all the way across the Atlantic... your speed is going to suffer with that thimble.  What also comes into play is that many consumer level international routes can be limited. (this is getting better over the years... it used to be a more widespread problem)  Multithreading will raise the speed in that situation as long as the route isn't being limited by congestion.   I hope that you find the issue, resolve it and email me back.  Like I said, I get this a lot.  Nearly everyone emails me back to say, "Sorry... I'm going to tell my friends about now..."    -- I hope that in the end you'll see that TMN reports the truth and share my site with your friends.  I work day and night to make it better for you.  I don't advertise so I rely on my work to speak for itself and let the public decide if it's worth sharing.  So far, so good.   Cheers, - Damon -   P.S.   I realized I forgot to give you a link to the Amsterdam server will default you to Amsterdam, NL.  You can also make a selection at ... a link to that is at the top of all the pages.  See attachement.  
    I recommend the official servers because I control them but if you look under the self hosted tab you'll see a server in Huerth, NRW Germany and London, GB.  You might want to try those too.  Any mirror listed is capable of at least 100 Mbps, my official servers are all connected with a minimum of 1000 Mbps... my main server in Dallas has dual 1000 Mbps uplinks to the Internet. ... all of my servers are connected through the Softlayer Network which has some of the deepest peering in the industry and a worldwide private network.  The cities where I host my servers are chosen based on their website hosting popularity.  My site in Texas hosts well over 100,000 servers each of which can have countless websites... that's not to mention all the other hosts in Dallas, that's JUST Softlayer's servers.  You're going to connect to the areas where my servers are if you're on the Internet... so those are the areas I have you test to.  Other speed tests try to eliminate routing factors to boost your score... I believe those are important variables.  You already know the speed you're supposed to get... I'm trying to show you the speed that you REALLY get.   Cheers, - D  
  22. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Expat With Brazil Net - Sao Paulo BR is online
    This can be found on -- should be immediately available to most but may take 24 hours to propagate DNS for some people.
    Let us know how it works for you.
  23. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Expat With Brazil Net   
    Hey @That_Eriksson I'll have a server online in Sao Paulo Brazil for you in just a few.  I'll update this topic when it's online.  It's with a hosting company I haven't tested so we'll have to see if it provides good comparison for our South American friends.  
  24. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by little oz2 in Test longer than 100 times   
    is it possible if i could test more than 100 times on the auto test?
    As i am trying to diagnose my internet and it drops in small sections so was going to run the test every 5 minutes but running this 100 times is only just over 8 hours
  25. suddenLYUNlinked liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Why Do My Results Differ From / Ookla Speed Tests?   
    Thank you for spreading the word, I love your username.  Noticed you online here and there before you posted and it made me laugh.
    The ISPs don't seem to like me these days.  I get no love from them anymore.   :-/  --- good thing I didn't make this site for them.