CA3LE

Administrator
  • Content count

    9,061
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Speed Test

    My Results

Reputation Activity

  1. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by wintroub in Auto test keeps stopping   
    The revert seems to be working. I'm on Test #14 of 100 and forcing a re-test didn't open a new browser tab. Thank you.
  2. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by wintroub in Auto test keeps stopping   
    Okay. I followed your link and requested 100 re-tests. I'll be gone for a few hours but will report back here with my results. Thank you.
  3. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Improve member location and search on location   
    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.
  4. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Improve member location and search on location   
    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. 
  5. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Peter B in Improve member location and search on location   
    It would help if when joining members had to enter more postal details on location so that it is possible to search and group on the area where I live. My location on Testmy.net is taken as Andover, Hampshire, GB(UK) but I live a long way off in Welwyn, Hertfordshire.
    So any grouping of speed tests in my area is impossible as you only appear to group by the ISP.
    I know that my problems are upload related and probably between the exchange and the ISP so grouping results at the location where the ISP links to the network does not help me with identifying users in my area who I would like to group together. This is because the issue may be telecoms carrier related (British Telecom Openreach) rather than the ISP. I know its not the line as this has been changed all the way to the exchange.
    If there is a search already that would help me identify members close to me it would be great but I can not see how to do this.
  6. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Result not what expected   
    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
  7. Pgoodwin1 liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in Result not what expected   
    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
  8. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Pgoodwin1 in Result not what expected   
    TestMy has tons of bandwidth. I remember the owner telling someone it would handle many times more than the highest peak load  of users he's ever seen.
     
    im not a PC guy, so I couldn't tell you if the computer or browser you have has any impact.
  9. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Chais82 in Result not what expected   
    So after looking around and doing some research Ive figured out my issue on consistency. Well not exactly. But I went ahead and refreshed my windows with a new install. I am now seeing a more steady stream of data input/output. Another issue I was having is my upload would not reach above 500Mpbs using Ookla or Verizons speedtest. This went away with the fresh windows as well.
     
    Now as far as the speed results I get here at Testmy.net... I've concluded that I (or anyone for that matter) do not reach my advertised speeds do to internet congestion outside Verizon's  network. So my one pc will never get true gigabit connection with another client. But my house as a whole with multiple devices and connections could theoretically come close to the bandwidth I'm paying for. This being because its not retrieving data from one source. But rather multiple sources all over in different locations. Now I know there is much more to this. And a lot more technical. But what are your thoughts? Am I understanding this right?
     
  10. 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...
    http://testmy.net/db/ozEV43YIP

    ...and some look like a struggle to get to the end.
    http://testmy.net/db/HvlNtJKXk

    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.
  11. 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.  TestMy.net 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.  
  12. 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 http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/
     
    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
  13. 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...
    http://testmy.net/db/ozEV43YIP

    ...and some look like a struggle to get to the end.
    http://testmy.net/db/HvlNtJKXk

    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.
  14. CA3LE liked a post in a topic by Jennistar in Ken Mills   
    Hello, 
     
    I wanted to tell you that the support was really helpful for me. Thanks 
  15. SlowBarn liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in TestMy.net 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.  
     
    Thanks
    -D
  16. 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 TestMy.net 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.
  17. 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.
     
    Cheers
  18. sd70mac liked a post in a topic by CA3LE in DNS Settings   
    https://developers.google.com/speed/public-dns/
     
    I personally use Google's DNS, 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 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.
  19. 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.
     
     
  20. 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.
    Manoj
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
     
  23. 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.
  24. 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?
     
    http://testmy.net/compID/22243263264

    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. 
  25. 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.