Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/31/2010 in Posts

  1. First, if you don't plan on adding value to conversation... leave. Simple posts saying "hi" that contain no true value to the forum may be seen as spam and removed. Tell us something worth typing... share your speed, share your experience or tell me what you think of what I've built. As long as you're a real person posting real content you have nothing to worry about. Bots on the other hand don't last long here. We'd love to have you introduce yourself as a new member, so please click here to make a post to the New Members board that you're currently in. That way we can all give you a warm welcome and answer any questions you may have. But please, if you have a question about your system, connection or any computer related question please make those posts in the board that suits the topic best. If you don't know where your topic should go just post it to General Discussion and one of us will point the topic in the right direction for ya. To see a list of the boards you should make your posts to all you need to do is go to the Forum Default Page. Make sure you take note of the sub-forums that are with-in some of the forums. These sub-forums can sometimes give you more specific help. HAVE FUN DAMN IT! Most importantly... enjoy yourself here, this community is full of not only helpful self proclaimed (and proud of it) computer nerds it's also full of people having a great time! Many people become addicted to our forums so I'd just like to warn you... you may be with us till the day you die, but at least you'll make a ton of really kick ass friends along the way. - Damon
    15 points
  2. CA3LE

    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
    6 points
  3. Connection is:: 5801 Kbps about 5.8 Mbps (tested with 12160 KB) Download Speed is:: 708 KB/s Tested From:: http://www.testmy.net/ Bottom Line:: 104 times faster than 56K you can download 1MB in 1.45 second(s) https://testmy.net/cgi-bin/get.cgi?Test_ID=HA7PXKR5N I have Roadrunner Premium rated at 6mb down and 512kb up , I pay $60 a month , Anyone that has faster and pays cheaper????????
    5 points
  4. The most common question that people ask us is why their results here differ from speedtest.net. I want to explain something that may help you understand why this is. According to the Ookla Wiki [updated link] the following is true about your tests taken at speedtest.net... The fastest 10% and slowest 30% of your results are DISCARDED The remaining data is averaged together to determine the final result Throwing away the fastest 10% and slowest 30% of the results in my opinion does not make for an accurate test. Isn't THAT the data that you're here to see? Also note this isn't only true for speedtest.net. Ookla is huge, most of the speed tests online run their software. Source: wiki.ookla.com Multithreading makes your connection look better Ookla speed tests are also multithreaded. Meaning that they open more than one connection to the host and combine the speeds. This often can mask congestion issues. For instance, imagine that you have a pipe along your route that's limiting you to 10 Mbps. If you open more than one connection through that pipe you'll be able to achieve a faster speed... but testing that way will not clue you in that there is actually a problem along the route. Remember, you shouldn't have to multithread your connection to pull your full speed. Multithreaded speed tests, like the majority out there, are designed to benefit the Internet provider not the consumer. They often display your maximum throughput not your throughput over the course of an entire upload or download. Omitting the worst portion of your test resulting in inflated scores that may make you feel warm and fuzzy but aren't going to help you see and resolve connection issues. Multithreading can show that you're able to max out your connection by combining the speed of concurrent connections but a great connection can max out without having to multithread. So, if you have to multithread your connection to get your full speed, you should be asking why that is. With TestMy.net it's instantly apparent if there is a congested route. Your speed here reflects the actual loading time of data within your browser... not the combined efforts of multiple threads being altered (dropping the top 10% and bottom 30% of the results) and added together, all through a plugin that isn't suited for the task. :: EDIT :: If you'd like to multithread with TMN, I offer that as well. Try the multithread speed test. TMN's multithread test gives you the option to select from an array of servers. Allowing you to test across multiple routes, to more than one server at a time. TestMy.net is the only Internet speed test with this ability. So THAT'S why your results differ. -- TestMy.net is a harder test to ace and a lot less forgiving than other speed tests. But isn't that what a benchmark should be? :: EDIT :: Another thing to consider is if you're running windows, particularly if it's older than Windows 7 you may need to tune your TCP stack to see your full speeds. Windows doesn't always come out of the box optimized for fast connections. Flash based speed tests fail to detect this problem. To make this change for free I recommend TCP Optimizer. This makes changing those settings very easy and nearly fool proof. Just open it, slide the bar over to your speed that you're supposed to have, check "modify all adapters" ...apply the settings and reboot. You should have faster speeds after your re-test if that was the problem. Here's an outside source talking about exactly this issue, I'll hunt down more examples. >> Download Speed Test - Something fishy? A few related topics :: Accuracy.. Slow upload, drastically different from other speed tests Resuts Vs. Actual Download speeds? TestMy.net shows different results than other speed tests TestMy v Ookla Difference Between Speed Test Sites? Satellite Service Testing Locking at around 14Mbps Questioning speedtest.net resolved with TestMy.net Outside Sources :: Internet providers caught inflating speed test results [myce.com] Use Testmy.net or else!! NO MORE speedtest.net posts will be allowed!!! by the Admin on [xplornetsucks.com] Accurate Speeds Or Speed Test Error? on [wildblueworld.com]
    5 points
  5. I was supposed to have ping included in the last version but I didn't get to it. I'm hoping to put that up front and center in the next release. Keep visiting to watch it develop before your eyes. --- I'm far from finished.
    5 points
  6. sietec

    Multithread

    Hi all, I just wanted to put my two cents in here for what it's worth. First of all, I have no interest in any online speed test. I host mirrors for the two most popular speed test sites, one of which you are on right now. My only interest is in helping people get accurate and informed information when it comes to measuring their internet speed. I will probably upset some people with this post, but what I am saying comes from my 12+ years of experience in tweaking web servers and meticulously measuring the details of different transports. For http (e.g. "internet" or web-browser compatible) speed testing, I can say with 100% certainty that you will not find a testing methodology more accurate than testmy.net. The attention to detail and every little tidbit of information involved in http/tcp transport is second to none. I can say that since I host a mirror on here and can measure the results from both ends. For example, if you make a request on my box, apache keeps a log of the transfer information and precisely how long the socket was open and how much information (exactly) was transferred. The timing is accurate to less than 1/10000 of a second. Therefore, I can measure the precise time it took to transfer, say 100MB from my box to your computer and determine from that the speed in which the transfer took place. TMN goes a bit further than most, in that you can see the actual speeds during the xfer as it fluctuates. The other speed test engines take an average of your speed over the duration of xfer and throw away a significant amount of the data as "erroneous." My question is, if it is erroneous yet contributes to the overall time it takes to transfer a file, it is NOT erroneous and should NOT be discarded as such. This is where you will see significant differences on the "other" sites. Sometimes it is disappointing to see the real numbers your machine is capable of. Believe me, I know. I get upset when I think a measurement is wrong. But, it gives me valuable insight into how to increase the throughput and achieve better results. Take a look at my max and averages These come from my VNC (e.g. linux remote desktop) connections to one of my boxes using Firefox or other browsers to test the box. The average has been skewed by testing all kinds of different settings (e.g. jumbo frames, different MTUs, browsers, servers, etc) and so could be much higher if I dedicated an account singly to testing with my best settings...but that would kind of defeat the purpose, in my opinion! If you consider the overhead on the processor and network interface just to support my 1920x1080 VNC connection, then factor in that I am remoting into a server to test it's connection; furthermore that it is just a TCP link with limited threads that can be opened (due to the nature of the protocol), my box is capable of much more. But when it comes to true INTERNET ability, I have never measured anything faster than I can through testmy.net. Consider that the "other" sites use Flash and other visual enhancements, a limited amount of data and basically, nondiscriminatly discards data assumed to be erroneous, which site do you think will be more accurate? I will soon be starting a blog regarding how to improve you internet connection speed and will post the link when I publish it. I would like people to try before and after modifying system settings as well as the other speed test sites. I say everyone should try the other sites as well and see where the discrepancy lies. But if you are truly looking to improve your performance, in my opinion, you have found the spot (that is, unless you want to write your own code and try to start from scratch what has taken a decade to get where it is...good luck by the way). Anyone with questions, please feel free to ask. Understand, please, that I am often distracted and cannot immediately reply -- but I will reply. Probably your best source of information is in the threads on this site, or directly from Damon. He is very active on his site and generally answers anyones questions or posts fairly rapidly. Thanks for reading and forgive my spelling and/or rambling! Good luck! SIETEC
    5 points
  7. Thank you JereSalo! this works for me too. only one of my PC has a slow speed, I been looking for the reason for few month, but you solved my issue!
    4 points
  8. Hi! Thank you both for your help. I solved this issue 2 days ago, I had a problem in my Windows 10 desktop and I investigated it for a few days till I found this: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10694244/sending-data-from-windows-is-slow-over-any-network-with-high-latency-but-linux-i I wrote this on my CMD: netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=normal And it worked! Now if I run the test on my desktop pc I have more than 30Mbps and before I had 3. I don't know why Windows was configured in that way. Have a nice day and thank you for your time!
    4 points
  9. Wow... look at this test result. I pay for 400 Down and my Avg Down is around 448. I snuck one by their speed throttle mechanism. At least now I know my neighborhood and facility wiring etc. can handle 1 gig. How this happened I don't know, but here is my theory. Based on the last thing I did, which was manipulating my so called router to grab it's Ip address from the host's DHCP but ignore everything else that comes from the Host's DHCP -- my router finally picked up DNS from 1.1.1.1 I proved my so called router was using the new DNS server via the cool tool on this site (DNS lookup or something similar, under Misc --> tools). So, the very first time I ran the test without the extra DHCP baggage - my Down test hit 1 gig+, but their clever infrastructure caught on real fast. At first it over-corrected, then settled down in at the speed I usually get in my test results. So, no, benchmarking is not my hobby. I just want to be well prepared for my inevitable conversation with my dear old ISP.
    4 points
  10. CA3LE

    TMN on the News

    Awesome! Thank you Ken Colburn from Data Doctors. https://www.abc15.com/news/let-joe-know/paying-for-fast-speeds-why-is-your-computer-so-slow Another great article at KTAR - http://ktar.com/story/2530346/why-is-my-internet-slow-even-though-the-speed-test-says-it-is-fast/
    4 points
  11. I was once a Hughesnet customer and had the same problems from time to time. It is shared bandwidth; therefore, the more devices added, the less bandwidth you receive. It's a normal practice for Hughesnet to "oversell" available bandwidth. I've also known quite a few people with the service and they all report the same problems. Once their 30 day trial period ends and their contracts are locked in, the service they receive after that point is poor to say the least. It's as if they give new customers "PRIORITY" access until the trial ends, and then, BAM, customers find out exactly what they're paying for. You are not alone! There are thousands upon thousands of complaints filed against Hughesnet for their business practices.
    4 points
  12. fey42

    Distance issues?

    Your problem might not be your local ISP. Since they have to connect across the country you are at the mercy of every connection made and every node you pass through. They have control over everything until they hand it off to the Internet backbone and then all bets are off, It can go anywhere. I live 70 miles south of Portland, but to get to the Portland Netfix server, I go though Seattle and sometimes San Jose. Also you have time of day that affects speed. Imagine as everyone comes home, has supper and kicks back to stream their favorite show. It starts first on the East Coast and the load picks up as you move West. 7PM is the worst, the whole country is streaming and unless the server is in your back yard you are in trouble. Try your test against multiple test sites and time of day. You will see a wide variance the further away you are from "home" and the time of day.
    4 points
  13. CA3LE

    What does NFW mean?

    No problem, glad to help. Thank you too. I sell advertising but try to not over do it. Huge segments of TMN's traffic never even see an ad. ISPs and other entities have offered to pay for analytics, many times. Instead of just giving them what they want I'm building TMN to do it for me. Instead of sharing the information with only those who pay for it TMN aims to share all of its collected information with everyone, for free. (within the privacy policy guidelines of course) -- with help from those requests the information presented here will become more and more detailed in future versions.
    4 points
  14. I will preface this post by saying that I am a Windows dummy, so I don't have a whole lot to offer to the Microsoft bunch out there. However, my quick little tips don't apply so much to a particular OS as to general system settings good for almost any OS, so here goes: 1. Minimize the amount of running services on your system. I cannot overstress the importance of this one -- the more services & applications you have running simultaneously on your box, the more overhead utilized. So many people have all kinds of virus scanners, supposed "speed up" apps, unnecessary running services/daemons/etc. which do not need to be running 24/7. For instance, say you have a virus scanning platform. **Please note, I am not advocating that you turn off your virus protection -- and only you can determine the level of protection you need, so in the end, use your own judgement and don't hold me responsible (please) ** Anyway, virus scanners are generally not needed constantly. You're not going to get a virus if you don't have one already and you are not downloading files, visiting malicious sites or running untrusted software. There are times the preceding statement if false, but rarely enough to cause concern. So, I suggest that you only have your virus software set to scan files on demand - e.g. when you download something or when you are reading emails. Use your browser security settings to help minimize the chance you wonder into an insecure site and always make sure the sites you are using for sensitive information (such as bill payment, purchases, sensitive data, etc) are encrypted with trusted encryption (check the pad lock icon and make sure it is a "https" connection). Using your browser to help with security is a performance sparing method to minimize the processor intensive constant scanning by a virus detection package. If you have a ton of system services running in the system tray of Windows, take a look at which ones you really need and eliminate the others. Same for system startup -- clear out everything that does NOT need to be started upon startup; this will save memory (RAM) and processor usage...which leads to quicker page response and transfer speeds. Advanced users should check actual "services" in Windows and turn off those you don't need. If you're running a linux flavor, I assume you're already pretty versed in modifying your configuration. If not, PM me. e.g. . chkconfig --list to see a list of services or service --status-all to see what's running currently (RH/CentOS/etc.) 2. Change your MTU (max transmission unit) to 9000 if you're on a high speed cable or ethernet link. This allows your network interface to send much larger frames than the standard 1500 value. Basically, this parameter sets how large a single transmission frame may be, minus overhead. So, if your system includes overhead in the setting, set it to less than 9000 so you don't get an error for exceeding 9000 (e.g. set it to 8900 to be safe). Just make sure you do this if you know what you're doing only and if you're sure it is appropriate for your set up. It shouldn't cause any problems, but make sure you know how to get back in there and change it to the previous value in case it breaks your connectivity (which I doubt!) 3. Try different browsers - not only are some browsers actually much better at speed natively, they save on system resource usage as well. My suggestion: firefox or opera. I was never a fan of opera until recently when they made a lot of improvements. Firefox is always a good choice. IE would be my last choice, but many people love it. Chrome is pretty good too but I have noticed some issues with it lately. 4. Stop background file transfer daemons such as online data backup utilities, cloud sync systems (iCloud, etc). If you have things like that running in the background, they obviously will take a lot of your bandwidth away (unless you specifically configure them not to, they will use as much bandwidth as they can get their hands on). So, shut down iCloud from syncing while the system is active and if you use something like Carbonite backup, let it work when you are not using your box (e.g. overnight). 5. If you are using wifi, make sure you have a good signal and make sure you are using the faster encryption settings. You should use 802.11g at a minimum and preferably 802.11n for best connectivity. Most network connections (note I said most) will not realize much (if any) performance gain by going direct ethernet unless the previous 3 suggestions (signal, encryption, protocol) are not followed. If you cannot adjust the first 3 settings, then you probably should connect directly to your router's ethernet connection or to your cable modem/DSL/etc. You can also change the "power" or "energy" saving settings on your wifi box by setting the transmission power to 100% all the time. Search your manufacturers KB or google for "increasing wifi transmission power" or, more generally, "tutorial to speed up wifi" Note that wifi is going to give you a theoretical maximum of 450Mbits per second in the best and hardly ever realized conditions. Generally 300Mbits is as fast as you'll see and if you're not using 802.11n, 54Mbits optimum. These optimal speeds are what the manufacturers tout, but it is nearly impossible to see them. Believe me, wifi can interfere (pardon the pun ) with even a moderate cable speed of 30-40 Mbits/second. Summary: wired is always better, but there are ways to maximize your wifi connection. I will put the last 5 of my first 10 tips online over the next few days ... but, please feel free to reply to this post or PM me if you need help doing these things. I hope some of this helped! SIETEC President & Lead Network Engineer SIETECserverNet :: sietecFASTcom :: sietecMATRIXcom Coming soon, I will be launching a hosting service unlike anything you have ever seen -- take a look at my test results here: My clients will be able to achieve similar, depending on the service chosen, and it is my goal to help them do so. Interested in pre-sales information? Drop me a line at [email protected] and let me know what you are looking for ... deep discounts to the first 25 people! My website is being re done right now, but I basically offer anything most hosting companines offer, just in a virtual box. (which, believe it or not, that is how I achieved most of these results, through one of my virtual machines). You still get to pick how many processors, RAM, type of HD and space on disk, NIC speeds, etc. You can even choose a free virtual appliance that suits what you are doing and launch it on my platform. Or, I can assist you in installing your OS and let you take it from there .. full root/administrator access! Again, if interested, email or PM me!
    4 points
  15. paroxysmal

    Hello!

    @CA3LE --Thanks for the great speed test site. I was genuinely surprised at the results I got here compared to speakeasy/ookla. My ISP does host an ookla site and does recommend using the java based speed tests. I was having trouble after upgrading my internet package. My old one was 10Mb/768k and I upgraded to 30Mb/3Mb. I had asked the sales/accounts lady if I needed a new cable modem and she said no and I believed her. Well after doing multiple tests on various sites i stumbled upon testmy.net and actually got an accurate result for what my connection really felt like compared to what my ISP said it should be. I contacted tech support and they said that I did need a new cable modem that the upgraded plan required a DOCSIS 3 cable modem and I had a DOCSIS 2 modem and that could/would account for variances in speed vs internet package. I went in and swapped out cable modems free of charge and tests were about the same on ookla/speakeasy but improved by a decent amount on testmy.net. Most importantly it felt quicker and more responsive as my family and I were using it for various things. Thanks again and keep up the good work! Oh and for all you older techies in the crowd that might remember how we used to do speed tests before there were websites for it *grin* ftp blah.soandso.edu get 5mbfile.tar.gz send <1mbfile.tar.gz --paroxysmal
    4 points
  16. That would not solve the issue, and would essentially give you a single average number that is better left as a set of numbers for more information regarding routing. There are two speed graphs that I think are most important for an internet connection: a graph of speed tests to an internal server (within the ISPs network) to determine the average and variance during the day/week/year/millennium of your connection to your ISP; and a graph of speed tests to a server outside the ISPs network, to find out how good your ISP is at handling that. Latency tests can also be very useful. You are right in that a single server can be hampered by a single bad network, but it does point to a problem that is not supposed to exist, and will affect many more servers which you want to interact with.
    4 points
  17. Hi Guys I thought I'd post a solution to a problem I had recently - it might help someone else. Last year I was getting 30+ Mbps down with Comcast using their "Boost" option (costs a bit more than regular). Then this year, it dropped to 10Mbps. Of course I complained to Comcast, ran all types of scans, checked my PC with HighjackThis, etc. Nothing. I have a Dell XPS with a mother board capable of handling 24GB of RAM. I had 15GB in it but then took out a 1GB stick to put in a 4GB stick giving me 18GB of RAM. I also have a bootable second hard drive "F" with Win 7 Ultimate but my primary "C" dive has Win 7 Home Premium. The puzzler is the secondary "F" drive was still getting more than 30Mbps down but the primary "C" drive was only getting 10 Mbps. What's up with that? I tried everything until I discovered that Windows 7 Home Premium can only "handle" a maximum 16GB of RAM - Win 7 Ultimate can "handle" 192GB of RAM. When I dropped my RAM back to 16GB my speeds returned to above 30Mbps on the primary C drive. The lesson for me is that if you put more RAM in your machine than your Operating System can handle, you might down grade your speed when you think you're helping.
    4 points
  18. Mine are so awesome. Can't wait till my sites to come up for 2 to 3 minutes. Who can go lower then my slow speeds? For 2 years of Suddenlink disappointment.
    3 points
  19. I opened up TestMy Latency for public testing about 2 weeks ago. Thousands of tests have been performed daily, thank you for the data and insight. It's really helped to button down the program. It wouldn't be able to test the way it does today without you just simply running those early tests and logging that information to my database. Today I was in the shower and thought, "Why not make it able to test anywhere..." --- cut myself shaving because I wanted to get to my computer so fast. So I added an ability that's hidden right now and I would love for you to test it. https://testmy.net/latency?internal=1&fa=1&addr=google.com https://testmy.net/latency?internal=1&fa=1&addr=facebook.com https://testmy.net/latency?internal=1&fa=1&addr=msn.com ... any address you want. It's going to show as "My Network" right now because it's barely built in there. If you query TML like this and it returns a result then you're testing against the host at addr=. From what I've seen it doesn't matter if the host is behind a CDN like cloudflare, it will punch right through that and get the real time to the host. For instance, a website I know is hosted in Australia, who's users have linked to TMN for decades >> forums.whirlpool.net.au I ping that using ICMP ping and I get Damons-5K-iMac:~ CA3LE$ ping forums.whirlpool.net.au PING forums.whirlpool.net.au (104.20.14.233): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=0 ttl=57 time=9.928 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=9.410 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=9.819 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=9.808 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=11.445 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=9.191 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=9.319 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=9.396 ms 64 bytes from 104.20.14.233: icmp_seq=8 ttl=57 time=9.357 ms ^C --- forums.whirlpool.net.au ping statistics --- 9 packets transmitted, 9 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 9.191/9.741/11.445/0.650 ms Damons-5K-iMac:~ CA3LE$ (I can tell by the 104. address, don't even have to look it up, most likely cloudflare) That's the ping to the cloudflare proxy... not the actual forums.whirlpool.net.au server. but then I run that address with TML and get about 1 second delay. (sorry, can't share this like normal because it's not logging it to the database... again, this is a hidden function and I have to develop it further. There are blocks in the program preventing certain actions when it's outside of the scope it expects to see. Screenshots will have to do.) https://testmy.net/latency?internal=1&fa=1&https=1&addr=forums.whirlpool.net.au I do the same test to domains known to resolve in the US... Oops, I realize now that you need to add the &https=1 if the website is https. However, most will resolve both. https://testmy.net/latency?internal=1&fa=1&https=1&addr=google.com https://testmy.net/latency?internal=1&fa=1&https=1&addr=facebook.com https://testmy.net/latency?internal=1&fa=1&https=1&addr=msn.com by the way, facebook started responding slower on http also, wasn't just https. It's like it switched me to a different location. Actually, sharing does work as long as the address has less than 3 parts to it. "forums.whirlpool.net.au" won't save just because it has 4 parts to the address... I'll fix that. example embedded share https://testmy.net/latency?q=CA3LE&n=100&internal=1&fa=1&addr=testmy.net&stats=1 Help me understand what this can do, I'm figuring it out with you. Please run more tests and let me know what you find.
    3 points
  20. Both the dslreports folk and fast.com reached out the the bloat email list (see lists.bufferbloat.net) as to how to go about measuring this problem properly in their codebases. You will find a lot of good info in the archives there, and we're always looking for sites to be actively testing for bufferbloat. Of the two, dslreports has thus far been doing a great job, so great that their dataset is thoroughly polluted by people that used the site to fix their bufferbloat!!, so we no longer have a real picture of what the internet is really looking like. (so I really, really, really applaud the idea of a new site, such as yours, attempting to tackle the problem also) I have a few nits on the dslreports stuff I've always wanted them to address, also. A few are: 0) huge threads on the bloat lists that I won't summarize... a noted one is the insistence on doing some level of statistical ledgerdemain on the data (throwing out the worst 5% of the data, or picking an arbitrary threshold of X latency for bufferbloat, etc. )When it comes to this sort of science, the *really* interesting data is in the outliers, not the averages. This is a detailed look at that sort of statistical rigor problem from a talk I gave at sigcomm 2014: http://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/2014/doc/slides/137.pdf (they've never invited me back) 1) Since the adoption of fq_codel in OSX, openwrt, thousands of commercial routers (notably now in Wifi - see google's implementation here: http://flent-newark.bufferbloat.net/~d/Airtime based queue limit for FQ_CoDel in wireless interface.pdf ) and the universal enablement of ECN in that OS, we are starting to see ECN negotation and CE markings show up in multiple data sets. It would be good to track that somewhere. 2) both dslreports and fast.com throw out too much data. The really core and scary bufferbloat problem is when a network is too congested to operate worth a dang in the first place. I keep hoping that someday dslreports, at least, will create a plot that just shows the data they currently throw out - an analogy of what we might discover is here: https://www.space.com/25945-cosmic-microwave-background-discovery-50th-anniversary.html 3) I really like the http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat?up=1 plot - my kvetch is that it is only a 10 day most recent summary and I've had to rely on screen shots to be able to compare stuff over time. I'd long hoped for a deal where they could sell or share that dataset to researchers. The bufferbloat problem IS getting better - assuming the dslreports dataset isn't totally polluted but there is a long, long way to go. 4) Nobody's tests run long enough to saturate higher speed links, due to how slow TCP ramps up. A variable length test, or one that runs longer when it detects high bandwidth is in use. dslreports cuts off their data set and test with 4+ second delays - and we have seen delays as bad as hundreds of seconds in the field. 5) A really simple test would be to measure syn and syn/ack times while under load for a string of very short tcp transactions. This would emulate web traffic better. 6) Recently published (and under discussion on the bloat list) was a pretty good summary of the speedtest problems we have on the internet going forward. Discussion here; https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/bloat/2019-May/009211.html - the paper, here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1905.02334.pdf Anyway, we're kind of old internet fogies that mostly use email, and not web forums like this, if you have further questions, want to gain testers, or have someone from the bufferbloat effort or academia help dissect the data, please drop us a line on bloat at lists.bufferbloat.net. Best of luck with it! Thx!
    3 points
  21. Sean

    How does a WISP work?

    Some of the wireless internet service providers (WISPs) that operate here in Ireland operate on the 5GHz Wi-Fi band. This is basically like a home Wi-Fi set up, but on a much bigger scale. The purpose of the dish is provide a high enough gain to pick up and transmit the signal over a several mile radius. The tower usually consists of several sector antennas, typically three aimed 120 degrees apart operating on separate channels. Customers on one sector generally share the same channel like on a home Wi-Fi network. The last WISP I was with used Ubiquiti hardware. When I changed provider, I was curious myself to check out its web interface and to my surprise they never changed the default password on the dish hardware's web interface. Its configuration was very similar to home Wi-Fi, mainly an SSID, WPA2 passphrase and internal IP address set. Their service end likely had a gateway server that throttled the up/down bandwidth according to whatever package was ordered, while also metering the usage from the assigned IP address. Ubiquiti has a training book freely available on their website which goes into detail on how enterprise Wi-Fi works including on a large scale that WISPs use: https://dl.ubnt.com/guides/training/courses/UEWA_Training_Guide_V2.1.pdf A few other WISPs here use LTE on the licenced 3.6GHz band. This basically works the same as a mobile phone LTE service, but where the operator has exclusive control over its assigned spectrum, LTE hardware and installation. As this is a managed network, it generally performs a lot better than a mobile phone LTE network as each LTE client device (i.e. that dish antenna on the roof) is professionally installed, maximising the signal encoding efficiency. The weaker the signal quality, the more airtime is required to transmit the same amount of data.
    3 points
  22. I'm not sure 'What' you will win in the end. But it sure ain't a usable fast connection, referring to the last poster's comments. I too have been on the phone with them many times, to no avail. Every time I see the advertisement come on about guaranteed 25Mbps, it really annoys me. I have recently found better options to try out, (new company's coming out with internet connections). I just don't know how much of a fight they will put up if I haven't served the complete 2yr sentence, oops, I mean automatic contract I'm supposed to be on with them. Even though there was no mention of it when I called to get connected. The way I see it, they are not holding up their end of the contract, then why am I forced to stay with them and unable to use my connection for any of my work? My speeds are all in the old Dial up range. 3 or 4 days after my cycle begins, I'm told I used all my data. I ask "What, pray tell, is using up my 20 Gigs in the first week so fast? No one seems to have an answer for that. I mean, I am unable to do but the very basic of things on this connection. It isn't fast enough for me to use up 20 gigs!
    3 points
  23. CA3LE

    Wrong result ID given

    Looks like there was already a result in the database with the same testID. It won't allow an overwrite of the same ID. It's supposed to check for that, I'll look and see why it didn't. Maybe I turned that off at some point and didn't realize... Even with that check disabled it's extremely rare to conflict with other testID's. It's like 36^9 combinations, but I have seen it before and you just confirmed it again. I'll make sure that's not an issue for you in the future. 1.0155996e+14 that's a lot of combinations. 1.3537087e+16 combinations if I switched to cAsE sEnSiTiVe Better go buy a lottery ticket.
    3 points
  24. Hi, I just found this internet speed test site and I think it's great and it seems to give the most reliable results I have found yet. I can't seem to find the ping result however, is it possible to see your ping amongst the final test results? All the other internet speed tests show ping, I think you guys should do that as well!
    3 points
  25. $89.99 Cable and TV. Xfinity Massachusetts
    3 points
  26. As ridiculous as it sounds, most computer components such as the motherboard, PSU and certain expansion cards can survive a full dishwasher cycle. Obviously that's not how I recommend cleaning a PC. The following 8-year old video is an example. The internals were covered in cigarette smoke residue, so he decided to dismantle the components and put them through the dish washer, with the exception of the case, battery and the hard disk. I also enjoy watching videos on old hardware such as restoration videos. I have come ones where such hobbyists put components through a dishwasher cycle to clean extensive debris build-up from being left for 10+ years in storage such as a dusty shed. As long as no moisture remains when the PC is powered up, it should be fine. I generally clean my PC with an air duster, which is basically an aerosol can filled with propellant gas. Here in Ireland, humidity is usually on the high side, e.g. I run a dehumidifier to keep the indoor level below 60%. The only component I may wash is the keyboard. I have a Corsair Cherry Red Mechanical keyboard that I accidentally knocked a glass of cider on. I immediately unplugged it, tried wiping off what I could and let it dry. Once dry, many of the letters were sticking. When I started removing the keys to try cleaning below, I realised the mechanical switches were jamming. With what appeared to be a ruined keyboard that I only purchased a few months before the incident, I figured I'll try giving it a bath as we don't have a dishwasher. I partially filled a wide container with water from our dehumidifier (since it's effectively distilled), soaked the keyboard and pushed each key multiples times to force water through the switches. I left it to dry for about a week. It's fully functional again, all keys work and no sticking or other issue since.
    3 points
  27. ed_1960

    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.
    3 points
  28. CenturyLink fiber. Trial offer ended, so I'm at $160/month.
    3 points
  29. I have the same experience with 4G (cellular LTE) based broadband connections, such as when positioning a directional antenna. When the network is quiet (e.g. early on a weekend morning), there can be a large variation between what SpeedTest and TestMy reports if the antenna is not aimed correctly. Once the antenna is carefully aimed, the TestMy results climb up towards what Speedtest reports. It's similar also if there are swaying branches in line of sight as Speedtest will again ignore the brief dips as if the bandwidth is sustained. If Speedtest measured road trip speeds, their speed test methodology would eliminate traffic lights, construction zones, slow vehicles, busy junctions and everything else that accounted for the slowest 30% of the journey. If TestMy measured road trips, it would run a stopwatch from the moment of departure to the moment of arrival. Of course like the Speedtest fanatics, there would be those that would argue the same for road trip measurements - "What if that construction zone was not there, those traffic lights were green, no accident on the route, ..."
    3 points
  30. CA3LE

    Speedwave Like Option?

    Go to TestMy.net (homepage) and look under the database menu. This option was disabled, I just enabled it for you. Once you enter a name you'll get an invite link that you can use to add members to the group. Your group stats are then saved to an entirely separate database used for results comparisons.
    3 points
  31. Sean

    Port 8080 speed test

    As I noticed some ISPs return considerably quicker speed tests with Ookla's speed than what's possible with regular web access including TestMy, I decided to snoop at how Speed test establishes its connection using Sysinternals' TCPView utility. I sorted the traffic by 'Received Bytes' and then started a speed test. While the multiple connections doesn't surprise me (Ookla's tests are all multi-threaded), what I was surprised with was what port it used - 8080: It seemed like no matter what test server I tried, it ran its test over port 8080, which is a seldom used port for web traffic. For example, HTTP and HTTPS traffic are carried over ports 80 and 443, respectively, while FTP traffic is carried over ports 20 and 21. Port 8080 is typically used for an internal web proxy within corporate networks and for an ISP cache proxy in the early days of Internet for faster access to popular websites. On the other hand, by running the speed tests over port 8080, this makes it easy for ISPs to prioritise traffic for anyone using Ookla's speed test as all they have to do is give elevated QoS for traffic running over port 8080. I then thought - Is port 8080 necessary for Ookla's Speedtest? To find out, I blocked port 8080 on my PC. The speed test took a little longer to start, but once it did, it switched over to port 80, in this case with two threads: Once I open up port 8080 and click 'Test Again', the next test runs on port 8080 again. So an interesting idea would be if TestMy could add support for port 8080. I don't think it will require much configuration other than configuring the various test servers to also accept traffic on port 8080. Then it would just be a matter of typing testmy.net:8080 to perform the test on port 8080 with suspect ISPs, such as those that seem to throttle ports 80 (HTTP) and 443 (HTTPS).
    3 points
  32. justinlay

    Im Back

    Haven't been on here in years! Life has kept me busy. Glad the site is still up and running great! Figure Ill post up my results from my t mobile phone haha
    3 points
  33. Samsung Electronics announced Wednesday that it is now shipping the industry's highest-capacity solid-state drive (SSD), the 15.36TB PM1633a. Samsung revealed it was working on the drive last August, saying it would use the same form factor as for a laptop computer: 2.5-in, but the drive is 15mm in height. Laptop SSDs are typically 9mm, 7mm or 5mm in height (for ultrathin notbooks). The 2.5-in SSD is based on a 12Gbps Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) interface for use in enterprise storage systems. The PM1633a has blazing fast performance, with random read and write speeds of up to 200,000 and 32,000 I/Os per second (IOPS), respectively. It delivers sequential read and write speeds of up to 1200MBps, the company said. A typical SATA SSD can peak at about 550MBps. Because the PM1633a comes in a 2.5-in. form factor, IT managers can fit twice as many of the drives in a standard 19-in. 2U (3.5-in.) rack, compared to an equivalent 3.5-in. storage drive. The SSD also sets a new bar for sustainability, Samsung said. The 15.36TB PM1633a drive supports one full drive write per day, which means 15.36TB of data can be written every day on a single drive without failure over its five-year warranty. The SSD can write from two to 10 times as much data as typical SATA SSDs based on planar MLC and TLC NAND flash technologies. Samsung said it is betting on the PM1633a SSD line-up to "rapidly become" the overwhelming favorite over hard disks for enterprise storage systems. "To satisfy an increasing market need for ultra-high-capacity SAS SSDs from leading enterprise storage system manufacturers, we are directing our best efforts toward meeting our customers' SSD requests," Jung-bae Lee, senior vice president of Samsung Electronic's Application Engineering Team, said in a statement. The performance of the PM1633a SSD is based on four factors: the 3D NAND (vertical NAND or V-NAND) chips; 16GB of DRAM; Samsung's proprietary controller chip; and the 12Gbps SAS interface. The random read IOPS performance is about 1,000 times that of SAS-type hard disk drives and the sequential read and write speeds are more than twice the speed of a typical SATA SSD, the company said. Combining 512 of Samsung's 256Gbit V-NAND memory chips enables the SSD's unprecedented 15.36TB of data storage capacity in a single drive. V-NAND, or 3D NAND, is a way of stacking NAND cells one atop another like a microscopic skyscraper. Not only does it double the density of standard planar NAND chips, from 128Gbits to 256Gbits, it also increases performance. Samsung originally announced the 48-layer V-NAND last August, saying it also sports 3-bits per cell or multi-level cell (MLC) NAND technology. Source
    3 points
  34. Yes compared to my first results: 16.2 Mbps download 5.3 Mbps upload Thanks for the help!
    3 points
  35. I wanted to share this in case it can help someone in the future. For the past few weeks we've noticed a lot of digital artifacts and audio cutting out on some channels. I was thinking that it may be an issue with Comcast, they just fixed a major issue in my area so I hadn't made a big deal about it yet. I was about to call about it and today I noticed something that I'd never seen before. Downloading something... affecting the picture on the TV. Over and over I slowed down and sped up the transfer speed on an intensive usenet download. When I'd ramp it up to full speed the picture started to block out heavily, I'd then slow the speed way down and immediately the picture returned to normal. When it was pixelated it was so bad that the show became completely unwatchable. My actions on the Internet were 100% without a doubt affecting the TV picture. After witnessing this I grabbed a fresh 2 way splitter out of my tool bag, ran down to the basement and swapped out the splitter. Ever since... perfect picture. Not even a single instance where before you couldn't make it 60 seconds without something. By the way, there was no issue with the Internet speed in this case. Just looking at the Internet performance I would have thought everything was fine. Cracked open the splitter and there's definite signs of degradation. Hot spot on a solder point leading to that wrapped coil shows signs of internal resistance. This was a brand new splitter used in untouched conditions indoors for only 1.5 years before it failed this way. A wide array of symptoms can be caused by the same thing. Remember, any points where two or more cables meet are always weak points. When you're having issues, always look in these areas first. The fix may be easier than you can imagine.
    3 points
  36. With TestMy.net you are testing to Dallas TX, other test locations are available around the world but none in South America. I'm still looking for a fast and decently priced server in South America. There are many reasons why speedtest.net results differ from TestMy.net. Here's a couple of topics that will shed light. Why Do My Results Differ From Speedtest.net / Ookla Speed Tests? Internet providers caught inflating speed test results You said it yourself, you're getting crappy quality from netflix while speedtest.net says you have 20 Mbps. Sounds like TestMy.net is more representative of what you're really seeing. You're not alone, topics like yours are by far the most common question we get here. You already have your answer and know which test is right. Why would you trust that test when you can feel that it's much higher than it should be? I have an option that you can use to make your own multithread download tests against pretty much any server you want. I created one for you using netflix servers. assets.nflxext.com :::.. Download Speed Test Result Details ..::: Download Connection Speed:: 98183 Kbps or 98.2 Mbps Download Speed Test Size:: 96 MB or 98328 kB or 100688125 bytes Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 12273 kB/s or 12.3 MB/s Tested At:: http://TestMy.net Version 15 Validation:: https://testmy.net/db/i98fNGPJr Client Stats:: https://testmy.net/quickstats/CA3LE https://testmy.net/compID/4602014672148 Test Time:: 2016-02-02 07:27:42 Local Time Client Location:: Monument, CO US https://testmy.net/city/monument_co Target:: assets.nflxext.com https://testmy.net/mX/KsSMa Client Host:: Comcast Cable https://testmy.net/hoststats/comcast_cable Compare:: 29% slower than client avg, 137% faster than host avg, 69% faster than city avg, 217% faster than country avg, 531% faster than world index 1MB Download in 0.08 Seconds - 1GB Download in ~82 Seconds - 1753X faster than 56K This test of exactly 98328 kB took 8.208 seconds to complete User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_11_2) AppleWebKit/601.3.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/9.0.2 Safari/601.3.9 [!] Comparing to multithread on TMN Dallas where I got 135 Mbps using the same test size immediately after. And then a linear result... https://testmy.net/db/WHjK6uJZl This, by the way, is on wifi that I know to be under performing. On a computer directly wired to the router with cat-5 moments later... https://testmy.net/db/~JnyL6cNz The best thing you can do to understand your connection and where it's weak is to test it more with TMN. By altering the variables, testing against different servers, using the different test types you can spot weak points in your route. Hell, you can even use TMN to test against speedtest.net servers if you'd like. Search google for "speedtest.net server list" and you'll instantly find their publicly available server list. Search the XML file for your city or the server you know about already. Take the URL e.g. "http://speedtest.com.uy/speedtest/upload.php" then drop the "upload.php". Most of the servers are open to file navigation, just open the URL in your browser and you'll see the list of files that speedtest.net uses to test. Copy the URL for the packet size you'd like to test with and paste it into http://testmercury.net ... TMN will turn the image into a speedtest that can be automatically sized anywhere from 2X the original size to 200 MB. Literally just paste a URL to a valid image online and hit enter... So here's the directory listing for a random speedtest.net server in UY That's the standard file structure for speedtest.net servers. You could just take "random350x350.jpg" and add it to the end of any of the server addresses on the XML and it will make a great test using TMN instead of speedtest.net. Faster connections you may want to use the larger images, which are then repeated to reach the final test size. Hope this helps you nail down the problem. Always compare the multithread results (the Mercury test is multithread) to the classic linear results.
    3 points
  37. Tested a week ago, I was getting >90mb. In the last few days, I was getting between 5 & 25mb. I have been testing with a cabled connection & wireless switched off. Tried some other speedtests tonight, and the were indicating c. 90mb. So I switched my server to the DE server and tried again - and got 90mb! So it appears to me that there is an issue with the GB server. Either that or my host (VirginMedia) doesn't like it.... Anyone else encounter this problem? Update: Actually it appears that at one stage I had changed to "Global multithread" and that was where my results became inconsistent. reset to London now, and it is better - though still slower than my Dusseldorf tests. (I'm In Belfast, Northern Ireland). regards Elkay
    3 points
  38. I hope this is what you mean. Crude but gets the job done ... again I hope!!! Oh, the reason for the slave and the Ethernet not directly to the HP Compaq is the wireless is being used by a Roku about 10 feet away. No, they are all off during all tests. In fact I try to have everything using bandwidth off during tests.
    3 points
  39. Is it possible to get the topology of your network, in other words: Modem---> switch --> windows machine Or Modem --> switch --> switch --> XP windows machine | windows 10 machine It all good, we should have the above before at least myself, has a better understanding of the layout. Also, when referring to the 'node', this could mean any number of network 'devices' in the path, a switch, a router, to keep it simple, it's a 'hop' that must be traveled to reach the destination. Which is what the tracrt shows, each 'hop' from 'node to node' is showing the 'latency' or speed / time to reach there and back divided by 2.
    3 points
  40. RideDucati

    Just a hello

    Just saying hello to the community. Great service and site you have here! Thanks for creating it.
    3 points
  41. Hello back at you! Yes, we live on the Olympic Peninsula, and the landscape and the quick access to it is amazing. It's just frustrating living so close to Microsoft and Amazon, to name a couple, yet have access to the internet far below many 3rd world communities.
    3 points
  42. CA3LE

    Merry Christmas TMN

    I wanted to wish everyone a safe and Merry Christmas! 2012-Merry-Christmas-Hd-Wallpaper.zip
    3 points
  43. That's on your smart TV, right? Typically when we see results like that on a computer we suggest TCP Optimizer. Optimizing the TCP and MTU settings will often bring the single thread score up to the multithread result level. You may not be able to change these settings on your TV, I would almost bet that you wouldn't be able to. Sometimes if the drive performance is lacking single thread tests here will suffer. Here's results from a Macbook. The first 9 results were taken with a failing mechanical HDD. The last 4 stable results were taken after the HDD was swapped for a SSD. In hindsight I should have done some multithread tests to show you that multithread is usually unaffected in this scenario. But I didn't know I'd be sharing the results at the time... I just wanted to quickly fix my friends laptop. I could tell just by how the first few tests felt while they ran that it was the hard drive holding it back, plus I had already diagnosed it with multithread test comparison a month prior. Did a swap for SSD, rebooted and instantly 90 Mbps ... over and over again. Everything ran better by the way... I just tested it through the Internet and TMN. ... Note: if I only had 15 Mbps Internet I wouldn't have been able to see the issue. It's only at extreme speed that you can start using TMN for purposes beyond what I originally intended it to be used for. It's not always the Internet connection and ISPs fault. Hardware can hold you back too. TestMy.net is not just a bandwidth test... it started as a bandwidth test but at higher speeds we've found it does much more. Those results (from a TV on your connection type) look good to me. That's a comfortable speed to surf at. It would be better if both types tested at 35+ but I wouldn't get too hung up on it either. That's not a bad performance. It may be held back by the speed of the TV's memory... why things like that only affect my classic test, I don't know.. they just do. But now, when you get your next tv... you'll know how to benchmark the difference.
    3 points
  44. CA3LE

    Greetings from 1996...

    speedtest.net, as you know it now, was only started in 2006. source: wikipedia speedtest.net Wonder why their results favor the ISPs... One has to assume cronyism. ...they weren't chosen for accuracy. So you see... the speedtest.net you saw in the 90's was someone totally different. It was bought and converted in 2006, almost instantly was used by every ISP. ... even though it was common knowledge among computer nerds/geeks/dudes that it was complete BS. Wayback machine only goes back to 2000. Here's a funny screenshot. But yes, even the version before ookla stepped in required plugins to work. I've never required plugins.
    3 points
  45. The difference of the two you say? Speedtest.net uses a pure flash-based approach, and drops the top and bottom 5% of your tested speed. Why? Because the first instant of testing is typically slower due to the requirement to establish a connection. Then there's often a sudden burst which is typically irrelevant to your speed. Speedtest.net is more useful for a total-throughput test. It's often handy for gamers to test what the typical speed of their connection is. (After all, they are using UDP mostly which is connectionless, so there is no establishment of a connection.) Testmy.net uses a pure HTTP based approach, and does not remove any data. Why? Because almost all of the typical users network traffic is over HTTP, which requires the establishment of a connection. (Downloads, webpages, style-sheets, images, etc.) Testmy.net is much more relevant to testing your total connection throughput. Basically giving you a true establishment of how websites should download. Thanks, EBrown
    3 points
  46. CA3LE

    I am confused.

    You can trust the results here. ... I can tell you that a thousand times, it means nothing coming from me. Testing it yourself like you just did is the best way to really drive the point home. Not enough people take the time to question it, they blindly trust the other tests thinking that their provider knows what they're doing. Yeah, they know what they're doing alright. Too bad more people don't know. Help by spreading the word.
    3 points
  47. Hi Alex, Distance will not be an issue if your provider is delivering. GB to NL isn't that far, if your provider and the people they peer with were delivering... you'd be able to easily pull your speeds at that distance. I have connections that I pull hundreds of Mbps from at distances of thousands of miles. TestMy.net uncovers issues that other speed tests fail to detect. It could be your TCP settings effecting performance. It could be poor routing or it could be that your ISP is pulling a fast one.. shaping the way you can draw your bandwidth. LOTS of people are contacting me telling me that this is happening to them. TMN is purposely designed to render as normal content would which makes it in tune with many issues that go undetected otherwise. Before you're so quick to judge you might want to read this post one of my members wrote, just last night. https://testmy.net/ipb/topic/30731-multithread/?p=339762 -- He's an aerospace engineer with a lot of experience with bandwidth. His independent findings as well as others backup my claims. That's coming from someone who's pulling over 600 Mbps frequently using the same exact test you used... it's not my test, it's not my bandwidth. Other speed tests are wrong more often than not. Believe the numbers you want to believe but before you rush to judgement you might want to put a meter on your line and compare. TestMy.net is right on the money every time. Other tests myself and others compare to don't line up and obviously aren't taking the entire test into consideration. They also often don't use enough test information to be accurate so results can be inflated from bursting. Another way you can achieve higher speeds is by multithreading. If you go to https://testmy.net/mirror you'll see information on it and a link to toggle it on and off. Currently however I haven't expanded this to my servers outside of the US. The way it's setup now you'll be pulling resources from all my servers in the US at the same time. By opening more threads you may be able to pull more speed, even given the distance. The resulting score will represent your speed not just to one location... but across the entire US. Multithreading is not my default option because enabling it can mask issues that only testing a single thread will pickup on. Again, this is what makes my site different. Other sites are simply trying to max out your connection. There is more to it than that. The truth is, if your connection is running correctly and your ISP isn't shaping your bandwidth... you should be able to max a single thread. ... personally, I have the same issue on my home connection as you might. I can't come close to my speeds in a single thread, multithread opens me up an extra 30Mbps. Using the multithread speed test on my connection more accurately depicts the capability but the question remains, why can I only do that when I open more threads? If there was an issue with the test or servers myself (on other connections I have) and other users wouldn't be able to pull many 100's of Mbps. ISPs are starting to heavily shape the way you can draw your bandwidth. Often limiting single thread transactions. Other speed tests fail to pick up on this... maybe they design it that way on purpose because that's who the ISPs use. ... Ookla brand speed tests in particular are BS. They ignore part of the transfer and omit a portion of the data, the result is an inflated score. Read more - That information comes from their OWN admission printed in their own wiki. Dude, you have to admit to me... if the results are adjusted, it nullifies the result. You can't trust something that makes adjustments for a number that's variable. ... Say that your connection dips for part of the test. Chances are, it won't be accounted for in the final result. You're testing to know that information and they're hiding it from you. TMN accounts for EVERYTHING that happens during the test. If you look at the TiP details on my results you'll see how much simply looking at different parts of the data can effect the result. Look at 'middle average', that's removing the first and last reading... Not only does ookla/speedtest.net ignore the start and finish, they remove the worst portion of your results before calculation. Flash speed tests have been proven inaccurate by MANY people much smarter than I am. I've also been told that ISPs that opt in can actually make adjustments to how much of the results are dropped off. HAHA, sounds like fraud to me. Letting ISPs basically make their own results. BAH! How they sleep at night escapes me. Keep this in mind too... I was building my test nearly 10 years before ookla released their first test. Believe who you want to... my program is just calling it how it sees it. Other people in GB are able to pull well over 100 Mbps... even out to my US servers --- https://testmy.net/country/gb/max --- your connection just isn't delivering like you thought it was. The truth hurts sometimes but when you searched for a speed test I don't think you were looking for someone to pull wool over your eyes... you were looking for a test. If you don't believe my results, use the other guys test with results designed to make you feel warm and fuzzy inside. Thanks for visiting, I hope that I've helped shed some light and that you'll trust and continue to use my service. If I opened your eyes to anything, please help me spread the word. I'm trying my hardest to get this information to people but I'm only one person. - Cheers and Kind Regards, - Damon Mueller
    3 points
  48. TestMy.net's new home server is online. Most people will almost immediately be on this server. It's a monster. With 2000 Mbps of connectivity, 4 200MB SSD in RAID5 array, 16GB RAM, Dual Intel Xeon-SandyBridge E5-2620-HexCore (24 threads of processing). Intensive mySQL queries I've ran query 10X+ faster than the old server. Some things that were so intensive that they couldn't execute on the old server pop right up on the new server. It's amazingly quick. This means snappier response all around. The old server was starting to reach full load during peak hours. Still operating correctly and handling the job, plenty of bandwidth available on tap... but the CPU load was getting higher than I'd like. So I put a more powerful server online. Enjoy!
    3 points
  49. Several months ago I was scratching my head wondering about the reason why my computer was so slow, I started looking through different web site looking for an answer or even just a point in the right direction for some help getting my home built comp, system faster. I stumbled across T.M.N. on Oct. 08, 2012. The people are here to help you and hopefully resolve your problems along the way. I am not saying every one will be happy with their results and some will end up doing back flips. Sys.Admin. Moderators, techs, and co members, thanks for your help Now lets see what kind of progress you have made.
    3 points
  50. coknuck

    Merry Christmas

    Wishing you all a Merry Christmas
    3 points
×
×
  • Create New...