Leaderboard

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

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

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????????

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]

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.

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

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.

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/

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.

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.

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!

@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

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.

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.

Alex Trebek, "Little black boxes maybe 4-5 in square and an inch thick." Me, "What is, apple tv?!" Damn. For reals though, it's exactly what your title says, "little black box that replaces my tower" --- it IS the tower, just smaller. I'd only refer to this as a node if the computer itself isn't doing the processing. Then it would basically be just a medium for i/o (input/output... keyboard, mouse, monitor, usb). Your company may be doing it like that but more likely your computer is still running the software physically. A notable example of this type of computer is the Intel Nuc They can be spec'd as low as $250 (with a Celeron J4005 - 2 threads) and go all the way up to north of $1600 with (a Xeon E-2286M - 16 threads!) -- you can also get kits that have no memory and drive for like $135. -- can make for some pretty dense computing. There are all kinds of mini PCs like this. Search Amazon for "mini PC" and watch some youtube reviews to find a good one at a good price. It's ever changing. In 2015 I may have said that this could replace your tower with something like this for lighter workloads like general browsing. Today... you can get a lot done in a much smaller package. Having said that, if you spec'd a full tower at the same price you'd have WAY more power. ...can't really fit an RTX in one of these. -- also I feel it's a huge waste of a processor if you aren't going to take advantage it's extra PCIe lanes. But there's something to be said for such a nice form factor. There are many use cases where this is a much better solution.

Hello @DESAND I am going to try to make this as less of a work as possible for you. (I think?) I assume you are running windows 7 or above... Open any folder anyway you like... or just directly file explorer... 1. On the address bar copy and paste this: Control Panel\Network and Internet\Network and Sharing Center Hit enter, and when you are the page I hope you are at. You should see what you are connected with. 2. Beside connection. you would see Ethernet or Wireless in blue. Click on it. 3. The window that pops up shows your hardware capabilities. This is the maximum your network card can go up to theoretically. (No way you'll hit this, even PC to PC direct transfer. As your other components w/ bottleneck the transfer of file transfers) Screenshot below for an example: As you can see my network card is 1000Mbps/Gbps capable. I don't get these speeds, but here we are :P Hope this is what you are asking for? Please clarify if it isn't. Cheers!

The same logic where more people are likely to post negative reviews than positive ones. You're probably right, to a degree. I think there are also plenty of people who test here on sunny days. If that is true, it's true across the board with all providers. They're all being judged using the same method. In my experience, the better providers always perform better and rank higher here. Is any of this perfect, no. Will it ever be perfect, no. Will I try, definitely. After TMN's recent full switch to https (SSL) settles in with the search engines I have an upgrade to the host stats pages you mention. It aggregates a much broader range and I think it better represents the highlighted ISP, city or country's speed because it won't just be showing you the logs like it does today. It will unlock a huge amount of information that TMN has been calculating and storing in private databases for a very long time now. So look for that tool to become higher resolution in the near future.

Testmy.net is not detecting IPv6 address correctly. Disabling IPv6 fixes this issue. If your using the MaxMind DB there are different databases for IPv4 and IPv6 depending on how you have them stored on your end.

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.

CenturyLink fiber. Trial offer ended, so I'm at $160/month.

Happy New Year to you too ! Thanks for your reply. I tested both my standard and mobile broadband connections using the 3MB test URL you provided. The tests confirmed that the 4G connection is much faster than the standard broadband connection - we are in a rural location where the standard broadband links are not good ! Time to purchase some pre-loaded SIM cards !! Thanks again for your help with this.

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, ..."

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.

Yes, an email and/or SMS text alert when a user-defined minimum threshold is crossed would be EXTREMELY useful, IMHO.

Yes compared to my first results: 16.2 Mbps download 5.3 Mbps upload Thanks for the help!

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

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.

May I suggest running a traceroute to east.testmy.net, and post the results here please. tracert east.testmy.net

opera_mini_proxy and opera_software_asa and opera_software_america will no longer be detected as being in a city or country. Stats already saved to city and country databases are being removed right now. Hope this helps.

Hi All Souls, Well ladies and gentlemen, it has finally come. Internet speeds faster than your typical cheap 5 port hub, POE devices, and even too fast for some of your laptops with older NIC cards out there. Behold, 300 mbps / 20 mbps - has finally reached into my area. Although, most webservers peak out at 20mb/s, and netflix only allows each device about 5 mbps from what I can see on my network monitoring. Evidence Below: Download: (on a good day I can get 320mbps) Upload: They complimentary increased our speeds because competitors in the area had 100mbps offers and also, I believe Google Fiber is looking to expand into my area ... I'll keep you posted. As for the obvious questions, torrenting (legal) stuff is infact awesome with the correct settings in your torrent client, I manage about 22-30 mb/s download rate in torrents. The upload speed increase also seemed to have increased my ping times by about 10ms in most games, such as League of Legends, DirtyB, Counter Strike, even agar.io At any rate, TWC MAXX is awesome! And after 2mo with no outages, I have nothing but great things to say. It is cable, so I know there are speed variances but a variance from 150mbps-320mbps is pretty nice for $69/mo.. Anyone else out there get there TWC MAXX upgrade? Oh yeah forgot to mention you need the right modem that can handle all the channels....

You should always purchase your own modem. Don't buy it from your provider either, don't even let them give you one. Always do your research on the modem, even if you're not going to use it's full capability... in the future you may. Motorola owns. If you get the best model (usually for around $100) and pair it with a great N-600+ or AC router (Netgear owns here IMO) you can't go wrong. So side from saving money why should you always purchase your own? Especially with Comcast... Because Comcast USES their customers who have leased modems. If you have one of Comcast's modem/router combos you're not only broadcasting your own private wifi but also Comcast's public wifi network. People can hop on your modem and draw your bandwidth. They don't access the Internet from your IP but they do draw bandwidth from your modem. You can now call 1-800-XFINITY or visit http://customer.comcast.com/ to disable this "feature". But in my experience, even without that... their modems suck. They're huge and you don't want to combine your router and modem. I change my routers out more often than my modem needs to be changed... More info > Comcast sued by customers for turning routers into public hotspots You can get much better supported routers in the open market that will give you a much richer feature set and technologies behind them. IMHO it's always a dumb move to get modems and routers from your provider. ESPECIALLY if they're a combined unit. YUCK! No thanks. If they gave one to me... I wouldn't even sell it or give it away... I'd disassemble it for fun, see if any parts could be salvaged. Get that public wifi out of people's houses! It's a disgrace and they should be ashamed for doing it without really telling people. Hey Comcast, install that crap out in your pedestals at the street and pay for your own electricity!

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.

I finally gave in and upgraded my internet from 20mbps/5mbps to 50/10. I am currently streaming some youtube/netflix so my speeds are slightly off and its peak hours anyway. but check it out.

I wanted to wish everyone a safe and Merry Christmas! 2012-Merry-Christmas-Hd-Wallpaper.zip

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.

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.

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.

I might have already replied to this topic a while ago, so if I did, forgive me...I just didn't check whether I had or not. I'd just like to give a quick summary of my view of TMN vs. "the others." I am a networking guy by profession as well as by degree and certifications, so it is natural for me to be the "curious cat" about everything networking and to try to "fool the system" (e.g. find bugs that cause erroneous results) as well as attempt to prove or disprove the validity of someone's claim (in this case, the accuracy of TMN). Many (probably most) people do not realize that there have been TCP (and other transports) benchmarking for just about as long as the transport itself has been around. Some of the most powerful are command line tools found (typically) in Linux systems that offer extreme flexibility in testing (e.g. packet sizes, compression algorithms, hardware offload for things like checksums and VLAN or QOS tagging, certain kernel path bypass mechanisms, window scaling heuristics, and literally dozens of other adjustable parameters to test the maximum Tx/Rx speed between two or more computers). That said, I've used pretty much all of them at one point or another and have done very meticulous comparisons to the results on TMN. The margin of error is astonishingly low (generally less than 5%). Compared to Ookla's Flash based test, this is a factor of 10 difference in accuracy because the average from that site that I have found is around 50% (with a huge standard deviation). One day, I will perform the tests again and post the results in a forum here..I didn't save everything last time and want to make my post "legitimate" by including all methods and screenshots utilized. I'll try to get around to it sometime soon. That was the first thing to get out of the way. Secondly, as explained in other posts, Flash is a VERY expensive technology (expensive meaning processor and memory intensive) and adds quite a bit of latency as well due to the complex paths the data flow must go through. Is it appealing to the eye? Absolutely. Would I choose the most graphically appealing test if my goal is to get the most accurate results? Absolutely not. See paragraph above...command line is about as ugly as you can get - but also as accurate as you can get (using the correct tools). I'll preface point three by saying that I don't know enough about the internals of either TMN or Ookla to make a totally accurate claim about their inner workings but I may through my obversations, I can assure you that Ookla has major problems with regard to the results. One of the best ways to test this on your own is to use a program called Wireshark and start a capture of your network packets (make sure to choose the correct network card!!) during a TMN test and an Ookla test. The first thing to notice is the amount of data that is transferred during a test. I cannot figure out, for the life of me, the algorithm with which Ookla determines how much actual data to transfer. By "data," I mean, for example, how many megabytes are transferred to your box during the test. Second thing I noticed was a lot of "noise" in the packets that seemed to be upstream communication to the Ookla host server from my computer during a download test (NOT ACKS, so please don't call me out saying it was ACKS). There is some type of communication to the server going on - which OBVIOUSLY interferes with an accurate download score if a Download test is also simultaneously transmitting information other than standard TCP Acknowledgments, replies, etc. That doesn't occur on TMN. There is simply an ACK and SYN as expected during a raw transfer. The TMN server determines whether or not more data is needed to determine an ACCURATE result based on how quickly you down- or uploaded the information (7 seconds down and 5 seconds up for a specific amount of data transfer). Assuming a download, at first you will receive the smallest continuous piece of data and if it took less than 7 seconds to transfer, TMN will push the next size to you. This process repeats until: The seven seconds expire and you have not received the entire download chunk - or - You reach the maximum size (200MB) and complete the download in less than seven seconds. This way, during the download, the only cost incurred on your PC is that of the Operating System's networking routines and the CPU usage for offloaded tasks (for instance, checksum offload). BTW, this occurs during ANY network communication and there is no way around it. Another thing to consider if you are receiving results that are inconsistent amongst testing sites is the location of the hosting server. If you go to speedtest and live in Atlanta, Speedtest will choose the location closest to you with the least latency (and, in this case, would be in Atlanta). The further a byte has to travel, the more latency introduced and (generally) more hops must be taken to reach the destination. All of which introduces decreases in speed with increase in hops and latency. So, if you're testing on Speedtest in Atlanta on an Atlanta based server and then hop over to TMN and use a Dallas server, it is only natural to expect that the transfer speed will (again, typically) be slower and vice-versa. So, a more accurate way to compare the sites would be to choose a Dallas location on speedtest, take the test and then test via Dallas on TMN. Or, you can just trust me..TMN is better The last point I'll make in this post is that with TMN, the data transfer occurs via standard HTTP, which is how the vast majority of your real world downloads and browsing occurs. One exception is on a secure site that uses SSL and is preceded with "https://" - that normally occurs on port 443 instead of 80 as in HTTP and incurs a heavy performance penalty for the encryption and decryption of the data after is is received. There are tons of other protocols such as FTP, SCP, SSH, CIFS, SMB, NFS, etc. but, like I said, 99% of the typical user's internet browsing occurs on HTTP. I don't know exactly how the data is transmitted and received on Ookla based sites but I do not believe it is HTTP - I think it is an embedded part of the Flash wrapper. So, to close this post that I meant to be short and to the point and went way overboard, my opinion and experience is that the most accurate measurement of your bandwidth is going to be found on TMN. I apologize for the rambling. I hope at least someone finds this helpful! Take Care....more to come (in the future, sometime!) --SIETEC--

Happy Mother's Day to all the wonderful Mommy's and Grandmommy's

I'm visiting a friend in the mountains in Cotopaxi Colorado... litterally middle of nowhere staying in a camper. No reception... but I found a little patch of service, 4G and I've seen up to 15 Mbps. I hopped on my laptop and downloaded a couple GB of HD content and sustained 2 MB/s for the entire transfer. Amazes me. This result was pretty average. :::.. Internet Speed Test Result Details ..::: Download Connection Speed:: 10869 Kbps or 10.9 Mbps Download Speed Test Size:: 12.4 MB or 12736 kB or 13041664 bytes Download Binary File Transfer Speed:: 1359 kB/s or 1.4 MB/s Upload Connection Speed:: 1543 Kbps or 1.5 Mbps Upload Speed Test Size:: 832 kB or 851968 bytes Upload Binary File Transfer Speed:: 193 kB/s Timed:: Download: 9.599 seconds | Upload: 4.418 seconds Tested At:: http://TestMy.net Version 13 Test Time:: 2014-04-10 00:05:35 Local Time Location:: Greeley, CO US >> Destination:: Dallas, TX US Validation:: https://testmy.net/db/MWks2XE.oegONfJ TiP Measurement Summary (Download):: Min 4.57 Mbps | Middle Avg 11.73 Mbps | Max 16 Mbps | 47% Variance TiP Data Points:: 16 Mbps, 13.94 Mbps, 14.47 Mbps, 13.03 Mbps, 11.9 Mbps, 9.73 Mbps, 8.68 Mbps, 10.54 Mbps, 12.82 Mbps, 13.39 Mbps, 12.63 Mbps, 12.72 Mbps, 12.01 Mbps, 11.04 Mbps, 16 Mbps, 11.75 Mbps, 7.89 Mbps, 6.82 Mbps, 4.57 Mbps More Stats:: https://testmy.net/quickstats/CA3LE https://testmy.net/compID/643729204093 User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) CriOS/33.0.1750.21 Mobile/11D167 Safari/9537.53 [!]} Better one from earlier... about 30 feet higher up the cliff. The mountain I'm on right now (but the picture was taken during the daytime) super remote location... Verizon is awesome. Now if they would just unlock the caps or charge a reasonable rate for overages. Technology these days... I'm in the middle of the forest, maybe 10 people within 30 miles and I'm getting 5 times faster connection than my first cable internet connection. Insane to me.

CA3LE. And you should also mention that most of the OOKLA based test sites' speed tests won't run on an iOS device because the tests require Flash (the memory and battery hog technology that's not allowed on iOS devices). So kudos for you having iOS compatible testing. And although Speedtest.org now supports iOS/Safari, the results are way off. They even have a disclaimer: "Warning For best testing experience and accuracy, Broadband Speed Checker requires at least version 8 of Flash. Please update your client by clicking here." And when you try the support Contact Us on Speedtest.org, you get: "Not Found. The requested URL /contact/ was not found on this server." Plus you can't choose a server like you can on TestMy. There is an OOKLA Speedtest app for iOS that allows you to pick servers, and the results trend kind of like the results I get here on TestMy, but the UI and the results displays and overall functionality of the app is orders of magnitude less than this site. For iOS device users, nobody else that I've found is even in the same universe as TestMy.

so far so good tested speeds average 80 down 35 to 40 up ,here in lil ole vermont

Why do PC's rule the business world and the personal computer world..? My Dell laptops have done a great job, even the 2002 still works great, of course it's obsolete by today's standards. I like changing hardware and software on my desktops ^several PC brands) just for the experimentation kick, and I'm just your averaged user, not a geek (no pun intended). Seems some Apple users have a 'one track' mindset, or they are so technically inclined they disregard the PC as solid and functional. The PC made the computer World (Microsoft and Intel) and brought Apple along with it. I may own an Apple someday, but my first choice is the 'top' of the line Alienware machine..Apple doesn't excite me, like a PC does.. if you want a Cadillac work-horse,,get an Apple, you pay the price, ..if you want a work-horse, get a PC, and have some fun. PS. this is a friendly chat, and by any means is not to diminish any computer owners preference.. have a good day!....

Hi Ken, I have users that regularly pull over 600 Mbps (>70 MB/s). My servers are ALL very well connected with at least 1000 Mbps symmetrical. My main server has dual symetrical 1000 Mbps connections connected into Softlayer's multi-homed network >> http://www.softlayer.com/about/network/carriers. I'm in all of their datacenters. I've got a lot of bandwidth to back up my application, before anything... I make sure that my bandwidth is premium for my users. It's a bandwdith testing application, to be real.. it has to be on the best connected networks. Research my host and you'll find that I'm very well connected and peered. ... My main server is also very powerful with SSD RAID5 and 24 cores. Overpowering my end means that when you test you're guaranteed a private core, memory and plenty of bandwidth on tap. I'm running at a small fraction of my servers potential... and then I have 5 other servers on top of that to choose from. All dedicated to the task of speed testing. https://testmy.net/mirror -- 10 more mirrors hosted by other people too (new project, offering it up to anyone with a web server, you should host one at your school if you can). https://testmy.net/make-a-speed-test I suggest testing to some of the mirrors to see if there may be a routing issue. If you get limited speeds similar on most servers you might want to look into the problem locally. Either on the client machine or network. Often tweaking TCP settings can improve connections that fast. For Windows, which is the worst culprit, search for TCP optimizer from speedguide.net (I think it's) https://speedguide.net/downloads.php. For other OS search google for gigabit TCP tweaks for your specific OS. Note that TestMy.net is sensitive to many issues that other speed tests don't detect. It's purposely designed to be a hard test to ace... try to score as high as you can, then compare your subsequent results to your own average, highs and lows. Don't expect to pull your full speed on every connection type you test with... especially gigabit and faster. I can't... but the tools still makes the health of your connection very obvious in my opinion. TestMy.net is more than just an Internet speed test. I've seen first hand where it scored my girlfriends macbook under 20 Mbps on a 50 Mbps connection... I swapped her hard drive for an SSD and upon reboot her TestMy.net score maxed out my connection. I purposely tested around to prove a point. No other speed test picked up on it... even though my download and Internet surfing performance were obviously degraded. I wrote every line of code and I don't even know what truly makes my test different, it just is. Some known differences between how I do it and how my leading competitors do it are touched on at https://testmy.net/ipb/topic/28902-why-do-my-results-differ-from-speedtestnet-ookla-speed-tests/. If you like my life's work, please share it... it's totally word-of-mouth. - Damon

well here's my new build. up and running like a beast. i7 3770k thermaltake frio ock cooler master haf x full tower samsung 120gb ssd 1tb data drive Lg bluray drive 8gb ddr3 1600 ram powercolor 7970 850 gold rated corsair psu 23 inch 1080p monitor gigabyte ....im too tired to rememberthe number.... d3h mobo sorry for blurry images. i took them with my phone and my hands arent exactly steady.

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!

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.

The only worries I have when upgrading any linux distro are normally related to hardware drivers, normally ones for my wifi and video card. If you are not using them (I think ubuntu makes it pretty clear if you are) then you normally shouldn’t worry about upgrading to the latest supported release. Now If Mr Valve / Steam (Gabe) would actually get behind his support for Linux, I wouldn’t have any reason to use windows at all

i usually see very different results than here, when my internet is having issues speedtest.net doesn't usually detect them at all it will show my full 50/5 where as here i can see my service is really suffering and only receiving half that i actually get better results from here then i see on speedtest.net maybe that's just me...