CA3LE

it's most likely due to a caching error, server-side. I'll check it out here in a little bit and get right back to you. Thanks for the heads up.

Fixed, thank you! Still need to make that a global variable.

Post up your screenshots!

Hi @ticktock58 - welcome! Here's your latency at TestMy.net https://testmy.net/rt/ticktock58 It's called response time here but it's roughly the same thing as ping. I'm measuring the round trip time it takes for you to respond to a request and then cut that in half. So it is measuring your latency but for some reason I decided to make it even more confusing and call it something else. Looks like you're testing against uk.testmy.net and using Windows. Open command prompt and type ping uk.testmy.net (how to ping) You're very close to London, right? ~78ms seems high for being that close. Try also testing some TestMy.net mirrors. If you hover over the name it will show the server address in the tooltip... (by the way, I'm not on a very good connection right now. Latency is all of the place because uploads are maxing out the connection right now.) ...if you'd like the most accurate latency numbers ping the address of the server your testing against in command prompt. While logged in as you test and surf around TMN, your response time will be continually tested each time you load a new page. Even when you're not running a speed test. You can see it loading at the top of your page anywhere outside of the forum. Here's the connection I'm on right now, comparing terminal (command prompt) ping to the numbers reported by TMN Response Time test. Not a surprise, it's a 1Mbps upload connection, I disconnected my Pixel from wifi and everything started running better. ...but still pretty jumpy. Would look good if it was ~48ms and had little to no variation. (Phoenix, AZ to Colorado Springs, CO) Here's my connection at home and going from Colorado to Dallas is further. Probably much further than you are from London right now.

To export only upload or only download results go to My Results and filter the results to only display the results you want to export, then hit the export button. Basically, what you query on your screen is what will also be exported. To filter by test type click the upload or download arrows at the top of the details table below the graph. I'll post a video when I get on my computer.

I'll look back into the process and make improvements. The thing is, it's supposed to select the last linear selection as your multithread selection. I need to see why it's not doing this in your specific case... because it works every time I test it myself. I bet it has to do with the ordering of server overrides within the program that are set based on certain users locations. Need to dig in and find out. I'll also provide an advanced option to toggle this auto selection feature on and off for those who'd like it just to remember their last selection.

When they came to install, did you sign a work order? Or did you install service yourself? I'd like to see what Hughes customers are agreeing to when they sign up.

@Gustoff What does your contract look like?

you too

Hey Gabe, Happy 4th of July! Here's a video showing how I copy the TID and combine it with another. Let me know if it helps.

Right on - looks awesome!

Sorry it's taken so long. I responded in my head when your post came in and then never actually responded. Yes, that makes total sense. What's happening is that it's pulling your query and then splitting the download and upload results into two x-axis. Thinking of the programming, there are a few different ways that it can be achieved. I think the most simple would be to alter the rendering JS for the graph and leave the structure of the query alone. So it would enter blank values to match the dates so that both x-axis match up. Right now, if there are less upload than download or less download than upload results it's only graphing the values that exist. So, in short... I'll take care of that for you very soon. Shouldn't be hard to do at all and I agree it would make it easier to understand. ... if you understand the roots of the database structure here, basically if you've visited since the start... it started as the flat (details) below the graph. The graph wasn't added until later... at first it even displayed backwards (that's the default direction for the results from a mysql query).

Right on! Turned out awesome! I want to see your truck in motion. Here's a nice video on how to screen capture video in Windows 10. Happy to see this is part of Windows... just tricky to find it.

That's why I use all svg now on TMN... but @spudler_t said jpeg originally. Here' some vector graphics. :: Main Logo :: https://tmnstatic.com/img/tmn_logo.svg :: Testing Logos :: https://tmnstatic.com/img/tmn_logo-18.svg If you're putting it on a dark or black background this version will look better. https://tmnstatic.com/img/tmn_logo-18-dark.svg Or if you'd rather use the orange version (that you see on the upload test) https://tmnstatic.com/img/tmn_logo-18B.svg and orange logo for use with a dark or black background https://tmnstatic.com/img/tmn_logo-18-darkB.svg I'm looking for the svg for the logo text and will post that for you when I find it.

My brother was just set up with the gigabit package from Comcast. He calls me up asking if what the tech told him was true, brother: "The tech who installed me said it can take 48 hours to get my full speed, is that true? I'm only getting 58 Mbps down and 2 Mbps up." me: "Uhh, that's not true... sounds like he didn't want to do his job." We called Comcast together, after 30 minutes of waiting we got through to tech support. Tech support: "The modem you have is DOCSIS 3.0, it needs to be 3.1. I can't even send the configuration file for that plan to a DOCSIS 3.0 modem." brother: "Why didn't the tech who installed me catch that? Why didn't your system catch that?!" ... I should have checked that before we called but he told me he just bought it and he has a habit of always buying the top end. But it was indeed only a 3.0 modem so he went and swapped it out. Then, after he's finally set up he was able to get ~300-400 Mbps wired to the modem but wired to the router... 58 Mbps on TMN again, no matter what test options he uses. Using Comcast's test, 940 Mbps! We reset his router, upgraded firmware and then he started getting his full speed, wired and wifi. But his full speed is still only ~300-400 Mbps. Another example where the ISP's Ookla/speedtest.net test fails. --- I mean seriously, we corrected issues with the hardware and TMN's result was higher as a result... what are they doing to be so wrong?! This seems to happen when you need the test the most, at times when you have real issues holding you back from achieving the best performance. But people continue to use those tests and ISP's keep pushing them down customers throats. "...makes us look better. (at the customer's expense)" He had 8 Mbps with AT&T before so he's happier for sure... but he's also like, "Where's the gigabit speed?" To test and make sure that it wasn't his devices just maxing out he ran simultaneous manual 200 MB TestMy.net download speed tests and combined the results... within a margin of error it was identical to what he was seeing on his best performing device (2015 macbook). He's also tested the same computer with greater results on my home connection... so the connection just isn't performing at the speed Comcast would like customers in the area to believe. Same is true on my own Comcast connection, where I see 600 Mbps max. When I first signed up for gigabit service I was only seeing 350 Mbps and it's slowly crept up over time. So they are improving the situation. I attached my logo in png and jpg. I would love to see it on your truck! COOL! Long story short, the tech who installed him and Comcast's system would have left him with 58 Mbps on a modem that wasn't even compatible with his plan. "Give it 48 hours... sometimes it needs to warm up to gigabit speed." --- what a joke! IMO the job should have never been able to be completed unless the correct modem was on the account. This is why you always test your connection and NOT with your ISP's speedtest. JPG transparent PNG

Your first screenshot, showing 585 Mbps is the link speed the device is connected to your wifi router, you won't actually ever see those speeds. Not even under ideal circumstances. If the device is capable and you're transferring between a computer on your local network, you may get close to that but you'll still never actually get up to that speed. That is only showing you the maximum theoretical speed and doesn't have any bearing on your actual internet speed... same way a 1000 Mbps ethernet connection to your router or modem would be (ethernet has less variables so you'll get much closer to the theoretical limit). If the link speed is slower than your internet speed, then it would affect and bring down your TestMy.net results. You're only ever as fast as your slowest link, you always want your internal network speed to FAR exceed your internet speed. For instance, if you were only connected at 11 Mbps wifi to your router you'd never get a result higher than that on TMN. TestMy.net's result is your actual transfer speed across the internet, out past your network and even past your providers network. Hope this helps... and Welcome to TestMy.net by the way.

Big time. --- although your upload has been leveled out for a while... it's still a great upload speed. myaverage?q=mvbmac&var=Year Yeah, it is too bad. You know they could make some amazing new Wireless 6 Airport router... where you could add on your own number of satellite units, with ethernet backhaul capability. Apple would do it right and make bank. But if they go at that market again I think they need a faster refresh cycle. I don't see Apple putting resources into that right now. I was hoping that my Netgear Orbi (AC3000) was going to be better. I'll be ordering a couple different routers soon for a shootout. One that's high on my interest list is the Netgear XR500 running Duma OS -- which is supposed to be easy (intuitive) and powerful at the same time. This is one time I've strayed away from gaming routers (because I wanted a mesh system), I wish I had just waited. Because now, Netgear's gaming routers can create mesh networks with the NIGHTHAWK X6S (EX8000). Not saying the Orbi is terrible but I'm positive the XR500 and X6S will out perform it. Still creating a single seamless network like the Orbi, not an extended network. Linus Tech Tips (that links to his forum) just did a review on the XR500 -- guess I'll link to him even though he seems to have a hard on for speedtest.net. Maybe he just doesn't know any better yet. ...me too brother. I'm still nowhere near complete. And thank you! Glad to see you're still around. Always love to see TMN veterans!

Welcome to TestMy.net by the way. Hopefully we can help troubleshoot and diagnose the issue. Please share your findings and don't hesitate to ask questions.

Test with multithread disabled for the best comparison and testing.

Here's some information I found on NBN Satellite >> https://www.whistleout.com.au/Broadband/Guides/nbn-satellite-everything-you-need-to-know How's the weather outside during the periods when your connection cuts out to almost nothing? Any high winds? I don't think a lot of people take wind into consideration, it may look nice outside but wind can cause your dish to move in and out of alignment, especially if it's mounted on a tall pole. Here's some information on satellite reception and weather. https://www.lifewire.com/satellite-storm-reception-loss-3276178

I want to try a set up like this one... would be awesome for LOORS or the RC4 - 4DOF Just crazy.

That all looks pretty normal... Sweet, I love to hear that. TestMy.net's servers are specifically configured for each of their tasks. I keep all of the server software as minimal as possible. Behind the scenes I also split a lot of resources up into separate servers. There are individual servers for different tasks. Some serve static requests, some serve dynamic requests, a few serve databases, some are robots that run around the site caching frequently requested information... before you hit pages. Since I've sectioned off resources like this, things have run much smoother. ---- basically, the servers you're pinging... aren't doing anything else except focusing on your requests. Wow, this game looks super in depth! Looking at iRacing Live and it looks like NASCAR on tv. Do you have a set up at home with a steering wheel and pedals? I'm trying to find a list of their servers, not having any luck. Do you have IP addresses for some of these servers your connecting to? Don't they have servers on the west coast or central US?

even going all the way from San Fransisco to DE and UK [root@sf ~]# ping de.testmy.net PING de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=147 ms 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=147 ms 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=147 ms 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=147 ms --- de.testmy.net ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 4 received, 20% packet loss, time 4006ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 147.685/147.753/147.939/0.482 ms [root@sf ~]# ping uk.testmy.net PING uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=146 ms 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=146 ms 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=146 ms 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=146 ms --- uk.testmy.net ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3003ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 146.219/146.287/146.468/0.479 ms I think you should ping these two servers. If they're similar in time to what you're seeing to NY, I would definitely say there was a problem there. If you're getting 130ms to NY and 140ms to UK... there's something seriously lagging your route to NY. In turn lagging your connection to other cities connected by the same route. Here's my personal difference in those ping times. Damons-5K-iMac:~ CA3LE$ ping ny.testmy.net PING ny.testmy.net (207.246.91.111): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 207.246.91.111: icmp_seq=0 ttl=51 time=58.734 ms 64 bytes from 207.246.91.111: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=52.464 ms 64 bytes from 207.246.91.111: icmp_seq=2 ttl=52 time=53.594 ms --- ny.testmy.net ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 52.464/54.931/58.734/2.729 ms Damons-5K-iMac:~ CA3LE$ ping uk.testmy.net PING uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 45.76.133.26: icmp_seq=0 ttl=47 time=124.049 ms 64 bytes from 45.76.133.26: icmp_seq=1 ttl=47 time=119.679 ms 64 bytes from 45.76.133.26: icmp_seq=2 ttl=47 time=119.660 ms --- uk.testmy.net ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 119.660/121.129/124.049/2.065 ms ~60+ms.

It is normal for response time to increase at distance but I feel like yours is excessive in this situation. Check this out. My ping from NY to Los Angeles, San Fransisco and Portland. All much faster than what you're seeing. [root@ny ~]# ping lax.testmy.net PING lax.testmy.net (144.202.123.145) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from lax.testmy.net (144.202.123.145): icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=71.1 ms 64 bytes from lax.testmy.net (144.202.123.145): icmp_seq=2 ttl=49 time=71.1 ms 64 bytes from lax.testmy.net (144.202.123.145): icmp_seq=3 ttl=49 time=71.3 ms --- lax.testmy.net ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2001ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 71.101/71.206/71.322/0.321 ms [root@ny ~]# ping sf.testmy.net PING sf.testmy.net (107.170.222.115) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from sf.testmy.net (107.170.222.115): icmp_seq=1 ttl=49 time=79.2 ms 64 bytes from sf.testmy.net (107.170.222.115): icmp_seq=2 ttl=49 time=80.4 ms 64 bytes from sf.testmy.net (107.170.222.115): icmp_seq=3 ttl=49 time=80.3 ms 64 bytes from sf.testmy.net (107.170.222.115): icmp_seq=4 ttl=49 time=79.0 ms --- sf.testmy.net ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 79.008/79.749/80.423/0.647 ms [root@ny ~]# ping (known server in Portland, OR [outside of TMN network]) PING (known server in Portland, OR [outside of TMN network]) (x.x.x.x) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from x.x.x.x (x.x.x.x): icmp_seq=1 ttl=114 time=70.8 ms 64 bytes from x.x.x.x (x.x.x.x): icmp_seq=2 ttl=114 time=71.2 ms 64 bytes from x.x.x.x (x.x.x.x): icmp_seq=3 ttl=114 time=70.7 ms 64 bytes from x.x.x.x (x.x.x.x): icmp_seq=4 ttl=114 time=70.7 ms 64 bytes from x.x.x.x (x.x.x.x): icmp_seq=5 ttl=114 time=71.0 ms --- (known server in Portland, OR [outside of TMN network]) ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4786ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 70.738/70.925/71.241/0.347 ms I can even go out to Germany and England faster than what you're seeing. [root@ny ~]# ping uk.testmy.net PING uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=1 ttl=52 time=70.9 ms 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=2 ttl=52 time=69.3 ms 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=3 ttl=52 time=69.1 ms 64 bytes from uk.testmy.net (45.76.133.26): icmp_seq=4 ttl=52 time=69.1 ms --- uk.testmy.net ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3004ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 69.126/69.619/70.908/0.747 ms [root@ny ~]# ping de.testmy.net PING de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=1 ttl=48 time=79.6 ms 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=2 ttl=48 time=79.4 ms 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=3 ttl=48 time=79.5 ms 64 bytes from de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): icmp_seq=4 ttl=48 time=83.6 ms --- de.testmy.net ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3011ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 79.410/80.560/83.699/1.824 ms But that doesn't mean that it's Comcast's issue, it could be a peering provider. Who hosts the server you're playing on? My personal home connection (Colorado Springs) I get a 130 ms ping.... if I ping TestMy.net in Germany. Damons-5K-iMac:latency CA3LE$ ping de.testmy.net PING de.testmy.net (199.247.19.173): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 199.247.19.173: icmp_seq=0 ttl=45 time=133.653 ms 64 bytes from 199.247.19.173: icmp_seq=1 ttl=45 time=133.684 ms 64 bytes from 199.247.19.173: icmp_seq=2 ttl=45 time=133.139 ms --- de.testmy.net ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 133.139/133.492/133.684/0.250 ms 1000's of miles further than you're doing, with international routing.

Okay, now let me help you with your cable packages. Whoever you talked to on the phone wasn't being fully honest. If your price has gone up then you're not in an agreement. Let me tell you how I deal with them and then you can apply it to your situation. Recently my own Comcast bill starting shooting up (here in Colorado Springs, CO). I only want TV and Internet service. I don't want a phone I'll never use and I definitely don't want their security system.... why would I add MORE services for them to jack the price up on later on... like they just did to me? I'd get like a $500 bill later on, lol. When I called they gave me the same spiel. "You need to bundle up with phone and/or security or all of them to get these deals! You're looking at NEW CUSTOMER pricing." WHATEVER. I told them, "You're either going to give me new customer pricing today or I'm going to disconnect service... you'll be mailing me new customer offers within days. Let's cut out the middle man." the rep tried to dissuade me further, "You'd have to pay connection fees." me, "if it saves me money at the end of the day..." rep, "let me (pretend to) talk to my manager." ... I ended up with ONLY the services I wanted and at new customer pricing. That's standard and if they try to tell you any different, ask to speak to their supervisor. Remember who's paying who here! When you're out of contract and sign up for a new contract... you ARE a new customer. Don't forget that and DON'T let them forget that either. Before you call, brush up on exactly what's offered right now and exactly what you want -- (I think you're in Gladstone, OR) https://www.xfinity.com/locations/oregon/gladstone -- look at the prices as a new customer. Get your package together exactly how you want it, call them up and let them know nicely that you'd like to sign again under those terms. I've had sales people tell me that I needed the phone service bundled to get the fastest internet packages. So... yeah, don't listen to sales people. -- talked to the next guy and he was like, "What? No dude, let me get you all set-up..." and he did.