CA3LE

I'm not sure why that's happening for you but I'll use your results to make it better in the future. Looks like it's intermittently happening. Disregard that reading when they're obviously wrong and only pay attention to the final result. The final result is a separate calculation and isn't affected when that happens. There may be a software reason on your end causing this. Has your browser been acting erratic? When you perform a download test, does the progress bar move fluidly or does it seem to jump? This could be a clue to another issue... in all my own testing, I can not duplicate the bursted results that some users display here. If I can duplicate it and understand why it happens the program can be adjusted if needed. ...... but maybe it doesn't need to be adjusted, maybe it's a clue. TMN is weird. It's a bandwidth test but it's able to pick up on things totally unrelated to Internet speed. If you have some malware that's pre/post-processing your webpages... it could very well mess with the events that need to happen to make those calculations. That's one theory I have. (try disabling all plug-ins and add-ons and resetting the browser) If it was a mistake in the programming I would expect to be able to duplicate it in my own testing, I test a lot. The TiP system is slated for improvements, during that time I'll dig in deep and run through the entire process to make sure there isn't anything I missed. Thank you for the feedback! Very valuable.

Do you mean Wireless AP for "Access Point" or are you talking about Wireless 802.11 AC. Anything your connection runs through could limit you. Even brand new devices. Provide us with the modem number for your router so we can understand better what we're dealing with. If you're enabled QoS in your router, disable it and see if it makes a difference.

I'm running two auto tests right now myself and they're chugging along. I can also see many of our regulars testing. You can tell by looking at their results that they're coming off the auto test because of the time regularity in the results. So I'm confident that it's working... Here's a couple of direct links to auto speed tests that are already configured. Download test every 5 minutes, 5 times (do this one first, keep reading...) Download test every 30 minutes, 50 times (~24 hours) First try the 5x5 test. Reloads quicker so you can get answers faster, you only need to see it reload once to know that you'll be fine for all the other tests. Run that to make sure that you don't have an issue with it reloading correctly. If you do, I recommend clearing cache and cookies and trying again. If you still have issues try using another browser like Chrome. (I see you're using Firefox. Firefox is actually perfect for TMN... it's a browser that listens to commands very well, more raw in operation than others. We've highly recommended it here since it came out. But it doesn't hurt to try another because something could be configured wrong in the browsers settings. If you've messed with the browsers settings heavily or installed a lot of add-ons/plugins then I'd definitely try in another browser, preferably a fresh default install.) After you start a test, leave that browser alone. Open it in another window or another browser all together separate from what you normally use. You don't really need to, I often run the auto test in a browser tab in a browser with 50 active tabs while I surf around... including heavy browser media activity and it always reloads for me. But if you should always remove variables if you can. Especially if you have performance issues you're trying to nail down. Here's a big one. Is your computer falling asleep? Make sure that your power management settings are set to keep the computer awake. Even if you have 'wake on LAN' .. that doesn't help in this situation. Your computer needs to be aware to be able to initiate the test. Obviously the screen can be off as long as the computer is still thinking. Let me know how it goes.

Bonding won't increase the transfer rate of a single linear transfer. You can't split a transaction across two interfaces. You increase your bandwidth in total by bonding but it doesn't make individual transfers faster. Example: My main server in Dallas is is bonded with 4 GigE interfaces (2 public)... but you won't see over 1000 Mbps because each interface is limited to 1000 Mbps. The difference is with bonding multiple people can pull 1000 Mbps simultaneously. Why not put it on a 10G interface? Trust me, I tried. Problem is 10G interfaces available right now don't have flow control... without FC more packets are sent than actually arrive. Totally inaccurate for our testing purposes here, completely bonkers results. One day. So it's totally normal. You'll never pull more than the speed of the fastest single connection in a single file transfer. The file will have to be split and sent in pieces... then you can take advantage of both connections. Multithread test aside, you should be able to open two browser windows on the download test and start a larger test manually (one that will give you at least 10-15 seconds) on both windows. Try to do it quickly. If your bonding is balancing the load well the tests shouldn't affect each other. And you'll get two similar results... which you can then combine to get a total aggregate speed. As long as the two tests started at nearly the same time the final combined number should be highly accurate. (though not perfect because the tests were initiated by hand, staggered start time will raise the score slightly.) --- this scenario is only two threads but the score should be close to what you get in the multithread test if things are running well. ... this is one of the reasons I say "Versatile" on the home page. If you're smart you can use this test is different ways for which it wasn't originally designed and it still works.

Welcome! Glad you found us. Hope to see you around for many years to come! You're averaging 77% of what they quote you. Not bad at all.

Very possible that it was someone within the organization with access to more bandwidth than their customers. Looks legit to me. The TiP reading are consistent with what I'd expect to see from a connection running at that speed.

Mine too. A friend of mine paid over $2000 for a 55" 3D 'LED' smart TV (LED, lol... LED backlighting is not truly LED... tricky advertising), not too long ago. I think they're kicking themselves now. They never use 3D and seriously a $50-$100 device plugged in can do a better job for everything else. Last year I got a 60" 600 Hz plasma, stupid TV -- $800. It's larger, has all around deeper picture, nearly 3X faster refresh rate, doesn't have rainbow light reflections and odd 'soap opera' feeling I see on their TV sometimes... without a doubt I would take the cheaper plasma. All day, every day. Way better tv, costs way less... it's does one thing, but it does it really well. It's becoming harder and harder to get a straight-up-TV. What if you don't want or need all the extra crap inside that's just going to be obsolete in 3 years? What if you have a bunch of devices that already do things better? Why should you have to pay for a bunch of extra stuff you don't need?! But we're almost being forced to. The VAST majority of TV's on the market are 'smart'. Kinda dumb. Personally, if I was spending $2000 on a TV I'd want EVERY CENT going into the quality of the display and input/output. If you want to make it smart get an Apple TV, Chromcast, Roku, computer or whatever... hell, get them all and it will still be cheaper. Then when those are outdated or something cooler comes along you can just swap out the device and not be stuck with a software controlled monitor running outdated software. Most people are selected on another source most of the time anyway, using a cable/satellite box or other device. That $2000 smart TV my friend purchased... not a single firmware update in two years. That doesn't sound smart at all. Shouldn't hold their breath either. If they gave you updates you might not buy a new one every 4 years. The incredible shrinking TV replacement cycle (and that article is a couple years old) -- typically LED and plasma TV's can run for >100,000 hours. That's 11.5 years if you run it 24/7! Do the math on your own actual daily use. Yet on average people get a new TV every 4-5 years. "That's how they getcha! Back in my day... a TV was a TV!" "... we got one channel and it was only broadcast for 35 seconds a day... and WE LOVED IT!!"

re-test ... might have been a fluke.

Wow, crazy!

I'd love to see someone hack the network settings on a smart TV to pull better performance. Show us how!

Your location is saved with your results. If you mouse over the icon for the server you've selected you can see... So, based on your IP TMN thinks you're in Arlington, VA. It's about 86% correct at the city level. Not perfect but it's better than asking you where you live. You can also see your detected information under the Database menu (accessible everywhere except the forum). If you're all detected in the same city you can then compete with each other, using the Arlington VA stats page. The others just need to register usernames. Hope this helps. Eventually I'd like to give you the ability to create teams to compete with each other within your team and other teams.

They're as unique as IP addresses but don't give away any of your personal details. ConnectID's are something made up to give you a unique ID but also protect your identity.

Nice. Now that's customer service. Be interesting to see what happens...

You think they'd schedule the appointment during a time when it's happening.

And are you positive that there isn't activity within your network? Like someone else on your wifi for instance. If you're sure that there isn't any activity then it's pretty much a wasted service call. The problem is probably further down the line. If you're able to get over your provisioned speed some of the time then chances are things are fine within your home and with anything that tech would be checking. If they weren't you'd have degraded performance all the time. When everyone in your area gets home your speed drops. Right? Sounds to me like Comcast needs to deliver more bandwidth to your area or deal with bandwidth abuse in your area. But maybe you're the first to complain so they need to get out there to see for themselves... and then hopefully address the issue. Don't expect resolution today.

Looks like you started running better all of a sudden today. Today is Wednesday... so to me it looks like they came out and got you all fixed up. I hope that TMN helped in some way. Oh never mind... that might just be you performing better off peak, right? ... sorry, didn't notice that till just now.

SatMan, people can PM you for more info on ViaSat. Please don't leave your 800 number or email address. This forum isn't for advertising. I don't mind if you make suggestions to people that may benefit from your service, just don't plaster your contact info. Ask people to PM you for more details...and never PM anyone about your service unless they inquire. I don't like banning people so I wanted to warn you. It doesn't take much to be banned permanently here. Honestly, I really only want members who A: use the service B: add value to conversation.

That's normally how it works. It was worth a shot. At least something is improving. Here's a trick, try running two upload tests at once. Open two browser windows on the upload test and manually select 50 MB, try to start both tests close to the same time. Note, it doesn't need to be perfect to get a good idea. When I do this myself I get 13.2 Mbps and 11.3 Mbps ... one test by itself scored 21.1 Mbps. That shows me that I'm maxing out my upload speed in a single upload. If you're able to run a second upload test and the result seems unaffected by the fact that there's already an upload running then you know that your threads are limited not the connection itself and you may want to ask your provider why that is. A healthy connection should be able to upload a single transaction at it's maximum speed... you shouldn't have to combine threads to reach your line potential. Unless something is limiting you.

Did you try TCP Optimizer?

So, because you're bonded you usually can only max out one line or in speed tests? Have you tried the multithread speed test yet?

Let's first pretend that you're stuck with what you have. Many twitch.tv users have told me that as long as they set their bitrate lower than their TMN upload test score things go off without a hitch. Set below 500 kB/s and you should be fine... unless your connection is dipping much deeper than that. I see you're using Windows 7, one way to find out how the data is flowing in greater detail is to use a program like Net Meter while you run a test here. Post a screenshot of the graph so we can see how the speed is fluctuating during the upload test. But when you should have 50 Mbps upload... you shouldn't have to limit your upload 12.5X lower than your connections theoretical limit. You should be able to pull off a 720p @ 60 FPS stream with a bitrate of 2500-3500 Kbps ... easy. Actually with 50 Mbps (6.25 MB/s) you should be able to easily stream two games at that quality (2500 Kbps). Read Why Do My Speed Differ From Ookla? and try the TCP Optimizer recommendation. It can make a world of difference for earlier version of windows. Hopefully we can help you get more out of it. Have you tried testing directly to the modem without any of your networking. (no wifi, direct connection with ethernet) --- it may be Bell Canada's fault but before we blame them let's first make sure that we eliminate any variables within your control.

This result was an outlier. Your other results didn't burst like that. If you get a result that's obviously wrong... test again. Sometimes your computer (client end) may have a hiccup causing a delay in those readings. Your speed was never anywhere near the reading shown... that's why it's showing that warning. However, despite what the TiP reading says the final result is accurate. Those calculations are taken separately not aggregated.

"That's how they getcha!"

This is in development and may be beta tested soon. Join the beta program to be one of the first to use it.

8th place... my guess wasn't too far off.