CA3LE

Mercury was released on Monday, give it a try.

Mercury was released on Monday, give it a try.

You guys are no fun. I'll make it more obvious. Look for Mercury

"I hope you're up for an Easter egg hunt. Just remember, the doorway is obvious and easily accessible from the homepage."

Welcome to TestMy.net! I have just the tool for you. I released it this morning. I hope you're up for an Easter egg hunt. Just remember, the doorway is obvious and easily accessible from the homepage. I'm done and I want everyone to use it right away but I wanted to make it fun. I also don't want to explain or talk about it, you either get it or you don't. My users will get it. ...and you don't have to be a computer expert/nerd experts/nerds of all types welcome. In my experience, world travelers are usually and expert in something. We'd love for you to share anything on your mind. (sorry about the downtime today, a backup caused issues. I'm backing up those specific databases a different way from now on to avoid that problem in the future. Nothing to do with this update... at the core is actually something that's been built into TMN for many, many years. I expect the release to be stable.)

...you have to connect to dozens of peers to see your full speed. That's not realistic Internet transfer outside of p2p. I bet you'll never upload to a single source at your full speed. Even awesome commercial 1000 Mbps will have a hard time doing that out to the Internet. Here's an analogy. A hundred pennies is still a dollar but I'd rather have a dollar bill in my pocket. ... uploading or downloading from dozens of peers and combining the speed isn't the same as being able to do that from a single source. Some providers actually shape the way you use your bandwidth so that it's only possible to get full speed when you transfer many streams. Especially true with super fast residential connections. Like I said, the upload test here wasn't designed with connections as fast as yours in mind. Because the test size is so small the best I've seen is a little over 300 Mbps. The download test is fully capable of gigabit speed however. Testing over LAN I've seen just shy of 1000 Mbps, about 990 Mbps (accounting for overhead, right on the money) ... it IS possible to get better speed here than you're getting. Look at sietec's results .. proof right there https://testmy.net/quickstats/sietec I'd really expect that your multithread results would be higher. Be interesting to see what you get with the new test. I'll let you know as soon as I release it.

Your bandwidth is not as good as you think it is. You may be able to pull faster speeds but how long does it take to get there? It just like how most cars will do 120 mph but it's really all about acceleration. Like I said, I have an upcoming option that will allow you to test from you own sources. If you don't trust my servers you can test off amazon, google or whatever you want. Trust me... using that you'll quickly see that bandwidth is not delivered equally to all the sites you visit. You're getting killer numbers, don't get hung up that it's not as high as your ISP quotes. You're scoring higher than 99% of people here. The upload test right now only uses a max of 33MB of data and it's a single thread. Your score is great for that kind of test. I'm working to bring larger sizes and multithread to the upload test btw. Larger tests will bring higher number for insane connections like yours. Go upload a video to youtube and then tell me that you're still seeing 1000 Mbps. I bet money it falls much much much closer to the results you see here. The tests here are not intended to help you achieve maximum speed. They're intended to tax your connection. When you do a multithread test here you are combining the power of all the servers you select. Without selecting Google and Cloudflare that's 7000 Mbps of available bandwidth, much more when combined with the CDN options. I have more than enough bandwidth to serve you. If you were limited by my resources you'd get nearly the same speed on all your tests. Your fluctuating quite a bit.

Goes above and beyond what Windows safe mode does. I never realized it did all of that... then again, all my Macs have run so great that I haven't really had to test it out. thanks for teaching me something!

I've seen it perform better on the same dmg creation, when she first got the laptop I did the same test. I'd like to test that too but I'm 1400 miles from all my stuff. I'll see her again in about a month for a family wedding so I'll bring a spare SSD and external connections. That will tell the tale.

I would bypass the router and test directly to the best computer in the house. Doesn't always have to be bad hardware, could be that one of the connected machines is pulling lots of bandwidth for some reason. Maybe someone in your house is torrenting… maybe your network isn't secured and your neighbor is pulling bandwidth. If you connect directly and get similar results then you can be pretty certain that it's a problem before your home network and computers. In that case I'd call Charter… especially since you say that you were getting your speeds before the upgrade. This is a longshot but maybe they're overloaded in your area and it wasn't noticeable until everyone was upgraded. Everyone in your neighborhood is pulling more bandwidth now… maybe the outgoing pipe in the area is creating a bottleneck. This should especially be considered if your speed is dropping heavily during peak Internet hours (when kids get out of school and parents start getting home). Cable Internet is a shared system between you and your neighbors. Even in areas with lots of bandwidth this can easily be a factor. In Phoenix I saw fluctuations of up to 20 Mbps after 6PM. It got better before I could complain, they must have opened up more bandwidth in the area. If you connect directly and all of a sudden your speed improves here… well… then you know that either you have an issue with the router or one of the connected machines is sucking up your bandwidth. In that case, since you have 9 computers, disconnect a couple at a time till you see it improve again. Slowly you'll zero in on the problem computer. Don't assume because hardware is new it's infallible… new hardware can fail as easily as old hardware. I wouldn't call my ISP until it was tested directly (minus the network and all the other computers). I'd even test a couple of the computers that way to rule out the machines. If they come into your house and find that it's an issue outside of their control (like your home network or one of your machines pulling bandwidth out of control) they're likely to charge you for a service call. Some cable providers will charge you just for walking in your house. Just be careful there. Make sure that before any tech leaves your home that you've gone over any and all charges. Contractors, which are often who you deal with, have a lot of incentive to make sure you're charged. Be cautious. If it's their issue… you shouldn't be charged. Many providers consider any wiring beyond the side of your home to be your issue, keep that in mind too. If the computers you're testing are on wifi, again… test directly connected. First without the router then with the router. If your speed is improved with both those connections you may be dealing with wireless signal issues. Could be as simple as better router placement in your home. … why this would all of a sudden be an issue? Maybe you recently put new electronics near the router, could be interfering. Maybe you've recently moved it or maybe someone has put something on top of the router either causing interference or causing it to overheat. Could be many things when it comes to wifi. See WIFI Slow and wireless fung shui. Router placement can make all the difference. But, because your issue has just arisen this is less likely but still worth looking into. I'd really like to see your issue resolved. Please let us know if any of this helps.

she has hundreds of GB free

Thanks dude, that seems to have helped… at least for the Internet speed and the odd laggy behavior. It feels much better... I'm still seeing degraded HDD performance however, so there must have been more than one issue going on here. Big dip and still slower and took far longer than I would expect. Not all seesaw like before. It feels noticeably better but still not 100%. I talked to her about it and she said that right after she dropped it she could tell that it was immediately slower. I'm telling her to make sure she has backups because who knows how much longer it will last. Soon as she's comfortable she'll be upgrading it to SSD. I think it will last till then with only degraded performance. So does safe mode in OSX actually realign settings or something? The only other thing I did while it was in safe mode was remove a couple .plist files from those folders. For adobe crap and a couple of other well know programs… nothing fishy. Besides that I just rebooted and seems to have helped quite a bit. Thanks for the recommendations. You rule!

I wanted to share a nice tool for checking up on Mac system processes. Nice listing with user input. http://triviaware.com/macprocess/all Open activity monitor, run through and look for any suspicious processes. Search that page and see if they're known and what they are. This came up because I'm using someone's macbook right now and it's not running right for some reason. I'm only getting ~6-15 Mbps on a network that I know is running at well over 25-50 Mbps. immediately before I tested on my iPhone 5s and got 28 Mbps on the same 12MB test, same network. Multithread back on the laptop moments later Back to single thread, this time to dc.testmy.net Frustrating. I know it should perform better. My macbook is pulling the same tests just fine... So then I make sure that there isn't a hard drive performance issue. I'm looking at the protective case on this and the corners are all busted up so a drop may have degraded performance… well worth testing, I've seen many times where slow hdd performance affects results here. Open diskutil and create a test image on the desktop and monitor the speed with activity monitor. Doesn't seem too unreasonable for a mechanical hdd. I'm going to keep investigating. There is definitely something holding this back. Things are noticeably laggy. Even when I click links in the browser there is a slight delay. Her browsers were set to some spammy yahoo landing page (looked like yahoo but was an affiliate thing) and there were toolbars and crap in the browsers. But I looked through the processes and I didn't see anything that stood out. Even after resetting the browser it still has the lag and low TMN results. I really don't think I'm dealing with a software issue here. I feel like it's a hardware issue and on re-testing the hard drive I got this... Duplicating the image from my first test the performance this time was up and down. Taking much longer than my first test. There should be a flat top on that graph if it was running right. Seems that her dropping this a few times may have been the cause. The evidence is on 3 of the 4 corners. I'm going to recommend that she swaps to SSD, hopefully that will resolve the issue and get her back up to speed. But some other internals may have been damaged and be affecting the southbridge performance overall… who knows. I think she has Apple care so maybe just have them look at it before jumping to conclusions. All I know right now is that it's NOT right. It's crazy how many things can affect results here, it's really more of a computer benchmark (at higher speeds) than just a simple Internet benchmark. This laptop is running noticeably slower than the last time I used it… test it and sure enough the TMN results reflect what I feel. I just wish it would tell me what's actually wrong in detail. She doesn't even realize that there's an issue, I was just using her laptop and it felt wrong so I started testing and digging. I haven't even told her yet. It really doesn't run THAT bad. She might not notice it but to me… … … ...it's frustratingly slow and very obvious. Clicking on things that are normally instantly interactive, "Hello, I clicked that 1.3 seconds ago! WTF!" --- it's an i7 MBP with 4GB of RAM… it shouldn't run like this. Especially since I've seen this same laptop test over 110 Mbps at my house.

I'll work on bringing that back to life for you --- thanks for the suggestions mudmanc4, definitely can't just flip the switch on that.... within a couple of days it would be overrun with spam posts. I see the bots trying all day long, damn robots and their nonexsistent sleep schedules. You can login with your old .s1 username by the way. I have registrations turned off but old members can still sign in. Once registrations are turned back on... who knows, maybe it will get hoppin' again. :-/ All the old permissions still exsist so you're still a Global Mod there too. Now that it's been totally separated from the testmy.net domain I'm not as worried about changes over there affecting the overall scheme or search ranking... so I have no problem opening it back up. I'll do the least amount possible to make sure that spammers aren't such an issue while still maintaining the original look and feel. I'll update this thread soon.

http://www.myaccount.charter.com/customers/support.aspx?supportarticleid=59 notice "up to"... If you change that query to 1000/page you'll see those results better. Plenty of fast results.

Are you using an old DOCSIS 2 modem? What's the model number?

Trust me, TMN has no problem keeping up with your connection. The server you were testing on is connected to the Internet by 2X 1000 Mbps of tier 1 commercial bandwidth. Round robin style to even the load across the controllers. .... you could never max out my connection with your connection. The server end here has so much more bandwidth than the average client and I make sure that there is always a large pool of resources available. I upgrade servers here before resources ever become an issue. TMN has hundreds of Gbps of bandwidth at it's disposal if needed. Resources are also under constant quality monitoring. I take accuracy seriously and it can only be accurate if the server end is more powerful than the clients I'm serving. If you look at the recent results or Charter's speed test log you see that others have no problem pulling faster speeds than you. My home connection pulls over 105 Mbps all day long on TMN. Your connection doesn't look as bad as you might think. Look closely at your results, like this one. The overall score was 51.5 Mbps but during the test you held out over 60 Mbps for a while. When you calculate and factor in everything that's when your overall score drops. Understand that I'm not here to make you feel good, if I was I would calculate my numbers based on incomplete information like the other guys. I'm here to tell you what I see and hopefully help you improve on it. You describe the flash tests as totally inaccurate, I don't understand why you're still using them. If you need to compare results you should use mirrors not those flash tests. You haven't tried multithread yet. Personally, that allows my connection to really open up... to the point that it will cause other Internet applications to trickle because the test uses nearly all of my bandwidth. That test not only multithreads but it's also possible to test across the globe in a single test. You can test any combination of my servers and return a single result. This allows for testing across many routes at once... fastest for me is the Google PageSpeed option, which utilizes Google's CDN. You lose extra detail in multithread but if you want to try for maximum speed that's the way to go. I've seen that some connections and computers don't handle multithread as well as the classic test. You just have to try and see for yourself. There is also a new test being released in about a week that I think you might be interested in. It will allow you to test from any source you want. Here's a post from yesterday where I mention it. https://testmy.net/ipb/topic/32037-fiber-connection/?p=344834 (Mercury released)

Ask sietec, he regularly pulls up to 900+ Mbps here. He's our speed all star around here but there are many more examples. There are many factors that affect results here. Just keep trying to best your own speed... don't always expect to get 100% of ISP claims. Routing across the net needs work and depending on the servers and networks you connect to your results will be varied. TestMy.net tests are harder to ace too. Having said that... TMN offers testing in many different ways. Single thread, multithread and to popular CDN services like Google PageSpeed and Cloudflare networks. To get a complete picture you need to try them all. Each test type provides different insight. Usually multithread is a good way to max out your line but that only tells part of the story. For some, multithread is slower. Really depends on the connection type and client machine. I have something new I'd like to share with you.... but you have to wait a little longer. It puts the control of testing TOTALLY in the consumers hands. You can test from virtually any source, file type and file size on the Internet. The test looks and behaves just as you've come to expect from TestMy.net. Looks exactly the same except you can test against any almost any web server on the net. It's really easy too, input a url... that's it. I've seen up to 500 Mbps results with it so far. I'm going to open it up to allow even larger test sizes to help people with 1000+ Mbps connections pull longer tests... which allows the connection to fully ramp up and will yield higher accuracy. I've tested hundreds of servers. From Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook... nearly every server I've tried it on works perfectly and the results are verified by network interface readings. This update is already live and actually has been built into TMN's code for at least two years..... maybe up to 4-5 years, I really don't remember. I just forgot about it until I recently found a reference to it in the code. "Wait a minute..." --- searching for the variable I noticed turned up tons of results across my entire structure, deeply engrained into the program. It instantly worked and was highly accurate so I've build a database driven input system around it. I imagine that we can build a list of hundreds of thousands of test servers in short time. You can find the servers that work best for you and compare the results to my preferred test servers/methods. I really want to just share it with you now. But I need to put the finishing touches on it and I'm driving through Pennsylvania heading to CT and NY. I should be able to sit back at my console and finish up on Sunday the 7th... releasing on Monday Sept 8th. Open beta available to all. Giving you full control over where you test will give you a more realistic representation of your real speed. Using servers like Google, Amazon.. etc you can once and for all show your provider, "These are my speeds to very standard services. If you can't deliver my promised speed to these ultra powerful servers I'll find someone who will! Look, other people are able to pull faster speeds, why can't I..." I think you guys will dig it. I hope that it helps people understand their bandwidth better and puts pressure on the ISPs to deliver what they claim... across the board not just to limited locales like is often the case today. I aim to start revolution. But I always need your help spreading the word. Tell your friends! This site 100% relies on word-of-mouth. I'll update this topic when it's released. Coincidently happens to be right about the time you get home.

there are links below the graph to copy and paste various share options... also a share link next to each individual result in the details... you can also copy the img src off your stats page for the avg and max ... just right click and copy the image source... they look like txt but they're images for sharing. https://testmy.net/max/CJchronic&int=1.png?r=87681 removing int=1 and the query string from the url changes the image a little for outside sources... https://testmy.net/max/CJchronic.png

I'd open that forum back up but SMF has major spam issues... bots are already hovering over that 24/7, trying everything they can to join and post. Maybe one of these days I'll see what can be done to reopen that forum for fun.

Wow that's fast, try a multithread test. Be interesting to see what you get with that.

Not sure why that happened to you all of a sudden. I made some edits so that manual selection between 6 and 12 MB will no longer force you to forward. Run a couple of 12 MB tests and let's see what the result looks like and it may shed light on why you were being forced to do a larger size.

It never retests for you? I haven't heard that from anyone yet... As for the logging during downtime... I'm working to make that possible in the next version of the Auto Speed Test. ... there are quite a few updates I'd like to make to that.

Hi Rob, Glad to hear that you're interested in TraceMy.net. However, I'm sorry, the beta is over. The information I gathered during the beta is being used to build a primetime version. I'll probably want to do one or two more very brief beta rounds before I fully release it. If you'd like to be contacted for any future betas just vote 'yes' in the TestMy.net Beta topic and I'll contact you and add you to the beta group next time I have a beta. So, personally I also get faster results straight to Dallas. That's actually the prefered server, everyone defaults to that server for a reason. There's a common misconception that you must test close to the server to get a good speed test. Not true, in fact you should probably use longer routes to truly put your host, their peers and their peers peers to the test. Dallas is one of the most popular hubs in the world, my other servers are located in other hot locales. I believe that speeds to these locations and the Cloudflare and Google Pagespeed testing options are truly accurate representations of the speed anyone is to expect to get from most sites, servers and services they'll encounter. The data is being served similarly to the way you often get data from sources today. I mentioned the Google option, this is actually the fastest for me in most cases. I'm still working to trick pagespeed into working with my classic test. -- I contacted Google to see if they'd lift some restrictions for me, ... nope. They can only do up to like 62 MB... I need it to do at least 200. Sucks because it's a strong performer up to its limit. It works really well with multithread. I may be able to convince them in time to help me make it work with everything I offer. Look at my screenshots, 108.4 Mbps linear to dallas.testmy.net (my fav, because of the TiP data), 117.2 using google.testmy.net and only 93.1 to cloud.testmy.net. BUT if I do the same on my cell phone, using Verizon, the results are totally different. Dallas wins at 5.7 Mbps, closely followed by cloud.testmy.net at 5.5 Mbps and then the previously fastest method is now the slowest, google.testmy.net only hit 3.4 Mbps. These are all on the same computer, same browser, same time, etc... I just tethered my phone real quick to show you. Different hosts route differently, I offer the various servers and options so you can compare and decide which works best for you. What works well for me may not work as well for you. I personally use the default server most of the time, it's BY FAR the most powerful machine that I have. 24 core RAID SSD beast. It's also well connected and hosted in the most popular Internet hub. I'm about 1000 miles from Dallas and I still max out my connection. On other (commercial) connections I've tested at over 5000 miles and nearly maxed out. As long as the provider is doing their job distance is less of a factor. If you're really close to that server you might want to test and compare some routes at greater distance. Don't make it easy on your ISP! Warning, if you go too far it can be depressing... but then you can do the same thing on other connections and they'll test much better. It all depends on the provider and their peers. Look at my results from today ... you'll see that some of the multithread results are slower, those are to asia and eu. On my Comcast connection I'm usually able to pull about 4-5X my single thread speed. EU, 5000 miles away I go from 20+ Mbps to 80+ Mbps... both are right but really I'd only be able to download something at 20 Mbps unless it's split. Then look at my Verizon connection tethered off my iPhone. Only 2X to EU and actually ~40% slower multithread to Asia. Different situations produce different results. Some connection will multithread really well... then others appear to do worse. Yours..... appears to be dead even, little variance between results. Looks like you select the option that tests US coast-to-coast simultaneously, even better that your multithread is similar to your single thread performance. You want to see those two numbers in line with each other. If the multithread number is higher that means that there is room for improvement in your single thread performance. If the single thread number is higher that may mean that the devices performance is lacking. I hope this helps. Thank you for your continued patronage and support. - Happy Testing! - Damon - TestMy.net

Hi Elias, If your connection is really rated for 0.5 Mbps... you're performing very good some of the time. But then I see sometimes you have really deep degradation of speed. 99 Kbps / 13 Kbps were your slowest... you pretty much have dial-up sometimes. Sorry that you're getting frustrated with your situation. You said it yourself, your connection is unpredictable. How can you expect the test to make a prediction as to what size to use when the connection's acting unpredictably? If it's taking too long there are two things you can do. First, you could manually select your test size on thedownload test or upload test pages... or use the express button on those pages. Express, instead of making the calculations as the test is running it makes a size determination based on your last 5 completed results. The thing is though, if the burst is strong enough and the size is less than 6MB download or 1.5 MB upload manual selection can be automatically overridden. Having said that, I'll take your feedback and use it to make the algorithm better. Hopefully outputting a better size for you. Without a doubt, I can always improve the process... and I will thanks to feedback like yours. I'm looking at your results... https://testmy.net/compID/165236018813 -- it looks like you're getting short bursts of speed, then it caps back off. https://testmy.net/db/zmBQj3J -- the test sees those bursts and thinks to itself, "if I serve this client a larger size, it may smooth out the bursting for a more accurate result..." --- the goal is to serve you a size that's juuuuuust right. Large enough to be accurate but small enough to save yourself time and bandwidth. Usually after 20-30 seconds it's just wasting your time. Up to that point, the longer the better. The higher the duration of the test the more information you have, which in turn yields higher accuracy. Thanks for the feedback. Kind Regards, - Damon - TestMy.net