Mike Hammett

Not all and I'd say probably most ISPs don't implement bursting. I do agree that a longer speedtest.net test would be helpful. Many ISPs discount the credibility of speedtests. I, for one, encourage them to learn what they reveal. Yes, some of the hosts may be crappy, however, the poor tests that are not the fault of a crappy host indicate piss poor performance either at that ISP or beyond that ISP. They say they aren't responsible for what's beyond them. I say they are. They need to get their upstreams to fix the issue or switch upstreams.

None of these are on the same network. They are all out on the public Internet. This is from my desk at my client. It's an enterprise-grade connection. Cogent\Zayo SLA backed service. I'm not privy to what they pay, but being SLA backed, if they don't get their full gigabit 24/7 (obviously there's other things using the circuit either at my client or the servers), they're due a credit or can escape the contract. http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967940640 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967943227 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967946468 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967947756 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967949382 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967951961 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967953595 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967966426 http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3967968134 Nine different servers on nine different networks that are all less than 10 ms and are not on-net. I could keep going to additional servers, but I don't feel that's necessary to debunk the idea that I'm running it to an internal, on-net server. Some of them are even a three hour drive away. I'll try the Mercury tests and I'll try my laptop which has a lot more CPU later this week. Maybe I can get them to get me a bigger machine. Even though it has 16 GB of RAM, it's getting long in the tooth. I'm not here to trash one methodology or to promote another. I'm just trying to find the test that's the most accurate the most of the time. I do agree on the single thread vs. multithread. Seeing the latency during the test would be nice. I wish there was something like Cisco's IP-SLA that one could use for these. While the test was occurring, there's realtime loss, latency and jitter measurements. Great for finding connections that falter under load. I'm actually involved in a few projects to increase throughput and decrease latency in many locations on the Internet.

I can fill the GigE port with iPerf, so I'm sure the hardware is capable. The rest of what you said doesn't really make sense. What I read it as was, "This test just throws some numbers out there that aren't really relevant to anything." However, I assume that's not what you meant.

*nods* Just looking for something that's accurate for the general public to use. I'll try next week comparing my Core2Quad with my i7.

I read the guide explaining why speedtest.net reports higher speeds than testmy.net. http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/3962390815 vs https://testmy.net/db/OPnq5Eg(multithread) That's over 3x the difference. That seems to be more than the existing explanations can justify.