Sean

Thank you for the suggestion.  I added support for testing against port 8080.  As you imagined, simply visit [no longer works] -- works with all servers, similar to the https (port 443) test at https://testmy.net.
 
Let us know your findings.

As I noticed some ISPs return considerably quicker speed tests with Ookla's speed than what's possible with regular web access including TestMy, I decided to snoop at how Speed test establishes its connection using Sysinternals' TCPView utility.  I sorted the traffic by 'Received Bytes' and then started a speed test.
 
While the multiple connections doesn't surprise me (Ookla's tests are all multi-threaded), what I was surprised with was what port it used - 8080:
 

 
It seemed like no matter what test server I tried, it ran its test over port 8080, which is a seldom used port for web traffic.  For example, HTTP and HTTPS traffic are carried over ports 80 and 443, respectively, while FTP traffic is carried over ports 20 and 21.   Port 8080 is typically used for an internal web proxy within corporate networks and for an ISP cache proxy in the early days of Internet for faster access to popular websites.
 
On the other hand, by running the speed tests over port 8080, this makes it easy for ISPs to prioritise traffic for anyone using Ookla's speed test as all they have to do is give elevated QoS for traffic running over port 8080.
 
I then thought - Is port 8080 necessary for Ookla's Speedtest?  To find out, I blocked port 8080 on my PC.
 
The speed test took a little longer to start, but once it did, it switched over to port 80, in this case with two threads:
 

 
Once I open up port 8080 and click 'Test Again', the next test runs on port 8080 again.
 
So an interesting idea would be if TestMy could add support for port 8080.  I don't think it will require much configuration other than configuring the various test servers to also accept traffic on port 8080.  Then it would just be a matter of typing testmy.net:8080 to perform the test on port 8080 with suspect ISPs, such as those that seem to throttle ports 80 (HTTP) and 443 (HTTPS).

Reminds me of the Speedtest Android app measuring my DSL uplink.  It often reported above 1Mbps even though the DSL uplink is physically synced at 384kbps and an actual throughput of just over 300kbps.
 
They seem to have fixed this bug and now it under measures my uplink usually with a result about 200kbps.  TestMy generally reports around 300Kbps, which matches up pretty well to the 35KB/s to 40KB/s I get during FTP uploads.

As I noticed some ISPs return considerably quicker speed tests with Ookla's speed than what's possible with regular web access including TestMy, I decided to snoop at how Speed test establishes its connection using Sysinternals' TCPView utility.  I sorted the traffic by 'Received Bytes' and then started a speed test.
 
While the multiple connections doesn't surprise me (Ookla's tests are all multi-threaded), what I was surprised with was what port it used - 8080:
 

 
It seemed like no matter what test server I tried, it ran its test over port 8080, which is a seldom used port for web traffic.  For example, HTTP and HTTPS traffic are carried over ports 80 and 443, respectively, while FTP traffic is carried over ports 20 and 21.   Port 8080 is typically used for an internal web proxy within corporate networks and for an ISP cache proxy in the early days of Internet for faster access to popular websites.
 
On the other hand, by running the speed tests over port 8080, this makes it easy for ISPs to prioritise traffic for anyone using Ookla's speed test as all they have to do is give elevated QoS for traffic running over port 8080.
 
I then thought - Is port 8080 necessary for Ookla's Speedtest?  To find out, I blocked port 8080 on my PC.
 
The speed test took a little longer to start, but once it did, it switched over to port 80, in this case with two threads:
 

 
Once I open up port 8080 and click 'Test Again', the next test runs on port 8080 again.
 
So an interesting idea would be if TestMy could add support for port 8080.  I don't think it will require much configuration other than configuring the various test servers to also accept traffic on port 8080.  Then it would just be a matter of typing testmy.net:8080 to perform the test on port 8080 with suspect ISPs, such as those that seem to throttle ports 80 (HTTP) and 443 (HTTPS).

What did you do, delete my post?  Oh well.
 
I was just saying that it ended up taking over two hours to upload that 158.5 MB to youtube.  For fun I ran speedtest.net, also to Colorado Springs and got...
 

 
... if my upload were that fast the youtube upload would have only taken 11 minutes.  Why so many people use that site, I have no idea.  Maybe they like looking at a page full of lies and ads.
 

 
There are so many ads I can't find the result!  Visit us at ads.speedtest.ads.  Why do people use that?!

 
Proof during the TMN test that you were topping out the connection. 
 
Funny the ookla tests read higher yet didn't cause your voip and rd streams to die out.  The only way in my mind that happens is if there's funny business or it's just plain BS.

I had an interesting call with my work colleague in the UK who got in Pulse8's Fibreoptic 38Mbps Broadband package, which runs over VDSL. 
 
I asked him what speed he's getting and sent him the TestMy combo speed test link.  He came back saying he's getting 4.8Mbps down and 7.5Mbps up.  So I called his VoIP phone and asked him to accept a remote desktop connection so I could try some further tests.
 
I then tried several download speed tests with both the UK and German servers.  It seemed like each time I ran a test, it gradually got slower and slower, hitting 3.8Mbps after 3 x 50MB tests with both the UK and German servers.  So I then checked what Speedtest.net gives and it gave 16Mbps on the download and 8Mbps on the upload. 
 
He was quite surprised and wondered why there such a drastic difference.  As I know Speedtest uses multiple threads, I decided to do a 50MB multi-threaded test on TestMy using the UK server.  As soon as the test started, my remote desktop picture went to a crawl where it started painting chunks of pixels at a time and my colleague could only hear the odd word I spoke.
 
About 2 minutes later, the test completed along with my remote desktop screen and VoIP quality returning back to normal.  The test result showed 3.5Mbps. 
 
My work colleague told me that Pulse8 said to use their website's speed test to check if there is any speed issue.  So I decided to check that one.  Like Speedtest.net, it also reported about 16Mbps down and 8Mbps up and sure enough it showed 'OOKLA' at the top-right corner, which clearly is the same engine as Ookla's Speedtest.net site. 
 
Unlike TestMy's test, Ookla's tests did not cause my remote desktop screen or VoIP call to break up.  So it's pretty clear his ISP (or Tiscali it operates over) has traffic shaping to give plenty of bandwidth to Ookla's servers, but only 3.5Mbps to 4.8Mbps overall capacity to the Internet, at least around 4pm to 5pm when I was testing his connection.

Thanks, I'll have to try the google syntax when looking for stuff in the future. Also nice to know its getting refreshed and updated. I've been using this website for years for speed testing (website works out of the box, no plugins needed, when spinning up new servers) and sometimes I'll post in the forums, I'm a sysad going on 7 years now, and its so much easier to go here and provide reliable data to my bosses and not some flash based bullshit. Keep up the good work for years, you guys have been nothing less of world class. Happy new years all.

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
 
 

When you're logged in, do these unexpected test results have a yellow background such as the following example on the first two rows?
 

 
If you do see results highlighted in yellow similar to the above, what this probably means is that your internet connection goes through a shared IP address, such as a carrier grade NAT.  One good example of this is cellular mobile data connections where all the devices on the network connect through a small handful of IP addresses.  Even my fixed wireless ISP connection has a shared IP and I often see other user's results appear on the Results page highlighted in yellow.
 
You can hide these by making sure you're logged in and then click the following button at the bottom of the results page:
 

I see one more instance I need to update... will do that in a bit.
 

I just happened to noticed when I select the Dusseldorf, DE server, it shows up as 'Frankfurt, DE' on the download test page and also in the test result.
 
For example, this is the speed test servers list showing 'Dusseldorf':

The following is what this server shows up as when set as default:

Frankfurt is also mentioned in the test result:

Going by Google Maps, Frankfurt and Dusseldorf are 229km (142 miles) apart.

Based on my past experience with Ookla's Speedtest, it often gives me ping times well below what I can get to any host. 
 
The following is an example where I ran a speed test:
 

I have yet to see a host (outside my network) give a 1ms ping time, let alone under 10ms. 

It's a self-signed certificate.  It's not an attempt to fool you, your browser is just warning you in case it was.  If you don't trust TestMy.net then you shouldn't be here.  Fact is, the https test and the http test are exactly the same.  The https test sends me no more information about you than the normal test, they both run the same except the https test runs over port 443 instead of 80.  I'm not going to go out and pay for server certificates for all of my servers for a test I put online, originally for one person.  If this were an ecommerce site and you were actually sending me secure information it would be another story.  But we aren't talking about a security issue here.
 
You've been here since 2005... you should trust what I'm doing by now.
 
As for a page not found for test results.  If this happens please let me know the server you're testing against and how often it happens.  You should never see a 404 error.  I think what you may actually be seeing is connection reset by peer.  Please post a screenshot next time it happens and I'll make it work better for you.

I have had a modem that started slowing Down, once a day reset was often.
I Fixed It.
I simply tried another transformer (12v in my case) and it has been acting perfect for a month now, zero problems, all is well.  They are built so cheap they often fail to give proper output, cheap, easy, fix.
 
 

Some mobile phones such as Windows Phones and certain Android phones can display what 3G and LTE networks are in the area, so well worth a check.  Despite what the satellite providers claim, 3G is considerably faster than satellite, particularly in rural areas where there is little contention on the cell tower.
 
If your mobile is able to connect to 3G at all (even if one bar) at your place, then it is quite possible you can get a strong signal with dedicated 3G/LTE router and an outdoor directional 3G antenna. If it shows a 3G or LTE network for another network, try to get a prepay data SIM to give it a test run.
 
For example, at my house with the Meteor 3G network here, my phone will intermittently connect to 3G while standing outside the house.  In the loft (upstairs), I have a 3G router which is unable to connect to the 3G network on its own (says 'No Signal').  I bought a 12dBi LOG antenna that covers all the cellular bands and mounted it on a camera tripod for a makeshift setup.  With the antenna aimed out the window in the direction of the mast, the router is showing 4 out 5 bars lit. 
 
The following is a 24-hour speed test run from it a few weeks ago with the figures put into a spreadsheet to produce a graph.  I'm in a rural area surrounded by farmland and the cell tower is in a small village.
 

The downlink throughput here is just over double what I'm getting with my DSL connection (~4Mbps) and the uplink is three times my DSL connection (~300kbps).  Actual browsing is pretty quick, latency is around 70ms and it has no problem playing YouTube in 1080p which my DSL connection can't handle.
 
Like satellite, the main issue you will likely face is getting a decent monthly data allowance and many contract 3G/LTE plans have severe overusage charges similar to the excess weight fees airlines charge on check-in bags.  For example, Meteor charge €20 per 7.5GB data bundle and then 2c/MB (€20 per 1GB!) excess, so I just mainly use when connecting to work and the occasional video I want to watch in HD and then revert to DSL for general web usage and downloads.

When you're logged in, do these unexpected test results have a yellow background such as the following example on the first two rows?
 

 
If you do see results highlighted in yellow similar to the above, what this probably means is that your internet connection goes through a shared IP address, such as a carrier grade NAT.  One good example of this is cellular mobile data connections where all the devices on the network connect through a small handful of IP addresses.  Even my fixed wireless ISP connection has a shared IP and I often see other user's results appear on the Results page highlighted in yellow.
 
You can hide these by making sure you're logged in and then click the following button at the bottom of the results page:
 

 
 
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. 

W 10 just did a major update that took almost as long as the first install. Wish M$ would get their shit together and put out an OS that was finished. I know my next laptop will be a Mac. Tired of having my time wasted fixing M$ fuck ups!! Instead of attracting people they are driving them away!! Rant over!!

If you're using a portable hotspot (e.g. mobile tethering or MiFi device), be sure to set Windows 10 to treat it as a metered connection.  Otherwise a 4G LTE connection will look like a high speed broadband connection to WIndows, which it will potentially use to distribute Windows updates.  This may also explain some threads I'm seeing in mobile operator forums about unexpected excessive usage charges when the user claims to only use the connection for e-mail and limited Internet access.
 
To configure your portable hotspot as a metered connection, first connect to it and perform the following steps:
1. Go into the Start menu and into Settings.
2. Go into "Network & Internet"
3. Ensure your hotspot shows "Connected" (if not, connect it)
4. Click 'Advanced Options'
5. Turn on "Set as metered connection".
 
In Windows 8.1, this was quite an easy task - Just click the Wi-Fi icon in the task tray and click "Set as metered connection" in the menu that appeared.  This should also stop Windows using it for Windows updates, which have been getting rather large recently.  I remember when Windows 7 Service Pack 1 seemed massive update at over 900MB and now it seems normal to get over 1GB worth of regular Windows updates on patch Tuesday.  Not something you want eating into the tiny monthly data allowances most mobile providers offer, let alone Windows then distributing these updates over it!

it could be the p2p stuff set up by default??

I already do You deserve it! And Frankfurt is actually closer than this "Atzenau" (I never heared of)^^
 
That would be exactly what I´ve been looking for. It´ll be a lot of work for me, but I love doing such stuff. Kinda geeky hobby of mine...
 

 
Average speed aggregated by hour of day.
 
Here's Vodaphone DSL as a whole...  All numbers in Mbps.  Keep in mind that I can't differentiate between your providers packages.
HOUR Download AVG   0 11.28 1 11.01 2 13.00 3 12.15 4 9.75 5 10.62 6 10.56 7 10.43 8 11.10 9 10.30 10 8.72 11 8.78 12 8.32 13 7.64 14 7.14 15 8.65 16 9.64 17 9.02 18 10.74 19 8.87 20 10.55 21 10.47 22 10.87 23 13.87 HOUR Upload AVG   0 1.99 1 1.94 2 3.38 3 1.98 4 1.72 5 1.95 6 1.81 7 2.04 8 1.86 9 1.78 10 1.65 11 1.75 12 3.32 13 1.82 14 1.79 15 1.78 16 2.57 17 1.84 18 1.60 19 1.60 20 2.20 21 1.64 22 1.83 23 2.02 Your detected city is Alzenau DE.  There aren't enough results to make an accurate plot.  So I'm looking to Frankfurt DE.  The largest city close to you.
HOUR Download AVG   0 24.93 1 28.93 2 41.31 3 30.63 4 23.94 5 35.25 6 38.32 7 39.03 8 28.17 9 10.00 10 16.33 11 38.49 12 69.68 13 18.31 14 11.56 15 18.29 16 19.24 17 6.07 18 24.01 19 26.02 20 5.47 21 7.43 22 3.60 23 16.32 HOUR Upload AVG   0 5.59 1 7.69 2 6.06 3 7.11 4 4.36 5 5.11 6 6.78 7 5.23 8 6.44 9 4.18 10 6.15 11 4.45 12 2.99 13 5.04 14 4.57 15 2.61 16 9.35 17 1.43 18 7.83 19 7.23 20 0.72 21 4.05 22 2.88 23 0.79 Vodaphone DSL, Germany (DE) only
HOUR Download AVG   0 6.84 1 9.78 2 20.56 3 14.71 4 6.27 5 8.47 6 17.10 7 11.12 8 15.94 9 19.06 10 7.74 11 9.41 12 7.94 13 8.91 14 4.11 15 9.96 16 11.72 17 4.69 18 6.41 19 4.56 20 4.54 21 4.52 22 9.51 23 9.98 HOUR Upload AVG   0 0.72 1 1.58 2 4.93 3 2.09 4 1.46 5 1.77 6 1.45 7 1.48 8 2.62 9 4.69 10 1.54 11 1.16 12 1.37 13 1.83 14 3.14 15 2.56 16 3.29 17 1.98 18 1.46 19 3.49 20 3.29 21 1.38 22 0.90 23 2.48  
Thought I'd just get you the numbers for now.  Hope this helps.  I'll give you the ability to run these queries yourself and plot it out on graphs with the next major database release.  

That's it now.
 

Fixed.  Sorry about the inconvenience. :)