xs1

Based on how the Beta seems to function, I would think it would be a prime opportunity to add a "dual" test, which simultaneously runs both upload and download.
 
This would be nice for testing in enterprises that have their own data-centers and host VPN/Web/etc. traffic, as they can find out what types of bandwidth carving they should do. I.e., if my Buckeye 1-gig fiber supports a full-duplex 1-gig, then I don't have to worry as much about having a good upload speed when someone else is using my network. But if it's a half-duplex 1-gig, then it changes how I might want to carve out bandwidth.
 
Just a thought, would be an interesting metric to add. Could be a purple double-arrow in the results that indicates the combined speed as well, since it's not a pure upload/download, but a "dual" / "simultaneous" / "mixed" test.

With a slower upload speed or higher latency it interferes with the normal flow.  If the requests are lagged it will affect the result.
 
With 100+ smaller requests the connection has to negotiate each one.   The latency and upload can effect this.
 
This will be less pronounced with linear because we don't have to keep initiating requests over and over.  
 
I went around and around with this one, trying to get those connections to ramp up quicker.  Originally I was trying to make the test ramp up quicker by adjusting test parameters for that situation.  Then realized that it's only doing what it's supposed to do.  This happens when the connection is weak, it's only showing you what happened.  If something slows down the requests or the process... it affects the end result.
 
So keep in mind when you're using the beta, it's splitting the multithread process much more than my previous version.  100 elements for < 1MB tests and 200 elements beyond that, where the production multithread at 10MB you only open 12 threads and 200MB opens 30 threads.  Big difference.  The beta is more demanding.
 
The difference is before I adjusted the process to meet the connection.  Smaller tests were done with less elements.  I've decided going forward that TMN shouldn't scale based on the connection, rather measure every connection the same.  As the linear test does.  Remember I'm only talking about the multithread process.
 
The beta upload test works the same way, 100 and 200 elements.
 
A couple of things to can do.  Click [customize] and Enable Linear Boost or test linear on connections like that one.
 
 
I've seen that too, always on crappy connections.  I think you're right about it being due to packet loss.  I'm going to see about detecting when a thread gets stuck like that and then reinitiate that thread and report the event in the results.
 
It's all about how the data is being rendered.  The beta is an entirely new test with different variables.  These new variables seem to favor more modern connection types because they're better designed for this type of load.  A bunch of small requests may be harder to render in some cases than a few large ones.  But that's what we're here to test.

I tried retesting with my router upload limited to 0.5Mbps up (to mimic my workplace DSL uplink) and the 10MB manual download block performs better giving about 7-8Mbps in Chrome after a few tests.  With a 102MB manual block it gets around 50Mbps:

With linear, it gives around the full download speed like when I do not have the upload throttled to 512Kbps. 

 
Going by your test results above, it appears you either did not limit the upload speed to 512Kbps on your gateway / router (to mimic a slow 512Kbps DSL upload) or it was measuring the 512Kbps upload limit as 39.2Mbps. 
 
The following shows the 512Kbps upload configured on my router to mimic the 512Kbps upload limit on my workplace's DSL connection.  With MikroTik routers, FastTrack must be disabled (IP -> Firewall) for speed limits to take effect. 

 

I thought this was kinda funny, did a combined test and got the exact same 767.2Mbps on both upload and download. Had to giggle at this one.
 

Instructions to Enable the Beta are in the Private area.
 
The beta is private but members with access are allowed to share instructions.
 
Please use this public forum for all threads related to Beta 23. 
 
If you encounter any issues or bugs please copy the URL in your browser and include it with your post.  This helps reproduce the issue.  Screen recordings are also very helpful.
 
Start new topic  
Happy Testing!

$95/mo for my 1gig.  works for me.  Better then comcrap trying to charge me $250 for 2boxes/phone/internet years ago.

Unless there's an issue with the gateway itself, the ISP should only "update" or need for a restart at most, once a month, if that. There has to be in issue with your gateway, or a signal loss issue with the connection itself for it to restart that many times. There's been months before my ISP needed to refresh/change IP or update the config. Id check with comcast to see what's going on.  Possibly a bad power supply to the gateway? Gateway itself overheating? Bad power strip?  There has to be a cause. This type of behavior is not normal. 

Hey there, fellow Testmynet users! 😊
I'm thrilled to be a part of this awesome forum, discussing all things speed tests and bandwidth with all of you. You can call me Catbear 🐱🐻 – it's a fun combo! I hail from the vicinity of Hamburg, Germany, and at 25 years old, I'm still relatively young. Technology and internet connections have always fascinated me. 💻🌐
 
Recently, I decided to bid farewell to my old internet connection and upgrade to a brand-new Cable internet line. The whole experience of installing it alongside the technician was a rollercoaster ride of excitement, opening up a whole new world of possibilities! 🚀🔧
My provider now offers an incredible speed of up to 1150 Mbps! On average, I'm hitting around 1100 Mbps down and 50 Mbps up – mind-blowing, right? It's the fastest connection I've ever experienced, and I can't wait to explore all the opportunities it brings. 😍💨
To tap into this high-speed connection, I've got a snazzy 2.5Gbit network card, paving the way to the online wonderland. My trusty router is the FritzBox 6690, which has been a reliable companion so far. 📶💼
 
I'm stoked to share my experiences with all of you in this forum and learn from your stories as well. If any of you use similar tech or have tackled similar challenges, I'm here to help with any questions or advice. Let's exchange ideas and make the most of this tech-savvy community! 💬🤝
Once again, a big thank you for welcoming me into this fantastic community. I'm excited to see what the future holds for internet connections and technology for all of us. 🌟🚀
Best regards,
Catbear 🐱🐻
 

👏 well said.
 
 

 
 
idk. TMN seems to work ok for me..   upload we will sort out in the new revision im sure. 
 
Keep up the hard work D! 

My beta gives anyone the ability to run TMN on any computer they'd like.  Run it locally on a Docker images I've prepared for you or install it on any web sever, with or without SSL.  It only takes 2 files, a total of 1800 bytes of code on your end.  What speed will you see between two wired 1 GbE?   Exactly what you'd expect to see, watch for yourself.
 
tmn-on-my-server.mp4
The Mac and Windows machines are fairly distant, non-direct routes.  The connection traverses 2 switches, then the router, then another switch also adding in about 100 ft of cable before it arrives.  Not lab conditions, I wanted all of those real world variables. 
 
If you inspect I think you'll agree, TMN's results are pretty exact. 
 
tl&dr

 
So average 916 Mbps | 904 Mbps.  Adding 6% network overhead you get to 971 Mbps | 958 Mbps.  Which is right in line with what we see coming across the interface in reality.  
 
I did the same LAN testing when developing the current version (v18) you're using now, always do.  But now I'm giving the ability to do it yourself, super quick.  ... I've also done that before but not like this.  This is very different.  Cut and paste a few commands into Terminal or PowerShell and you're running local tests on all your devices in a few seconds.  You can also audit all of the code and understand the entire container in just a few seconds.
 
Pretty excited to share that with you all.  Curious how people will use it.

Sheer bor-dumb. Added some characters lol 😛
 

I am not sure if I messed up the designation between B and b (Bits and Bytes). I did find the problem and I was shocked to be honest, my ASUS Strix Z-490 E Gaming MB has VI and I found it had the OBS Streaming set to Low which I guess was causing all the problems. I changed that setting to extreme (which is what iRacing is set at) 
I set the OBS to 10000 kbps and since then I have not had a single issue of dropped anything and am in the bitrate suggested for 3440x1440 
If anything changes or I find I start getting more dropped frames I will update this thread
 
 
 
 
 

I love when I spend hours upon hours helping someone, reading into all their tech support emails, taking hours to work someone else's problem in my head, explaining things in intricate detail, writing custom guides specifically for that person and taking time out of my family holiday weekend to quickly respond back... only to be attacked.
 
Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.
 
I understand your frustration and I've been trying to help.
 
It's pretty common that people attack and blame me and my site, I'm used to it by now.
 
 
Here's what I actually say on the website right now,
Total network bandwidth capacity in excess of 2000 Gbps TestMy.net's servers are all gigabit or multi-gigabit uplinked Hosted network features multi-homed connectivity with bandwidth from independent Tier 1 carriers, combining multiple 10 Gbps connections to create one of the industry’s fastest networks. Global network reach utilizing over 25 Tier 1 network providers including Comcast, Cox, Time Warner, Charter, Qwest, Google, Level 3, Internap, NTT America, Equinix & Telefónica to name a few Extensive peering relationships across North America, Europe and Asia  
That was actually written so long ago, needs to be updated and includes much more currently.  After I get the beta released I'll probably start updating text across the site.
 
Total network capacity.  This is the network capacity of the hosts I choose.  I choose hosts who peer well with other hosts and have in many cases direct connections to the larger ISPs.  Those are their peering relationships.
 
 
I've definitely had to be creative in the past to afford to run this site.  From 1999 to 2001 I had to shut down because I exhausted all of my options.  And then lost all the code.  Long story about how it was able to come back.
 
TestMy.net today I have a cabinet of servers at Colohouse (formerly Data102) about 15 minutes from my house in Downtown Colorado Springs CO.  This is where the (currently) centralized databases run.  When you visit "testmy.net" it's served from Cloudflare CDN and goes to my rack here in Colorado.  When you use the Colorado test server, you're hitting a VPS running in that rack.  My cabinet is located only about 10 feet from where all of the connections come into the data center.  When I first joined Data102 the owners were fans of TMN, "We use it all the time!  It's our go-to test." and so they gave me a favorable deal and placement in their datacenter.  But it's still very expensive and I pay for that out of pocket.
 
Then I have about 30-60 VPS servers at any time, the majority of which right now are on Vultr VPS.  If you want $100 of credit to try their platform, here's the link.  I get $35 if you keep them.
 
I scale the VPS servers up and down with demand.  That's also expensive but I've paid much more in the past. 
 
I could definitely do it all for much less but the quality of the bandwidth is extremely important to me.  There are a lot of people who've come to rely on my service and I do my best to provide them with the best possible scenario from a server-side perspective.  I do extensive testing on hosts... xs1 just helped me throw out a promising prospect.  It looked fairly good but TestMy.net proved it's not as good as Vultr.  So when the client is fast enough, TMN can work in reverse and be a test of the host it's running on.  And I intend on doing an entire section where I test VPS hosts like this.
 
So many people blocking ads.  But oh well.
 
 
When you have some computers pulling 250 Mbps in the linear test and others pulling 40 Mbps it's showing me that it might not be Spectrum at fault.  Are they delivering your 1000 Mbps... no, but I'm trying to tell you that 250 Mbps isn't all that bad.  In multithread it looks like you're able to see 400-600 Mbps.  Not bad.  If they're cool they should give you a credit for that.  Maybe $10-$20/month off for a year or something like that.  Comcast did that for me when I presented my information.  I just called and told them what I was finding, didn't have to show them anything.  They challenged nothing, but each ISP is different.
 
I've been a trusted resource going on decades now, your ISP knows TestMy.net.  They used to train their employees to use my site.
 
 
If it were happening on all of your computers across your network and also happening when directly connected to the modem.  Then it's probably a Spectrum issue. If it's happening, isolated to one or two machines... most likely a software or configuration issue of some kind.  
 
I test in Brave regularly, always with shields up.  You must have "block scripts" checked in the advanced settings or something.  If you block scripts here nothing will work right because all of the frontend code is javascript.  I don't know about Privacy Badger, probably the same kind of issue.
 
I'm getting back to writing my beta, where my time and effort is more appreciated.  Later!      << note: the thumb sticking out  

Every connection is obviously unique. In my case, I find that linear works better because of routing. If the other servers/connections on the "multi" test are poor routing it'll generally slow down the entire test. Now in other cases, multi-thread works better on my connection if the routing is ideal for all servers/connections involved. There are alot of variables involved. 
 
 
Firstly, That test is inconsistent, hot garbage. 🥴
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Lastly,
 
I'm going to be honest with you bud, I dont appreciate the disrespect your coming with right now. Firstly, there are thousands of people with actual fiberoptic & datacenter level connections who pull ungodly speeds from testmy.net & its host. Bandwidth & server specs are absolutely not in play here. TMN is on a 10 gig backbone. I have a 1 gig symmetric connection and pull in cases over 1.3 gbit.  Last thing you'll do here is shit on this site. 
 
Its apparent you have issues with your cable connection & im sorry to see this, but that's on you & your ISP. 
 
There's a few things to remember. This site and speed tests are absolutely free. The info you find here is also free. The assistance you are provided is FREE. So do us all a favor and tone down that bullshit negativity towards @CA3LE and this site we have all been members of for over a decade+. If you feel you are the end all be all of knowledge in computers and networking, than figure it out, or switch ISPs to verify your problem with Spectrum cable. Otherwise, keep using other sites like ookla (speedtest.net) that throw overhead in, to bloat the results & make the end user feel better about their max connection speeds, rather than real life performance. 
 

After I get the beta released I plan on reworking the ranking.
 
I think you can get what you're after by using the "full listing" search option.
 
By default it shows a lot of noise.  But you can modify the search to show only what you're after.
 
It's a little tricky.  First, I sort by upload.  Then tell it to only show tables that have over 45K results by modifying the URL string in the browser.  Specifically I'm telling it 45,100 results to pull up the more popular hosts.
 
The tables in the database that tool is searching are pruned daily to a max of 45K results, for speed.  So a host that has over 45,100 results shows that there's more recent activity on that host.
 
Depending on when you query this, it may be different.  The pruning and caching of the count are all done automatically on a schedule by the system.
https://testmy.net/rank/hoststats.up/1/45100
 

 
Same search, by download
https://testmy.net/rank/hoststats.down/1/45100

 
Once I shift my focus back to databasing I'll work to make that more simple and intuitive.
 
One of these days I'll make all the data available and easier to digest.
 

Well then you might be amused by this:
Crank the volume to 11.
https://www.tcw.org/Got%20the%20Spectrum%20Blues.mp3
 
Got the Spectrum Blues.mp3  
 
 

Well when I had Frontier dsl at least I knew I was getting all of the 1Mbps that they had for me. <g>

I followed your advice to reboot modem, router, computer. Speeds now back to normal in Firefox, my default. Also normal in Chrome and Edge, which I had not tested before.

Thank you.

Terry
6/26/23
 

I do subscribe to a slower than average package. The standard installation wouldn't work. The alternate proved a better method. I use NOKIA BGW320-505 modem with a short CAT5 cable connection to my pc. I've done a lot of experiments and have come up with a set of tweaks to my system, network connection software and Firefox. My actual file download speed (off peak times) is between 3.7 Mbps and 4.5 Mbps. This is as fast as I need or can use.
 
Thanks!

What speed do you pay for?
 
The max you usually get is around 32 Mbps.  That rating is comparing you against other users on AT&T, if you subscribe to a slower than average package you can safely ignore this.
 
The new version doesn't have a star rating.  If I add it, I'll make sure give an explanation of how it's calculated and improve the logic.  Maybe have it weigh your own average in there or give you a way to input your subscribed speed.

61857*

I've used it today and the results are all better than before, in both places. The upload differential is still the same, no matter what I use, but I was rather expecting that. I figure I won't get true full bandwidth until I get somewhere that I can use Fiber.

Me too, hated that.  Had AOL for a few months back in the dial-up days. 
 
Funny side story, related to TMN: A 15 year-old friend of mine was the master admin at a local dial-up ISP, he basically built and ran the whole thing for them and had been doing it for years before I met him.  Gave me a lifetime free account, he moved on from there like a year later.  But I ended up having dial-up until they stopped doing it like 10 years later.    Helped me continue to real-world test dial-up here, for freeeee.  
 
The Sound of dial-up Internet.mp3  
 
Came in handy on the road too.  And they were always super fast!  Always connecting at the max 56K!  Ahhh, simpler times.  Remember you'd have a 56K modem and AOL (USWest did this to me too.) would connect at 28.8K or 33.6K, "what the hell good is this modem if nobody let's me connect at 56K!?" -- 28.8K to 56K was a big deal, but AOL was big time overcrowded.
 
Check out the 8 different types of dial-up sounds, some you may not have heard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dial-up_Internet_access
 
I think it was a 9600 baud modem that I used to connect to my first BBS.  9.6 Kbps or 1.2 kB/s.  Now, the worst I ever see on my phone is 0.08 Mbps or 80 Kbps, 8X faster at it's slowest and that feels painful!  Slower than that and it's not connecting reliably at all.  At one time 80 Kbps was fast, it's all relative.
 
One day we'll say the same about Gigabit.  Kids will be like, "Great-Grandpa, what came before Exabyte internet?  Mommy says you used to have Jibby-Byte internet!"
 
"One point twenty-one JIGGA-WATTS!"
1.21 gigawatts？! - Dr. Brown & Marty - Back to the future.mp3  

I wouldn't worry too much about it in that case, FIOS/Frontier told me the same thing about their routers... I eliminated their equipment all together and bought an Asus RT-AX82U.. never looked back.  As long as the update/config files are accepted normally & speeds are decent, Im currently running 2 PC's wired, and 23 devices wireless. I dont worry about the ISP's "recommendations". lol  Depending on your areas provisioning & congestion speeds will vary. Even on my 1g/1g fiber, there are times of day where ill see as low as 400/600.  
 
edit for image:
 
 

This problem got me interested in the technical/engineering basics of what is going on. I have started to study Microsoft's Windows Internals book. Good thing I'm retired: my curiosity eats up a LOT of time...
 
phred