Crazimon Posted June 13, 2006 CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 I have been doing speed tests over the past few days so that we could do a cost comparison of DSL vs. T1. We are located in San Antonio, Texas. When I completed the test, my scores came out higher than I thought possible. I called the phone company and they couldn't tell me what speeds I was connecting at. They can only tell me what the promised speeds should be. Can anyone explain this to me? :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 25301 Kbps about 25.3 Mbps (tested with 12160 kB) Download Speed is:: 3089 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1)Test Time:: 2006/06/13 - 11:52am Bottom Line:: 441X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.33 sec Tested from a 12160 kB file and took 3.937 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 1365.03 % faster than the average for host (226.146) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-XUC85JBLG User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4 [!] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 13, 2006 CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 Crazimon welcome to the forum. that speed result is cached. clear your cache, and do another test, if you get the same results try another browser. or another speed test such as http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amc11890 Posted June 13, 2006 CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 welcome to the fourm crazimon. Those results are cached(meaning fake), please do not use accelerators or use the back button, also clear your cache. Also do you have a firewall running? Edit: It looks like Dlewis beat me to the punchline Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 13, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 Here's the competitor's speedtest where I constantly reach "off the charts!" http://speedtest.logixcom.net/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 13, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 Just cleared my cache too. Here's the re-test reports: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 23610 Kbps about 23.61 Mbps (tested with 12160 kB) Download Speed is:: 2882 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1)Test Time:: 2006/06/13 - 1:31pm Bottom Line:: 412X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.36 sec Tested from a 12160 kB file and took 4.219 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 289.35 % faster than the average for host (226.146) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-K7TIXY13N User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4 [!] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 13, 2006 CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 Here's the competitor's speedtest where I constantly reach "off the charts!" http://speedtest.logixcom.net/ that speed test sucks, for many reasons the first being it gives slow results "first test 149.2 Kbps" for me. second once you do the first test, the second test is compleatly cached 'second test Infinity Kbps" don't use that speed test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 13, 2006 CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 Just cleared my cache too. Here's the re-test reports: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 23610 Kbps about 23.61 Mbps (tested with 12160 kB) Download Speed is:: 2882 kB/s Tested From:: https://testmy.net/ (Server 1)Test Time:: 2006/06/13 - 1:31pm Bottom Line:: 412X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 0.36 sec Tested from a 12160 kB file and took 4.219 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: Awesome! 20% + : 289.35 % faster than the average for host (226.146) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-K7TIXY13N User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4 [!] cached again. try running a test from the second server http://www.testmy.net/o-000-2 or a mirror like this one http://www.testmy.net/o-mirror-dlewis23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 13, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 OKay, I usually use the smarTest. Which packet should I use here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 13, 2006 CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 do this test http://www.testmy.net/tools/test/d_load.php?&st=st&tt=1&ta=1&top=000-2&out_src=20MB and this one http://www.testmy.net/tools/test/d_load.php?&st=st&tt=1&ta=1&top=mirror-dlewis23&out_src=20MB and post both results Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 13, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 Test 1: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 2308 Kbps about 2.31 Mbps (tested with 20972 kB) Download Speed is:: 282 kB/s Tested From:: http://s2.testmy.netTest Time:: 2006/06/13 - 2:11pm Bottom Line:: 40X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 3.63 sec Tested from a 20972 kB file and took 74.438 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: May need help : running at only 41.65 % of your hosts average (226.146) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-WIF7601YM User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4 [!] Test 2: :::.. Download Stats ..::: Download Connection is:: 2184 Kbps about 2.18 Mbps (tested with 20972 kB) Download Speed is:: 267 kB/s Tested From:: http://theamericanforce.comTest Time:: 2006/06/13 - 2:13pm Bottom Line:: 38X faster than 56K 1MB Download in 3.84 sec Tested from a 20972 kB file and took 78.672 seconds to complete Download Diagnosis:: May need help : running at only 40.43 % of your hosts average (226.146) D-Validation Link:: https://testmy.net/stats/id-2W6AZC9HL User Agent:: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4 [!] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 13, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 13, 2006 So is that speed still better than the 1088k that the competitor was offering? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 15, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 Well, where are you guys now that I am asking for some help in comparisons? I know, I know...pretty self explantory, but would like your "expert" opinion. Thanks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amc11890 Posted June 15, 2006 CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 Well T1 will always be better that dsl simply because the speeds are way more consistent and you dont have to worry about your neighbors bogging your connection down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 15, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 But if they are only promising 1088k of bandwidth, b/c the remaining will go to phone lines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amc11890 Posted June 15, 2006 CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 But if they are only promising 1088k of bandwidth, b/c the remaining will go to phone lines? The remaining speed going to phone lines? I dont know wat that would have to do with phone line. Usually watever speed they promise you better get that speed or very close when you are talking about t1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 15, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 Apparently, the T1 is going to be split among 24 phone lines and the rest going to data. Thus the 1088kbps. That was what first brought me here. That looked a little slow for a T1 line...especially when my 'work' tests from yesterday state the following: Download Connection is:: 2308 Kbps about 2.31 Mbps (tested with 20972 kB) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 15, 2006 CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 Apparently, the T1 is going to be split among 24 phone lines and the rest going to data. Thus the 1088kbps. That was what first brought me here. That looked a little slow for a T1 line...especially when my 'work' tests from yesterday state the following: Download Connection is:: 2308 Kbps about 2.31 Mbps (tested with 20972 kB) a T1 being split for 24 phone lines would not be fast enough for DSL. it wouldn't really be fast enough for dial up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 15, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 If we were to lessen the number of phone lines (like to 14), would that increase the data speeds? If so, by how much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 15, 2006 CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 If we were to lessen the number of phone lines (like to 14), would that increase the data speeds? If so, by how much? that would be about 110kbps per phone line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amc11890 Posted June 15, 2006 CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 that would be about 110Kbps per phone line. that would be waste of money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted June 15, 2006 CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 that would be waste of money a T1 doesn't offer enough bandwidth for that. thats why most phone companies use a DS3 on that. its cheap relyable and they can server 50-60 customers easily off it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 15, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 What's a DS3? Sorry, I'm new to all this speed config. stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amc11890 Posted June 15, 2006 CID Share Posted June 15, 2006 What's a DS3? Sorry, I'm new to all this speed config. stuff. ds3 is basically T3(faster and offers way more bandwidth for larger companies) as compared to a T1. Smaller companies usually go with the T1 but larger companies that do a lot of video conferencing and bandwidth heavy things will require a T3 or DS3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazimon Posted June 16, 2006 Author CID Share Posted June 16, 2006 Cool. Thanks for spreading the knowledge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.