Siryak Posted January 20, 2007 CID Share Posted January 20, 2007 I am curious to see the ping times of Hughesnet. As you all may no Wildblue's pings are in the craper. I am hoping that they will straighten this mess out and I can stay with them, but if they don't do something soon I am going to haft to find something else. I used to game on Xbox Live, and even those pesky FPS worked!!! They were not perfect, but they worked and was highly enjoyable. But with the pings below nothing works. How steady are your pings? Could somebody maybe post a lengthy ping test? TY for any and all help. Pinging yahoo.com [66.94.234.13] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1182ms TTL=47 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1227ms TTL=47 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1704ms TTL=46 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1141ms TTL=48 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=2415ms TTL=46 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1173ms TTL=48 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1181ms TTL=46 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=2399ms TTL=47 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1170ms TTL=46 Reply from 66.94.234.13: bytes=32 time=1140ms TTL=47 Ping statistics for 66.94.234.13: Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 1140ms, Maximum = 2415ms, Average = 1473ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlewis23 Posted January 20, 2007 CID Share Posted January 20, 2007 that looks pretty good for Hughesnet except for the 2399ms one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bird Fan Posted January 20, 2007 CID Share Posted January 20, 2007 that looks pretty good for Hughesnet except for the 2399ms one He's on Wildblue... Mine: Pinging testmy.net [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=850ms TTL=49 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=764ms TTL=49 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=991ms TTL=49 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=911ms TTL=49 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 764ms, Maximum = 991ms, Average = 879ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fikester Posted January 20, 2007 CID Share Posted January 20, 2007 Hughes Pinging testmy.net [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=829ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=749ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=770ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=793ms TTL=50 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 749ms, Maximum = 829ms, Average = 785ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostmaster Posted January 20, 2007 CID Share Posted January 20, 2007 Pinging www.testmy.net [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=986ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=755ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=735ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=774ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=695ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=765ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=685ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=804ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=785ms TTL=47 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=715ms TTL=47 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 685ms, Maximum = 986ms, Average = 769ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aerodude Posted January 22, 2007 CID Share Posted January 22, 2007 Pinging testmy.net [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=773ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=687ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=678ms TTL=51 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=753ms TTL=51 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 678ms, Maximum = 773ms, Average = 722ms C:Documents and SettingsOwner.laptop001> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aerodude Posted January 22, 2007 CID Share Posted January 22, 2007 wait.. you can play xbox live with hughesnet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostmaster Posted January 22, 2007 CID Share Posted January 22, 2007 You can on some games, but I wouldn't recommend it for FPS or real time action games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 22, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 22, 2007 You can on some games, but I wouldn't recommend it for FPS or real time action games. If you have Xbox Live give Call of Duty 3 a try. Best network code I have ever seen, and it plays great on satellite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted January 23, 2007 CID Share Posted January 23, 2007 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes ->bytes=32 time=1081ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 750 bytes ->bytes=750 time=2661ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1125 bytes ->bytes=1125 time=1977ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1312 bytes ->bytes=1312 time=1543ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1406 bytes ->bytes=1406 time=1684ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1453 bytes ->bytes=1453 time=1842ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1476 bytes -> ..fragmented Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1465 bytes ->bytes=1465 time=1641ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1470 bytes ->bytes=1470 time=1703ms TTL=49 Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1473 bytes -> ..fragmented Pinging [67.18.179.85] with 1472 bytes ->bytes=1472 time=1730ms TTL=49 I guess I am average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blunted 2 Posted January 23, 2007 CID Share Posted January 23, 2007 how can that play fine with about a second of delay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted January 23, 2007 CID Share Posted January 23, 2007 how can that play fine with about a second of delay? I heard 2 second jet lag. Heck if I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luisdarisa Posted January 23, 2007 CID Share Posted January 23, 2007 My Pings DW7000 / 1.98 / Plan B. Internet / G11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 23, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 23, 2007 Could someone on HN maybe run a regular ping(preferably long) and then run this ping in the background---> ping yahoo.com -t -l 800 What that does is it puts the system under a load thus if HN is like Wildblue(used to be) the pings will improve whenever it is under a load. But if somebody would do that for me it would be greatly appreciated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fikester Posted January 24, 2007 CID Share Posted January 24, 2007 Pings did not improve while the other ping run in the background for me. Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1629ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1530ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1748ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1907ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1578ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1829ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1568ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1608ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1518ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1590ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1827ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1500ms TTL=51 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1798ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1577ms TTL=52 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1567ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1958ms TTL=53 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=800 time=1689ms TTL=52 Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135: Packets: Sent = 43, Received = 43, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 1450ms, Maximum = 2087ms, Average = 1658ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 24, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 24, 2007 Hmm...They improved for a member on the broadbandreports boards. So I guess so far it is mixed results here. Do you have a HN700s or a DW7000? Because I hear that the new HN700s's tend to get better ping times than the other modems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fikester Posted January 24, 2007 CID Share Posted January 24, 2007 DW7000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 26, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Anybody out there with a HN700S that wouldn't mind posting results? I am dieing to see if it gets better pings than the DW7000 lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fikester Posted January 26, 2007 CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Mine is not an S but here is what I have got tonight: Pinging testmy.net [67.18.179.85] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=983ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=731ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=711ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=739ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=898ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=798ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=747ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=715ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=706ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=822ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=850ms TTL=50 Reply from 67.18.179.85: bytes=32 time=710ms TTL=50 Ping statistics for 67.18.179.85: Packets: Sent = 12, Received = 12, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 706ms, Maximum = 983ms, Average = 784ms Control-C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 26, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Here is why I am thinking about getting Hughes... My ping times tonight on Wildblue: Pinging yahoo.com [216.109.112.135] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2063ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1932ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1671ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1419ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1743ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2399ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2210ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1899ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1672ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1335ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2381ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2963ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1356ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2057ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1669ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1600ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2129ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2269ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2012ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1148ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1749ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1267ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2227ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1492ms TTL=46 Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=2026ms TTL=46 Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135: Packets: Sent = 25, Received = 25, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 1148ms, Maximum = 2963ms, Average = 1867ms Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted January 26, 2007 CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Wont that mean all new equipment again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 26, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Wont that mean all new equipment again? Unfortunately yes, but if this does not get better soon I can not live with these ping times. This takes what little ounce of gaming I had and flushes it down the toilet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fikester Posted January 26, 2007 CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 are the pings like that on all the WB beams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siryak Posted January 26, 2007 Author CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 are the pings like that on all the WB beams? Beam 40 is worse than normal for some reason tonight. But all of the beams are averaging at a minimum of 1100-1300ms. It has been like this since November. No matter what time of the day you will never average below 1100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommie gorman Posted January 26, 2007 CID Share Posted January 26, 2007 Probably just a lot of traffic. 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.