Comcast and Net Speed Tests 290
JimDaGeek writes "I recently moved to Columbia, SC where I have Time Warner as my cable ISP and pay for an 8 Mbps connection and have been very happy with the service, speed, and reliability. In contrast I have heard bad things about Comcast. So now that I am up in the Philadelphia PA area visiting my parents, I decided to test out the speed and reliability using the Speakeasy speed test. The results surprised me. Here are the reported download speeds in Kbps: New York, 18,946; Washington, 15,821; Atlanta, 11,257; Chicago, 10,042; San Francisco, 4,230. What is going on? I know my father is not paying for a 10+ Mbps connection. Is Comcast giving priority to popular speed-test sites?" From Comcast's site, in the Philadelphia area they seem to offer download speeds of 6 or 8 Mbps, with an option for a "PowerBoost" to 12 Mbps on large files. This wouldn't explain the results JimDaGeek got of almost 19 Mbps down.
Update: 07/10 12:07 GMT by KD : A friend in Massachusetts had a tree fall on his house. The Comcast guy who reconnected the lines told him that they are boosting the line speed to 20 Mbps down / 2 Mbps up in certain areas to be more competitive with Verizon FiOS.
Update: 07/10 12:07 GMT by KD : A friend in Massachusetts had a tree fall on his house. The Comcast guy who reconnected the lines told him that they are boosting the line speed to 20 Mbps down / 2 Mbps up in certain areas to be more competitive with Verizon FiOS.
SpeedTest.net (Score:5, Informative)
Re:SpeedTest.net (Score:5, Informative)
One big transfer != bandwidth capabilities.
Give me 100-500 smaller files with smaller ACK going back. that gives you a real test that will show latency and jitter.
also check many different ports. Port 80 get's priority. Ports above 8000 get lower priority. Ports for Voip are screwed with hard.
REAL BANDWITH TEST (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Great app.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:SpeedTest.net (Score:5, Insightful)
Time of day? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Time of day? (Score:5, Insightful)
Already we juggle the factors of location, "paid for speed", shared bandwidth issues with daytime or peak traffic.. but then without some kind of neutrality we'd also be juggling whether or not the interconnects between yourself and the test site are all on a higher priority or lower priority pipe.(something we could never know)
Today your ISP can blame a bit of the slowdowns on network conditions, but ultimately it's obvious if your ISP is a slower provider.. but in the future they'll be able to knowingly serve you slow speeds while claiming it's just the low-priority sites you may be visiting.
Re: (Score:2)
There is already significant throttling going on, why wouldn't they prioritize some traffic very highly, simply cache the site and show your last mile bandwidth.
Totally underhanded, but these are fooking telecos
Re:Time of day? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Time of day? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course the internet traverses shared lines. That's practically the point of the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
True, however, it is always easier (and less expensive) to add additional capacity in a central office than it is for a cable company to add more lines within a bottlenecked neighborhood.
Re:Time of day? (Score:5, Interesting)
Cable might be like taking a bus to the station. There might be other people there. However, its not that significant.
Dsl is like taking your car or a cab to the station. It definitely is not a shared ride into the station.
The one thing that happens is that everyone gets off of there rides, and they all take the train out. Pretty much at the same speed.
Of course during that time of the day there are many people on the internet, so it won't matter what you are using. Its somewhat insignificant how 'slow' it is. The only thing that kills the dsl is how far away you are from the office. Thats pretty wild. The thing is that you can get speed tests from eith side of the country or even planet. So even if it isnt the rush hour here, it will be elsewhere.
Thats why I think most dsl ads are so misleading.
Re: (Score:2)
Cable might be like taking a bus to the station. There might be other people there. However, its not that significant.
Unless your bus is, say, giving away free money/crack/heroin/whatever and starting in a high-density housing project. Then it would be a ride like my former.
In Chicago, Comcast acquired their monopoly from several other smaller cable companies. The one I had apparently had some pretty sleazy workings- the cable modem appeared to be in some sort of bridge mode, as I could see ARP requests from other modems. For one weekend, I counted over two thousand unique MAC addresses worth of ARP requests.
And the type
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I'm a schemer. This is also academic, since I'm on DSL
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Time of day? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Time of day? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Time of day? (Score:5, Funny)
Dude, a T3 would be almost as expensive as just buying all those CDs and movies.
:)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The door to the lab bursts open, and a couple techs started methodically checking port labels on all 69 of the PCs, then started checking the Macs. (I was on a Mac 'cause those were the only machines t
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
this is because even if programs aren't using bandwidth networks use a csma/cd "carrier sense multiple access with collision detection" setup where, simply put, if someone is transmitting on the line, you back off and wait to transmit.
While that's technically in the Ethernet standard, you don't see it much--if at all--with switched networks, and even less with networks with decent switches that hold packets in a queue. Switches and routers aim to eliminate that kind of inefficiency.
Re: (Score:2)
Thats why DSL and Fiber (okay, that one is obvious) are always better technologies than cable for last mile, no matter how much bandwidth you throw at it. Unless you're Verizon, and don't add another T to the DSLAM until you have a higher churn rate
Giving Comcast Props (Score:3, Informative)
That's in the Denver region using both speedtest.net and DSL tools.
Give credit where it's due, but Comcast does appear to be amping up the bandwidth hugely.
Between this and the Zimbra announcement, Comcast has firmly passed Qwest as next to last evil corporation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
How do I do it? Well, I suppose I'm just used to it. I'd say I use Opera to cope, as it's such a snappy, efficient browser, but I've been using Opera for at least eight years (version 3.something), since before the Internet was bloated, so I guess that doesn't count. I do set the Opera caches to their maximum sizes to minimize the horror of redownloading the static content of w
Re: (Score:2)
I have Comcrud. They bought out my local cable company years ago and raised rates, trashed service, capped the internet speeds, and all sorts of other fun stuff. I have something like a 6 mbps connection if you listen to them. I've seen it up as high as a little over 1 mbps (from speed tests and such). As it is now, every speed test I can find is maxing out at about 300 kbps down and 350 kbps up, which is what I was getting hours ago when this story first hit the firehose.
Jerks.
I love monopolies. My only
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When I was on Comcast (actually, come to think of it, I think I am here too), I usually got speeds right around what was advertised. Hell, I got a speed boost when they took over Adelphia.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've had Comcast and I found their download speeds to be quite usable and the occasionally help of burst speeds like you mentioned is nice as well. However, their home service is still only available with 40kB/s (320kbps) upload bandwidth which is shit. And to make things worse, it seems that the more of that upload bandwidth you use, t
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I have Comcast (8/768) in Cole Valley, San Francisco, and I have also noticed the speed increase. Uploads to my website are now cruising at 140kb/sec, occasionally dropping to 90kb/s. No complaints here! I performed a dslreports speed test recently and it also reported some Korean or Scandanavian-class bandwith numbers - the highest I've certainly ever seen in my time with broadband.
Second - it's my understanding that as you saturate the uplink connection (max out uploading a file) on a consumer-
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually you're absolutely right. Any TCP (connection based) protocol will suffer from a saturated uplink to the point where it can become unusable depending
Re: (Score:2)
It could just be that they are using QoS and Packet Shaping to speed up connections to these 'test sites'. Allowing for 'bursty' traffic to break formal limits for 5, 10 or even 60 seconds a test takes. This makes people happy going 'Hey cool I'm getting X-speed here when I'm only paying for Y-speed'. A customer placebo if you will.
That is the problem with net neutrality not being respected by ISPs, they can engage in these sorts of behaviors without anyone knowing if they're g
Re: (Score:2)
Caching? (Score:2)
As long as it isn't special treatment for the test sites, it is hard to blame Comcast for the speed boost.
Re: (Score:2)
I got a massive bandwidth increase for about a month right after Comcast took over Adelphia and started blocking bit-torrent. So don't get too excited, they're just using the increased bandwidth to hide the fact they're breaking your service somewhere else.
Re: (Score:2)
I have seen fairly consistent rates in Silicon Valley (San Jose) of 14-19Mbps on Comcast's basic Internet service.
Only 1.5Mbps up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have also seen slow ssh speeds to my work LAN, yet when I go via an external server, the ssh speed is much better.
Who cares about peak rates? (Score:2)
When they work on reliability, up-stream, and price, then maybe they'll deserve some "props". For now, Fios is kicking their ass up and down the block. Even these theoretical burst rates can't compete, plus Fios is cheaper and more reliable. Sorry Comcast.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The speed test reported 21,499Kbps down and 601Kbps up.
Re: (Score:2)
Good Speeds (Score:2)
Well thank god we still have TW in Raleigh (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
rather nice if you really have that (Score:2)
374 KB, especially if "rock solid" (no VoIP dropouts unless you go above, low latency, reliable 24x7 operation) is great.
probably not fibbing (Score:2)
DOCSIS 2.0 Plus (Score:4, Informative)
Here is a current snapshot:
[speedtest.net]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I recently upgraded my 5 Mbps TW cable connection to 8 Mbps for an extra $10/month. Within 1 minute or so, I had the faster speed. When I called they just asked me for the MAC address on my cable modem.
Well... (Score:2)
Tell whatever client you're using to go all out.
If they block it, use Jidgo to download ALL of Debian (but that only tests download, not upload).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
PowerBoost uses compression (Score:3, Interesting)
not compression (Score:2)
Probably they just allocate an extra (second or third) channel to you on demand, maybe with something to keep you from having it continuously.
PowerBoost (Score:5, Interesting)
Faking performance? (Score:2)
In contrast I have heard bad things about Comcast. So now that I am up in the Philadelphia PA area visiting my parents, I decided to test out the speed and reliability using the Speakeasy speed test.
I've seen the same thing in the other Comcast markets (but not all over). What would it take for Comcast to throttle all traffic except that going through Speakeasy's "speedtest" IPs? I'm imagine very little, and it likely could make some people feel good about Comcast's performance. That's not to suggest that Comcast is actually faking it - I'm just saying that it could be done. Clearly, Comcast wouldn't do this - it'd be a stupid risk for them.
In any case, maximum download throughput is only a part o
Re: (Score:2)
I swear to God (Score:2)
They said they were doing some kind of trial in my area, and that it would end.
Well, it did end, and I went back down to a max performanc
Download a linux distro (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Someone above mentioned using jigdo to get all of debian, but even using wget to get a full dvd or cd set of some distro will provide you with a good data point.
I beg to differ. Downloading a single file is only indicative of how fast a particular connection is between two particular points. P2P, if it's allowed to, saturates the network with two-way traffic to numerous end points. If - and this is a big if - there were no constraints on P2P traffic at large on our networks, I would consider it a near ideal measure of TCP traffic capacity in the real world.
In fairness to your comment, you characterised that single download as a 'data point'. Strictly speaking,
In Bay Area try Apple.com (Score:2)
Comcast in Washington DC (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Speedtest.net tested against Frederick, MD ~13Mb down.
Sites just a little further away, such as Ohio, give me ~5Mb down.
Too bad Comcast doesn't do much for the upload (Score:2)
Mysterious speeds (Score:2)
Ok... and now try with the cache disabled.
Just kidding...
Seriously though, I think he's probably clicked one of those "Click here to make your internet faster" ads... I knew it they work!
Do It Yourself (Score:3, Insightful)
All you've got to do is fire up a shell (whether Windows, Linux, or other client OS), and download a big (>10MB) file while timing it. Find an HTML link to a video or something, then download it from the shell (eg. wget or curl in Linux) to a local directory. Watch the minutes and seconds from when you first connect (right after you give the command, after you get the download feedback), to when the file is complete. Then examine (eg. ls on Linux, or use your GUI file manager) the file for its exact size in bytes, then divide the time by the size.
I know this seems obvious, but distrusting Speakeasy's numbers as cooked by Comcast shouldn't be the last act before punting to Slashdot. Real tests, not just examples like Speakeasy, are trivial to run by yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Under linux: time wget "url_of_file_you_want_to_time.iso"
Why do the math when there's a program ready to do it for you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you've found a server whose bandwidth is lower than yours.
Also, 10MB is not big enough for a reliable test. I'll arbitrarily say 200MB minimum for a fair test.
-:sigma.SB
Initial speed bursts (Score:2)
Perhaps something like this accounts for the Speakeasy.net results.
Lots of factors... (Score:4, Informative)
To name a few:
If you're not happy with your service, CALL THEM. My parents were some of the first people to get MediaOne service back around '98-'99, and every time they had problems, we picked up the phone, and it was taken care of.
I've had the same experience elsewhere. Any time I have problem with the service, be it regular disconnects or lousy performance- I pick up the phone, and a few minutes later someone is checking into signal to noise ratios and such. If you lease the modem, they're usually happy to try sending out a tech and swapping out a modem if you're polite but clear there's a problem. They're usually even more amenable if you pick up the modem yourself at a "service center."
In my years as a customer and having friends who were customers, I've seen a)flooded junction boxes b)in-house distribution amps turned up too high c)1 failed modem d)one buggy model e)several incompatible modems after "upgrades" to the area network (usually to support faster speeds.)
In short: call comcast, ask them to look into it. They've almost always been helpful, through all the various company changes: MediaOne, RoadRunner, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In short: call comcast, ask them to look into it. They've almost always been helpful, through all the various company changes: MediaOne, RoadRunner, etc.
As someone who used to work for Comcast allow me to say rotflmao. Either you are one lucky sob or you are lying.
Just as a matter of example (one among many) during the entire nine months I worked for Comcast the entire state of Illinois never left the outage board. That isn't to say that no one in Illinois ever had a connection, but many people had little or no connection and we were under instruction to do absolutely nothing for anyone from Illinois - just keep BSing them till they gave up.
Some more info (Score:2)
Using the speedtest.net [speedtest.net] site that was posted above, I am getting all kinds of different results.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP_Tuning [wikipedia.org]
That is why you get slower speeds the farther out you go, even assuming every link in between is not congested.
Also, most of what you post there is explained by powerboost - very fast downloads for the first few seconds, then they throttle it back. If you ran a sustained download (g
Re: (Score:2)
20 Meg Cable Modems Practical Since 1999. (Score:5, Informative)
Comcast and cable suppliers are working on several techniques to allow customers to get more than the 6 or 8 meg typically allocated, while not causing undue congestion. "Speed burst" technology tests the network load, and if uncongested temporarily raises the speed of an individual modem making a fast download for a brief period. While that's marketed as "doubling" speeds to 12 and 16 megabits, bursts to 20 and 25 megabits are also practical.
The new technologies require upgraded equipment and are typically being tested first and then rolled out market by market. So it would be no surprise if a subscriber in Philadelphia (Comcast's home town) is benefiting from a test or early deployment of faster speeds than Comcast customers elsewhere.
100 megabit+ (shared) cable modems are being deployed in Japan, Quebec, and France, bonding 3 or 4 35 megabit channels for higher speeds. These are early "DOCSIS 3.0" products, unlikely to be widely deployed in the U.S. until 2009. Comcast's CEO, Brian Roberts, demonstrated 100 megabits at the cable show in Las Vegas this spring, and will probably test widely in 2008 and go into deployment (especially where Verizon is building FIOS) the following year. DOCSIS 3.0 requires a new cable modem unit, however, so this customer is unlikely to be an early tester.
That doesn't explain why the test to San Francisco only ran at 4 megabits, which could be explained by node congestion a few minutes later, inferior Comcast backbone connections to Speakeasy's host in San Francisco, or other circumstances. For more details on coming faster cable modems, google DOCSIS 3.0.
Dave Burstein
Editor, DSL Prime
They are up to it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I tested my comcast 6 MB with and got 1.2 MB., but With speakeasy, it ranges from 8-12 download. It is obvious that they are selectively caching. [bandwidthplace.com]
Who are you connecting to? For a while, I had a 60 Meg connection at work. DSL speed tests witht the graph bar were fun to print out an post. With a speedy connection at work, I could easly find ISP's and webhosts with serious connection problems. Many things pop up like they are on my local hard drive. Other things load like dia
The results are erratic (Score:2)
I did several consecutive speed tests last year (I'm on Comcast in Sacramento), and the results were erratic at best.
Over the course of about an hour, 20 tests said my bandwidth ranged between 3Mbps and 24Mbps (all to the same server, average was about 9Mbps), and I pay for 8Mbps.
In a word, it's Comcastic!
Adelphia to Comtrash (Score:2)
LanSpeed (Score:2)
I remember that when I had Comcast, my network traffic was pretty constant -- even if I wasn't doing anything! When I switched to a DSL line, that all stopped. I never did figure out what all the Comcast traffic was about.
Anyway, you can find LanSpeed at .htm [chello.nl] It is a fun little utility but, ag
http://members.chello.nl/~m.vanosta/orcasoft/index
Comcast is fast... (Score:2)
amazing (Score:2)
Hey, I can't stand Comcast as much as the next poor customer (probably more, since I used to work at @Home, which was killed by these damn cable companies) but give be a break, they have actually done something that benefits the average customer (give them huge initial download bandwidth to make web browsing FAST, but e
SuddenLink (Score:2)
Value Propositions (Score:2)
In quality of service terms, you put allocations in the QOS table but you let lower tiers "borrow" from higher tiers when t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Steeb upped his speed, so up yours!
sounds like channel allocation (Score:2)
There are extra channels. When you have a really big download, the cable system will give you exclusive use of one of these extra channels if there is one available. You thus get really high speed.