PDA

View Full Version : Cable modem BB Speed issue


smucks
29-09-2006, 00:25
Hi all and grab a coffee here's a long one

I have BB and a cable modem no TV only the phone.

I long while ago I moved from the old 2 meg connection on to the 10 meg, this was done due to being able to have a free trial of one month.

During this one month trial period the speed was very good with 9.6 meg total download speed and 487KB/s total up load speed and there was no problems at all so I stayed with the 10 meg.

But on month two I found that my download speed would drop to "at times to under a meg yes total download speed of under a meg" but the upload was still 487KB/s.

Whilst doing various tests I found that while downloading MSN I would only get on average between 100KB/s to 500KB/s instead of between 900KB/s and 1MB/s.

This has been going on now for quite a few months one minute the connection is brill and the next total rubbish.

I have called the Tech help line quite a number of times and have had more arguments with them due to them trying to blame my PC/Network Card etc etc.

But I have two PC's and both have different operating systems and both are maintained by myself as I used to work as a service engineer in a shop for just over two years.

I have had two engineers visit me the first about a month ago who checked the signal levels and found them to be way down on what they should be, he then corrected that and tested the connection on his laptop.

Which was found to be very slow and of poor speed.

He then changed my old 120 modem for one of those new blue ones.
Again he tested the connection and still found it to be the same. He then asked me to check the connect again in a couple of hours to see if there's any change and then left.

After checking the speed I found it to be the same and gave the Tech's another ring this then ended up in the Tech support person saying
"that the engineer should not have left the connection in the state that it was and he should have resolved the issue"

Then he asked me to do various tests and again they tried to blame my PC and hardware which then lead to another shouting match and me asking to be put through to disconnections as I at that moment just about had a belly full of pass the buck after all that would mean that the engineers laptop had a fault too!.

Disconnections listerned to my complaint and asked me to hold the line, after a short space of time they said
"look we have various amounts of staff in the call centers could I please put you through to another Tech support because it clearly sounds like the one you have spoken as not listerned to what you was telling them".

I agreed but after being put through I found that the Tech did not seem to know what he was doing he was asking me to use cmd but the commands he asked me to type in would not have worked due to he totally missed asking me to type "/" after asking to type ipconfig and he wanted me to release my IP address he was asking me to type "ipconfig release" and then because the comand would not work he said you have a problem with your PC.

I am sorry but I just exploded at him and told him that if he had asked me to type the "/" in the comand would have worked and that its not my PC at fault its the lack of knowledge between your ears thats missing and could you put me onto some one else has it is clear that you do not know what your are doing and therefor can not resolve my issue.

I was then put on hold and the phone went dead.

After a few days called Tech support again and this time found that the person knew what they was doing and advised me that I was on the wrong UBR and that he would move me onto the correct one after some tests and fiddling at his end the connection was back up to full speed.

That was until two days ago I notice it had dropped to under a meg again, another call to Tech support. I explained that the connect has been ok for about two weeks and then its gone belly up again.

He did a few tests and found that he needed to speak to another higher level of tech support of which he did and after a quite a few more tests he basically put me onto the higher level tech and another engineer was ordered for today.

The engineer arrived found a problem with the cable coming into the house and replaced the cable on the outside and inside of the house. But after doing a few tests again the connection was found to be still down but better then it was with a whopping down load spead of 5 meg on average.
He explained that it would be now back to Tech support to see if they can do anything.

So after spending about one and a half hours on the phone I then was told that the problem again could be my PC but after explaining I have done a fresh install and checked my PC I was told that the next level of engineer would be a networking one to vistit me. Which I have to call back today to confirm a date.

After speaking to the Tech support I asked to be put through to customer services to try and ask for some kind of help also. I explained the problem fully and then was told that the only thing they could do was to down grade me to the 4 meg connection and that they would give 3 months at half price.
Which does not even come close to the amounts I have paid for the 10 meg connection for which I was then told they would do a second 3 months a half price and again that does not add to the cost and problems I have been having.

So I am now here and I would like any advise that any one can give me also is there a direct way to complain to NTL other the letter as I know from previous experiance the letters do not go answered.

I know I can get the full 10 meg as I have had it for a complete month without any problems so there must be a technical problem somewhere down the line why this have gone belly up.

Just one last thing to add since having the cable replaced I have noticed that my connection speed is up and down like no bodies buisness with speeds ranging from 5 meg to speeds of 10 meg and never a constant or average speed.

I am sorry this is long winded but I am at the point of cancelling both phone and broadband and going BT and Pipex. I do not want to go the BT route but if thats the only option open then I will.

---------- Post added at 23:25 ---------- Previous post was at 23:06 ----------

Just to add my signal levels


Cable Modem Downstream

Downstream Lock : Locked
Downstream Channel Id : 2
Downstream Frequency : 586750000 Hz
Downstream Modulation : QAM64
Downstream Symbol Rate : 6952 Ksym/sec
Downstream Interleave Depth : taps12Increment17
Downstream Receive Power Level : -2.6 dBmV
Downstream SNR : 34.8 dB


Cable Modem Upstream

Upstream Lock : Locked
Upstream Channel ID : 4
Upstream Frequency : 46400000 Hz
Upstream Modulation : QPSK
Upstream Symbol Rate : 2560 Ksym/sec
Upstream transmit Power Level : 44.0 dBmV
Upstream Mini-Slot Size : 2


And log

First Time Last Time Counts Level ID Text
Thu Sep 28 17:51:49 2006 Thu Sep 28 17:51:49 2006 1 Warning(5) 68010300 DHCP RENEW WARNING - Field invalid in response
Time Not Established Time Not Established 2 Critical(3) 68000300 DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
Thu Sep 28 15:13:01 2006 Thu Sep 28 15:13:01 2006 1 Critical(3) 82000400 Received Response to Broadcast Maintenance Request, But no Un...
Time Not Established Time Not Established 12 Critical(3) 68000300 DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
Time Not Established Time Not Established 57 Critical(3) 68000100 DHCP FAILED - Discover sent, no offer received
Time Not Established Time Not Established 3 Critical(3) 68000300 DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
Thu Sep 07 13:23:42 2006 Thu Sep 07 13:23:42 2006 1 Critical(3) 82000400 Received Response to Broadcast Maintenance Request, But no Un...
Time Not Established Time Not Established 4 Critical(3) 68000300 DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
Time Not Established Time Not Established 2 Critical(3) 82000200 No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out
Time Not Established Time Not Established 1 Critical(3) 68000300 DHCP WARNING - Non-critical field invalid in response.
Time Not Established Time Not Established 4 Critical(3) 82000200 No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out
Time Not Established Time Not Established 1 Critical(3) 82000500 Started Unicast Maintenance Ranging - No Response received - ...
Time Not Established Time Not Established 2 Critical(3) 82000200 No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out
Time Not Established Time Not Established 1 Critical(3) 82000700 Unicast Ranging Received Abort Response - Re- initializing MAC
Time Not Established Time Not Established 2 Critical(3) 82000200 No Ranging Response received - T3 time-out
Time Not Established Time Not Established 867 Critical(3) 84000200 SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire FEC f...
Time Not Established Time Not Established 4761 Critical(3) 84000100 SYNC Timing Synchronization failure - Failed to acquire QAM/Q...

smucks
29-09-2006, 16:34
couple of speed tests


Fri, 29 Sep 2006 15:30:39 UTC

1st 512K took 625 ms = 819.2 KB/sec, approx 6750 Kbps, 6.59 Mbps
2nd 512K took 2922 ms = 175.2 KB/sec, approx 1444 Kbps, 1.41 Mbps
3rd 512K took 844 ms = 606.6 KB/sec, approx 4998 Kbps, 4.88 Mbps
4th 512K took 2437 ms = 210.1 KB/sec, approx 1731 Kbps, 1.69 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 3731 Kbps, 3.64 Mbps


Fri, 29 Sep 2006 15:33:02 UTC

1st 512K took 1640 ms = 312.2 KB/sec, approx 2573 Kbps, 2.51 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1688 ms = 303.3 KB/sec, approx 2499 Kbps, 2.44 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1156 ms = 442.9 KB/sec, approx 3649 Kbps, 3.56 Mbps
4th 512K took 844 ms = 606.6 KB/sec, approx 4998 Kbps, 4.88 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 3430 Kbps, 3.35 Mbps


Fri, 29 Sep 2006 15:33:27 UTC

1st 512K took 781 ms = 655.6 KB/sec, approx 5402 Kbps, 5.28 Mbps
2nd 512K took 672 ms = 761.9 KB/sec, approx 6278 Kbps, 6.13 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1234 ms = 414.9 KB/sec, approx 3419 Kbps, 3.34 Mbps
4th 512K took 688 ms = 744.2 KB/sec, approx 6132 Kbps, 5.99 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 5308 Kbps, 5.19 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 15:33:44 UTC

1st 512K took 734 ms = 697.5 KB/sec, approx 5747 Kbps, 5.61 Mbps
2nd 512K took 2078 ms = 246.4 KB/sec, approx 2030 Kbps, 1.98 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1047 ms = 489 KB/sec, approx 4029 Kbps, 3.93 Mbps
4th 512K took 1078 ms = 475 KB/sec, approx 3914 Kbps, 3.82 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 3930 Kbps, 3.84 Mbps

smucks
29-09-2006, 20:56
Well I have just been in contact with Tech support again and they claim there is nothing wrong with my connection even though the speed is up and down like a yo yo.

Basically during a download test file I was asked what was the download speed, well I answered its going up and down from 500KB/s up to 900KB/s and at times it went below the 500KB/s.

I was then told that there is nothing wrong with my modem and connection speed.

I then said so its classed as ok for the speed to drop to levels of under 5meg which I was told again that there is nothing wrong with my connection speed.

Then I asked to be put back through to customer services and I asked for all credits that have been placed on the account to be removed due to I am not accepting the situation as it is being that I am not getting the correct 10 meg speed, I was then told "well we advertise the product as up to".

Sorry NTL you have a complaint gone to the adverting standards ASA and on the 2nd of October you will also have a complaint going through Ofcom I would do it sooner but they are doing upgrades to their server.

I will be then taking my custom else where.:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

---------- Post added at 20:23 ---------- Previous post was at 20:13 ----------

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:18:19 UTC

1st 512K took 610 ms = 839.3 KB/sec, approx 6916 Kbps, 6.75 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1203 ms = 425.6 KB/sec, approx 3507 Kbps, 3.42 Mbps
3rd 512K took 484 ms = 1057.9 KB/sec, approx 8717 Kbps, 8.51 Mbps
4th 512K took 719 ms = 712.1 KB/sec, approx 5868 Kbps, 5.73 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 6252 Kbps, 6.1 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:18:42 UTC

1st 512K took 641 ms = 798.8 KB/sec, approx 6582 Kbps, 6.43 Mbps
2nd 512K took 687 ms = 745.3 KB/sec, approx 6141 Kbps, 6 Mbps
3rd 512K took 875 ms = 585.1 KB/sec, approx 4821 Kbps, 4.71 Mbps
4th 512K took 953 ms = 537.3 KB/sec, approx 4427 Kbps, 4.32 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 5493 Kbps, 5.37 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:19:02 UTC

1st 512K took 1656 ms = 309.2 KB/sec, approx 2548 Kbps, 2.49 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1188 ms = 431 KB/sec, approx 3551 Kbps, 3.47 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1187 ms = 431.3 KB/sec, approx 3554 Kbps, 3.47 Mbps
4th 512K took 781 ms = 655.6 KB/sec, approx 5402 Kbps, 5.28 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 3764 Kbps, 3.68 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:19:19 UTC

1st 512K took 1234 ms = 414.9 KB/sec, approx 3419 Kbps, 3.34 Mbps
2nd 512K took 688 ms = 744.2 KB/sec, approx 6132 Kbps, 5.99 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1687 ms = 303.5 KB/sec, approx 2501 Kbps, 2.44 Mbps
4th 512K took 594 ms = 862 KB/sec, approx 7103 Kbps, 6.94 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 4789 Kbps, 4.68 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:19:39 UTC

1st 512K took 516 ms = 992.2 KB/sec, approx 8176 Kbps, 7.98 Mbps
2nd 512K took 594 ms = 862 KB/sec, approx 7103 Kbps, 6.94 Mbps
3rd 512K took 531 ms = 964.2 KB/sec, approx 7945 Kbps, 7.76 Mbps
4th 512K took 687 ms = 745.3 KB/sec, approx 6141 Kbps, 6 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 7341 Kbps, 7.17 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:19:53 UTC

1st 512K took 984 ms = 520.3 KB/sec, approx 4287 Kbps, 4.19 Mbps
2nd 512K took 782 ms = 654.7 KB/sec, approx 5395 Kbps, 5.27 Mbps
3rd 512K took 703 ms = 728.3 KB/sec, approx 6001 Kbps, 5.86 Mbps
4th 512K took 1062 ms = 482.1 KB/sec, approx 3973 Kbps, 3.88 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 4914 Kbps, 4.8 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:20:17 UTC

1st 512K took 1391 ms = 368.1 KB/sec, approx 3033 Kbps, 2.96 Mbps
2nd 512K took 656 ms = 780.5 KB/sec, approx 6431 Kbps, 6.28 Mbps
3rd 512K took 578 ms = 885.8 KB/sec, approx 7299 Kbps, 7.13 Mbps
4th 512K took 672 ms = 761.9 KB/sec, approx 6278 Kbps, 6.13 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 5760 Kbps, 5.63 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:20:33 UTC

1st 512K took 1360 ms = 376.5 KB/sec, approx 3102 Kbps, 3.03 Mbps
2nd 512K took 656 ms = 780.5 KB/sec, approx 6431 Kbps, 6.28 Mbps
3rd 512K took 2812 ms = 182.1 KB/sec, approx 1501 Kbps, 1.47 Mbps
4th 512K took 3500 ms = 146.3 KB/sec, approx 1206 Kbps, 1.18 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 3060 Kbps, 2.99 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:20:53 UTC

1st 512K took 3282 ms = 156 KB/sec, approx 1285 Kbps, 1.25 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1281 ms = 399.7 KB/sec, approx 3294 Kbps, 3.22 Mbps
3rd 512K took 640 ms = 800 KB/sec, approx 6592 Kbps, 6.44 Mbps
4th 512K took 625 ms = 819.2 KB/sec, approx 6750 Kbps, 6.59 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 4480 Kbps, 4.38 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:21:14 UTC

1st 512K took 1594 ms = 321.2 KB/sec, approx 2647 Kbps, 2.58 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1406 ms = 364.2 KB/sec, approx 3001 Kbps, 2.93 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1906 ms = 268.6 KB/sec, approx 2213 Kbps, 2.16 Mbps
4th 512K took 2531 ms = 202.3 KB/sec, approx 1667 Kbps, 1.63 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 2382 Kbps, 2.33 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:21:46 UTC

1st 512K took 594 ms = 862 KB/sec, approx 7103 Kbps, 6.94 Mbps
2nd 512K took 797 ms = 642.4 KB/sec, approx 5293 Kbps, 5.17 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1156 ms = 442.9 KB/sec, approx 3649 Kbps, 3.56 Mbps
4th 512K took 1172 ms = 436.9 KB/sec, approx 3600 Kbps, 3.52 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 4911 Kbps, 4.8 Mbps

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:22:11 UTC

1st 512K took 1328 ms = 385.5 KB/sec, approx 3177 Kbps, 3.1 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1469 ms = 348.5 KB/sec, approx 2872 Kbps, 2.8 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1797 ms = 284.9 KB/sec, approx 2348 Kbps, 2.29 Mbps
4th 512K took 2265 ms = 226 KB/sec, approx 1862 Kbps, 1.82 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 2565 Kbps, 2.5 Mbps

And the above is supposed to be a good solid mega fast 10 Meg NTL connection what a load of old tripe:td: :td: :td: :td: :td:

---------- Post added at 20:56 ---------- Previous post was at 20:23 ----------

Last two speed tests at random

Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:22:11 UTC

1st 512K took 1328 ms = 385.5 KB/sec, approx 3177 Kbps, 3.1 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1469 ms = 348.5 KB/sec, approx 2872 Kbps, 2.8 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1797 ms = 284.9 KB/sec, approx 2348 Kbps, 2.29 Mbps
4th 512K took 2265 ms = 226 KB/sec, approx 1862 Kbps, 1.82 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 2565 Kbps, 2.5 Mbps




Fri, 29 Sep 2006 19:53:51 UTC

1st 512K took 1031 ms = 496.6 KB/sec, approx 4092 Kbps, 4 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1172 ms = 436.9 KB/sec, approx 3600 Kbps, 3.52 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1172 ms = 436.9 KB/sec, approx 3600 Kbps, 3.52 Mbps
4th 512K took 1125 ms = 455.1 KB/sec, approx 3750 Kbps, 3.66 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 3761 Kbps, 3.68 Mbps


Total CRAP

smucks
30-09-2006, 14:05
Sat, 30 Sep 2006 12:49:49 UTC

1st 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps
2nd 512K took 422 ms = 1213.3 KB/sec, approx 9998 Kbps, 9.76 Mbps
3rd 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
4th 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9570 Kbps, 9.34 Mbps

Sat, 30 Sep 2006 12:50:38 UTC

1st 512K took 469 ms = 1091.7 KB/sec, approx 8996 Kbps, 8.79 Mbps
2nd 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps
3rd 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps
4th 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9314 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps

Sat, 30 Sep 2006 12:50:56 UTC

1st 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
2nd 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps
3rd 512K took 422 ms = 1213.3 KB/sec, approx 9998 Kbps, 9.76 Mbps
4th 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9735 Kbps, 9.51 Mbps

Sat, 30 Sep 2006 12:51:18 UTC

1st 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps
2nd 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
3rd 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps
4th 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9478 Kbps, 9.25 Mbps

Looks like someone has been playing with a big hammer and no phone call to say "oh sorry we found the fault"

monkey2468
30-09-2006, 14:23
Looking at the times you did the tests, it looks much more like congestion at peak times.

smucks
30-09-2006, 14:55
Looking at the times you did the tests, it looks much more like congestion at peak times.

I have been doing tests since the 27/9/06 at all times of the day and even early hours of the morning and without filling this entire thread with all the results I find that now the connection is the bests been for a long time.

27/9/06 thats when I noticed again my speed was not up to scratch so the only comment I can think of is this.

Two engineers one upped the signal level from the box after finding a fault there, still not resolved and then replaced the cable modem, still not resolved (after testing on his laptop) call to tech support and still not resolved.

The second engineer found a problem with the cable coming into the house and replaced the cable on the outside of the house and inside the house connecting to the modem (unable to test on his laptop due to needing to recharge the battery) so tested on one of the PC's in the house and found the connection was slightly better but the speed was up and down like a yo yo. A call to support and tech support and the matter still not resolved.

After reading Bill C's entire thread last off last night and doing more tests after he had found his connection up to scratch I then find the same with my connection not dropping below 9.3 meg last night and today not dropping below 9 meg and mostly holding a steady connection of 9.3 meg.

Conclussion
Yes two faults identified on my connection one being the signal level from the box and the second a faulty cable the third was TRAFFIC SHAPING which apparently neither support or tech support and the neither did the engineers know about and so left them blaming my PC!
This would account for the previous months of slowed connection speeds due to the faulty cable on signal levels and after that in recent weeks the TRAFFIC SHAPING causing the unidentified problem with the connection and so again leaving them to blame my PC!.....

Total time wasted on the phone trying to resolve the issue this week nearly 5 hours.

smucks
30-09-2006, 19:56
Just to add some speed tests taken today just to who ever has fixed this issue thank you who ever created the issue pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft

On Microsoft a file download now stays at between 1.0MB/s and 1.2MB/s


Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:09:45 UTC

1st 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
2nd 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps
3rd 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
4th 512K took 454 ms = 1127.8 KB/sec, approx 9293 Kbps, 9.08 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9559 Kbps, 9.34 Mbps


Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:10:06 UTC

1st 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps
2nd 512K took 469 ms = 1091.7 KB/sec, approx 8996 Kbps, 8.79 Mbps
3rd 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
4th 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9399 Kbps, 9.18 Mbps



Sat, 30 Sep 2006 18:50:25 UTC
1st 512K took 484 ms = 1057.9 KB/sec, approx 8717 Kbps, 8.51 Mbps
2nd 512K took 422 ms = 1213.3 KB/sec, approx 9998 Kbps, 9.76 Mbps
3rd 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps
4th 512K took 422 ms = 1213.3 KB/sec, approx 9998 Kbps, 9.76 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9587 Kbps, 9.36 Mbps


Sat, 30 Sep 2006 18:50:40 UTC
1st 512K took 421 ms = 1216.2 KB/sec, approx 10021 Kbps, 9.79 Mbps
2nd 512K took 500 ms = 1024 KB/sec, approx 8438 Kbps, 8.24 Mbps
3rd 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps
4th 512K took 453 ms = 1130.2 KB/sec, approx 9313 Kbps, 9.09 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9351 Kbps, 9.13 Mbps

Sat, 30 Sep 2006 18:51:01 UTC
1st 512K took 421 ms = 1216.2 KB/sec, approx 10021 Kbps, 9.79 Mbps
2nd 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps
3rd 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
4th 512K took 438 ms = 1169 KB/sec, approx 9633 Kbps, 9.41 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 9735 Kbps, 9.51 Mbps

monkey2468
30-09-2006, 20:42
Looks good. I hope it stays like that for you. :)

smucks
30-09-2006, 21:18
Looks good. I hope it stays like that for you. :)

Me too and I hope that everyone else who had the problem is also now back up too speed.