View Full Version : Just to prove a point..
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 08:23
Now I know that speedtest sites aren't always reliable, but for the majority of the time they are - I'm so confident my broadband will slow to a fraction of what it should be this evening that I'm going to update this page throughout the day will speedtest results from www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195977715&v=2871358
19355 Down
479 Up
Right now, early in the morning speeds are good. EXCELLENT!
If anyone else would like to do the same..
---------- Post added at 08:23 ---------- Previous post was at 08:02 ----------
Twenty minutes later, STILL all working ok..
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195979240&v=2871427
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 09:29
Well I guess the bandwidth & Download whores are up already around this area:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/20.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
This is the "best" it has been for weeks, but its STILL not good enough for a 20Mb connection!! :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: :mad::mad::mad::mad:
Sunday morning, and after suffering almost none existance net last night i hoped it would be ok this morning.
Supposed to be a 4 meg connetion and im on (bagu ) and in stoke on trent st2
I will test it every half hour.
Be a good idea to state which area your in and which UBR your on.
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 09:50:44 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 10281 ms = 99.6 KB/sec, approx 821 Kbps, 0.8 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 7312 ms = 140 KB/sec, approx 1154 Kbps, 1.13 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 7360 ms = 139.1 KB/sec, approx 1146 Kbps, 1.12 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 13015 ms = 157.4 KB/sec, approx 1297 Kbps, 1.27 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1105 Kbps, 1.08 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 10:00
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195984991&v=2871870
Ohh, it's going back towards dismal again.. at just 10 am
Download Speed: 5689 kbps (711.1 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 660 kbps (82.5 KB/sec transfer rate )
vmuser027
25-11-2007, 10:08
All ok here....for now!
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195985542&v=2871934
http://www.speedtest.net/result/205654449.png
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 10:36
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/18.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 10:21 ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 ----------
I love the way, now that everything has gone slow, speedtest.net recognises it all as Virgin Media!
---------- Post added at 10:23 ---------- Previous post was at 10:21 ----------
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/19.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
---------- Post added at 10:23 ---------- Previous post was at 10:23 ----------
Very odd. Let's see what happens..
---------- Post added at 10:24 ---------- Previous post was at 10:23 ----------
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195986563&v=2872032
---------- Post added at 10:24 ---------- Previous post was at 10:24 ----------
Date of Speed Test: 2007-11-25 10:29:23
Download Speed: 18727 kbps (2340.9 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 671 kbps (83.9 KB/sec transfer rate)
Very, Very odd indeed.
---------- Post added at 10:26 ---------- Previous post was at 10:24 ----------
Does anyone else notice that upload drops noticably when the download speed increases?
---------- Post added at 10:27 ---------- Previous post was at 10:26 ----------
Anyone else confirm if their speeds have suddenly increased?
---------- Post added at 10:29 ---------- Previous post was at 10:27 ----------
Whoah! I just witnessed the most amazing display, the arrow for the speedo on the speedtest site darted all over the place from 19mb to 4mb and then it settled at 14...
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195986772&v=2872059
but just look at the upload :/ Date of Speed Test: 2007-11-25 10:32:52
Download Speed: 13919 kbps (1739.9 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 479 kbps (59.9 KB/sec transfer rate)
---------- Post added at 10:36 ---------- Previous post was at 10:29 ----------
it's so incredibly unstable (one minute it's a 1mb the next, 15mb)..how can this be simply an overcrowded network?!
speed at 10.00 sunday morning, Overall Average Speed = approx 1105 Kbps, 1.08 Mbps
Here is mine just 30 mins later than than last one.
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 10:30:45 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 26532 ms = 38.6 KB/sec, approx 318 Kbps, 0.31 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 22203 ms = 46.1 KB/sec, approx 380 Kbps, 0.37 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 38437 ms = 26.6 KB/sec, approx 219 Kbps, 0.21 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 49063 ms = 41.7 KB/sec, approx 344 Kbps, 0.34 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 315 Kbps, 0.31 Mbps
I did this test with direct connection to the modem, seems like every one up early today.
My weekend slowness and utter crapiness continues unabated.
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 10:34:11 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 9578 ms = 106.9 KB/sec, approx 881 Kbps, 0.86 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 10547 ms = 97.1 KB/sec, approx 800 Kbps, 0.78 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 7484 ms = 136.8 KB/sec, approx 1127 Kbps, 1.1 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 18578 ms = 110.2 KB/sec, approx 908 Kbps, 0.89 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 929 Kbps, 0.91 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
20 meg high speed broadband in all its glory
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 10:40
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/14.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/15.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Wow..please, please, please stay this way...
---------- Post added at 10:39 ---------- Previous post was at 10:38 ----------
Amazing variation in speed though..
---------- Post added at 10:40 ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 ----------
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 18:39:40 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 437 ms = 2343.2 KB/sec, approx 19308 Kbps, 18.86 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 422 ms = 2426.5 KB/sec, approx 19994 Kbps, 19.53 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 422 ms = 2426.5 KB/sec, approx 19994 Kbps, 19.53 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 1000 ms = 2048 KB/sec, approx 16876 Kbps, 16.48 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 19043 Kbps, 18.6 Mbps
Hmm..
Cobbydaler
25-11-2007, 10:41
I find this (http://myspeed.visualware.com/uk/index.html) is a better test site.
You can get detailed information on the quality (http://mslhr.visualware.com/myspeed/db/report?id=639126) of the connection...
Mine was up in the 17-18Mbps earlier, now its down to 3-4... :(
And this delicious speed test from speedtest.net showing 20 meg performing at it's best.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/17.png
VM you are sooooooo good at broadband :)
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 10:50
I find this (http://myspeed.visualware.com/uk/index.html) is a better test site.
You can get detailed information on the quality (http://mslhr.visualware.com/myspeed/db/report?id=639126) of the connection...
Mine was up in the 17-18Mbps earlier, now its down to 3-4... :(
Well that site says I'm able to download at 997kb/s..
---------- Post added at 10:47 ---------- Previous post was at 10:45 ----------
My Quality of Service was measured at 47%...
---------- Post added at 10:48 ---------- Previous post was at 10:47 ----------
Speed test statistics
---------------------
Download speed: 2160256 bps
Upload speed: 537008 bps
Quality of service: 47 %
Download test type: socket
Upload test type: socket
Maximum download pause: 61 ms
Average download pause: 7 ms
Minimum round trip time to server: 45 ms
Average round trip time to server: 78 ms
---------- Post added at 10:50 ---------- Previous post was at 10:48 ----------
Speed test statistics
---------------------
Download speed: 1914608 bps
Upload speed: 641048 bps
Quality of service: 37 %
Download test type: socket
Upload test type: socket
Maximum download pause: 261 ms
Average download pause: 8 ms
Minimum round trip time to server: 45 ms
Average round trip time to server: 47 ms
Speed test statistics
---------------------
Download speed: 2214536 bps
Upload speed: 361536 bps
Quality of service: 29 %
Download test type: socket
Upload test type: socket
Maximum download pause: 773 ms
Average download pause: 7 ms
Minimum round trip time to server: 41 ms
Average round trip time to server: 42 ms
Oh look
VM Broadband at its best
Download speed 948 Kbps (socket test)
Upload speed 740 Kbps (socket test)
Quality of service 34 %
Maximum pause 337 ms
Round trip time 472 ms
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 10:55
Could the fact that my upload is so slow suggest a cloned modem? Or..what would it suggest?
---------- Post added at 10:55 ---------- Previous post was at 10:53 ----------
From 20mb, to this in the space of 10 minutes
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/16.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Every 30 mins is different this just made me laugh.
Download speed 314 Kbps (socket test)
Upload speed 268 Kbps (socket test)
Quality of service 0 %
Maximum pause 3613 ms
Round trip time 47 ms
This just about sums up Virgins service.:mad:
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 11:04
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:01:07 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 3547 ms = 288.7 KB/sec, approx 2379 Kbps, 2.32 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 3500 ms = 292.6 KB/sec, approx 2411 Kbps, 2.35 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 3422 ms = 299.2 KB/sec, approx 2465 Kbps, 2.41 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 7922 ms = 258.5 KB/sec, approx 2130 Kbps, 2.08 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 2346 Kbps, 2.29 Mbps
---------- Post added at 11:04 ---------- Previous post was at 11:03 ----------
HOW, in the space of 10 minutes, can you go from a full 20mb connection to THIS?!
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:01:07 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 3547 ms = 288.7 KB/sec, approx 2379 Kbps, 2.32 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 3500 ms = 292.6 KB/sec, approx 2411 Kbps, 2.35 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 3422 ms = 299.2 KB/sec, approx 2465 Kbps, 2.41 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 7922 ms = 258.5 KB/sec, approx 2130 Kbps, 2.08 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 2346 Kbps, 2.29 Mbps
---------- Post added at 11:04 ---------- Previous post was at 11:03 ----------
HOW, in the space of 10 minutes, can you go from a full 20mb connection to THIS?!
That is what i have been getting for months. up down up down anyone would think there was a lady of the night around ;)
At this moment in time its on the UP part
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:11:41 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 1125 ms = 910.2 KB/sec, approx 7500 Kbps, 7.32 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 1203 ms = 851.2 KB/sec, approx 7014 Kbps, 6.85 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 1703 ms = 601.3 KB/sec, approx 4955 Kbps, 4.84 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 2110 ms = 970.6 KB/sec, approx 7998 Kbps, 7.81 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 6867 Kbps, 6.7 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
Just lost the net all together as modem ready light was blinking, rebooted everything and now look at the speed.
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:17:40 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 2266 ms = 451.9 KB/sec, approx 3724 Kbps, 3.64 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 2250 ms = 455.1 KB/sec, approx 3750 Kbps, 3.66 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 2218 ms = 461.7 KB/sec, approx 3804 Kbps, 3.71 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 4500 ms = 455.1 KB/sec, approx 3750 Kbps, 3.66 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 3757 Kbps, 3.67 Mbps
this is driving me crazy. next doors have there internet from sky ill just pop round and have a look at there speed.
Down the Pub
25-11-2007, 11:28
well for me it ain't no bed of roses either............
Speed test statistics
---------------------
Download speed: 1330640 bps
Upload speed: 736536 bps
Quality of service: 30 %
Download test type: socket
Upload test type: socket
Maximum download pause: 810 ms
Average download pause: 14 ms
Minimum round trip time to server: 25 ms
Average round trip time to server: 31 ms
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195990522&v=2872508
baguley is shot to peices, d/l from giga is a joke at the moment and can't remember the last time i had a decent game without much in the way of lag or packet loss, and surfing is becoming a joke.
and i don't see things getting much better with chrimbo round the corner, ppl gettin the souper douper lightning fast virgin bb which will put more strain on network.
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 11:30
Please, if there is a God, put some money into the infrastructure of the network, Virgin!
http://www.speedtest.bbmax.co.uk/results.php?t=1195990423&v=2872490
Right i have just been round next door to look at there speed, they have the upto 16 meg from sky, we are approx 4 miles as the crow flys from the exchange.
And according to the speed tests hes getting a good 12 meg download speed, he says hes never had a problem since installed, 6 months ago, he ex NTL.
Hes paying £10 per month, and getting a great service, Im paying £24 for crap.
At the moment im not prepared to change,but i dont know how much longer im prepared to put up with this.
Down the Pub
25-11-2007, 11:39
i'm seriously considering the business bb package, although paying a little more for a stable speed/service is not something we should be having to do, jez we already pay one of the/if not the highest charges for an isp.
and to be honest like a lot of ppl on here i'm getting sick and tired of the excuses, with it's this and maybe that or it's your computer :mad:. the only reason i'm still with them is that going back and having a bt line is my last idea on the list.
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 11:47
But do we know the business package will actually improve things? If we knew this, I'd hop strait on now!
Down the Pub
25-11-2007, 11:58
But do we know the business package will actually improve things? If we knew this, I'd hop strait on now!
well that i can't answer, if there were enough ppl who'd tried it and found if the speeds are stable to form an opinion on it. only thing is that the supposed speed-grade next year from 10/768 to 20/1.5 won't have the same effect as the general upgrade did. it shouldn't but you never know.
just tried our connection, struggling to get above 1Mbps now on the speed tests - i've not seen any less than 16Mbps previously - perhaps they are working on the network somewhere ?
I am sooooo giddy with the speed i get.
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:51:52 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 6296 ms = 162.6 KB/sec, approx 1340 Kbps, 1.31 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 3625 ms = 282.5 KB/sec, approx 2328 Kbps, 2.27 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 5344 ms = 191.6 KB/sec, approx 1579 Kbps, 1.54 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 32375 ms = 63.3 KB/sec, approx 522 Kbps, 0.51 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1442 Kbps, 1.41 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
At the moment its down again.
Would going cap in hand to Mr Branson and asking "Please Sir can i have some more" work do you think.
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 12:04
Thanks for the new hope! :P
from 10/768 to 20/1.5 won't have the same effect as the general upgrade did. it shouldn't but you never know.
That would mean i could have an upload faster than my download :rolleyes:
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:51:52 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 6296 ms = 162.6 KB/sec, approx 1340 Kbps, 1.31 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 3625 ms = 282.5 KB/sec, approx 2328 Kbps, 2.27 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 5344 ms = 191.6 KB/sec, approx 1579 Kbps, 1.54 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 32375 ms = 63.3 KB/sec, approx 522 Kbps, 0.51 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1442 Kbps, 1.41 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
Down the Pub
25-11-2007, 12:06
Thanks for the new hope! :P
didn't realise there was any :doh:
Upload is unaffected, yet download isn't great today :(
Down the Pub
25-11-2007, 12:08
That would mean i could have an upload faster than my download :rolleyes:
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:51:52 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 6296 ms = 162.6 KB/sec, approx 1340 Kbps, 1.31 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 3625 ms = 282.5 KB/sec, approx 2328 Kbps, 2.27 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 5344 ms = 191.6 KB/sec, approx 1579 Kbps, 1.54 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 32375 ms = 63.3 KB/sec, approx 522 Kbps, 0.51 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1442 Kbps, 1.41 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
you mean you don't already ;)
right time to go paint the bathroom, which is similar to our bb speeds at the moment as both are like waiting for paint to dry :D.
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 12:08
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:06:52 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 6650 ms = 154 KB/sec, approx 1269 Kbps, 1.24 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 9153 ms = 111.9 KB/sec, approx 922 Kbps, 0.9 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 10395 ms = 98.5 KB/sec, approx 812 Kbps, 0.79 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 23313 ms = 87.8 KB/sec, approx 723 Kbps, 0.71 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 932 Kbps, 0.91 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
And this is the SAME speed Im getting from wired too, what a f'n joke!
Just to give you hope, this is what is possible ;
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:12:20 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 438 ms = 2337.9 KB/sec, approx 19264 Kbps, 18.81 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 437 ms = 2343.2 KB/sec, approx 19308 Kbps, 18.86 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 454 ms = 2255.5 KB/sec, approx 18585 Kbps, 18.15 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 843 ms = 2429.4 KB/sec, approx 20018 Kbps, 19.55 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 19294 Kbps, 18.84 Mbps
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:09:35 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 1396 ms = 733.5 KB/sec, approx 6044 Kbps, 5.9 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 704 ms = 1454.5 KB/sec, approx 11985 Kbps, 11.7 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 528 ms = 1939.4 KB/sec, approx 15981 Kbps, 15.61 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 989 ms = 2070.8 KB/sec, approx 17063 Kbps, 16.66 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 12768 Kbps, 12.47 Mbps
Not toooo bad here just now i suppose...relatively anyway.
Long lies for everyone today is it;)
Just updated one of my Linux boxes - 100 packages, ranging in size from 50MB down, downloads ranging from 1MB/s down to 600KB/s, more than the speed tests were saying.
Still more than usable though.
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 12:17
Just to give you hope, this is what is possible ;
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:12:20 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 438 ms = 2337.9 KB/sec, approx 19264 Kbps, 18.81 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 437 ms = 2343.2 KB/sec, approx 19308 Kbps, 18.86 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 454 ms = 2255.5 KB/sec, approx 18585 Kbps, 18.15 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 843 ms = 2429.4 KB/sec, approx 20018 Kbps, 19.55 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 19294 Kbps, 18.84 Mbps
Yeah thats it Paul M, rub it in why dont ya lol:)
All that I can say is, you people that are gettin WHAT SPEEDS YOU SHOULD are really, really, REALLY lucky and I am completely green with envy over every single 1 of you that has proper speeds :p:
Yeah thats it Paul M, rub it in why dont ya lol:)
LOL, that wasn't the intention :)
I'm lucky in that Diamond Cable built a very good network in Nottingham, and so my connection has always been excellent. I know that some of the local cable companies didn't do as well.
People seem to forget that Virgin Media did not build the network they now manage (nor did NTL) - they inherited it from all the local cable companies that they bought up in the late 1990's. Those are the people mostly to blame - if you build a crap network in the first place, no amount of attention is going to make it perform brilliantly.
alferret
25-11-2007, 12:24
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/14.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/15.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Wow..please, please, please stay this way...
---------- Post added at 10:39 ---------- Previous post was at 10:38 ----------
Amazing variation in speed though..
Which goes to show that its down to outside forces and maybe not all down to VM as many people simply state.
Sirpingalot
25-11-2007, 12:27
LOL, that wasn't the intention :)
I'm lucky in that Diamond Cable built a very good network in Nottingham, and so my connection has always been excellent. I know that some of the local cable companies didn't do as well.
People seem to forget that Virgin Media did not build the network they now manage (nor did NTL) - they inherited it from all the local cable companies that they bought up in the late 1990's. Those are the people mostly to blame - if you build a crap network in the first place, no amount of attention is going to make it perform brilliantly.
Which is exactly what I found with the Liverpool network - it was excellent. Can't say the same for the baguley one though..sadly not just yet.
Which goes to show that its down to outside forces and maybe not all down to VM as many people simply state.
There will certainly be an element of the ISP's infrastructure involved - but equally the internet as a whole will have contention issues / problems. Its better to use closer servers, yes, but they may still be overloaded or having other issues. Its very much a guide rather than a definative.
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 12:30
LOL, that wasn't the intention :)
I'm lucky in that Diamond Cable built a very good network in Nottingham, and so my connection has always been excellent. I know that some of the local cable companies didn't do as well.
People seem to forget that Virgin Media did not build the network they now manage (nor did NTL) - they inherited it from all the local cable companies that they bought up in the late 1990's. Those are the people mostly to blame - if you build a crap network in the first place, no amount of attention is going to make it perform brilliantly.
But surely if VM didnt waste money on pointless advertising & paying extraordinary amounts to famous "beautiful" women, then they would have more than enough money to make sure each area is upgraded, not all at once, but a slow roll-out from area to area like they do with their speed upgrades, then yes, once everything is upgraded, THEN is the time to advertise & pull in new customers, but as we know, VM have far too many subscribers now, so go figure :)
And my last test of the day which shows that my connection here has contention issues to the extreme.
I went cap in hand to Mr Branson for some more speed and he said yes :LOL:
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 12:31:56 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 1328 ms = 771.1 KB/sec, approx 6354 Kbps, 6.21 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 532 ms = 1924.8 KB/sec, approx 15860 Kbps, 15.49 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 500 ms = 2048 KB/sec, approx 16876 Kbps, 16.48 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 1406 ms = 1456.6 KB/sec, approx 12002 Kbps, 11.72 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 12773 Kbps, 12.48 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
But surely if VM didnt waste money on pointless advertising & paying extraordinary amounts to famous "beautiful" women, then they would have more than enough money to make sure each area is upgraded, not all at once, but a slow roll-out from area to area like they do with their speed upgrades, then yes, once everything is upgraded, THEN is the time to advertise & pull in new customers, but as we know, VM have far too many subscribers now, so go figure
Ruby Wax.......beautiful:shocked:
:)
But surely if VM didnt waste money on pointless advertising & paying extraordinary amounts to famous "beautiful" women, then they would have more than enough money to make sure each area is upgraded, not all at once, but a slow roll-out from area to area like they do with their speed upgrades, then yes, once everything is upgraded, THEN is the time to advertise & pull in new customers, but as we know, VM have far too many subscribers now, so go figure :)
thats the sensible option ;)
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 12:45
thats the sensible option ;)
yes, but when has vm EVER done sensible??
EDIT: Now my upload speed IS higher than my download!!!
http://www.speedtest.net/result/205686235.png
I have no intention of posting every half hour, but I too have been suffering abysmal speeds for the last month, often down to dial-up levels.
I contacted the "Help Line" at their exorbitant rates to be told yes I had a problem, they would send an engineer (in 3 days time).He came, never crossed the doorstep, told me everyone in my area (Stafford North ST16) had the same problem, and they had no idea what was causing it, but would get back to me.That was a fortnight ago. I am still waiting.
A few days later I had a "How did we do " email from customer services.
I replied telling them exactly how badly.
Two days later I had a most charming and apologetic lady on the phone from Virgin. After some discussion, she told me I would indeed be credited with the cost of the helpline call, and offered a months broadband free of charge, hoping that the problem would be solved by then.She declined to giving me a means of getting in touch with her again, said I would have to again use the helpline.
I am waiting to see if indeed there is an improvement. I am also waiting to see if I get the promised refunds. I am not holding my breath whilst waiting.
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 13:12
I have no intention of posting every half hour, but I too have been suffering abysmal speeds for the last month, often down to dial-up levels.
I contacted the "Help Line" at their exorbitant rates to be told yes I had a problem, they would send an engineer (in 3 days time).He came, never crossed the doorstep, told me everyone in my area (Stafford North ST16) had the same problem, and they had no idea what was causing it, but would get back to me.That was a fortnight ago. I am still waiting.
A few days later I had a "How did we do " email from customer services.
I replied telling them exactly how badly.
Two days later I had a most charming and apologetic lady on the phone from Virgin. After some discussion, she told me I would indeed be credited with the cost of the helpline call, and offered a months broadband free of charge, hoping that the problem would be solved by then.She declined to giving me a means of getting in touch with her again, said I would have to again use the helpline.
I am waiting to see if indeed there is an improvement. I am also waiting to see if I get the promised refunds. I am not holding my breath whilst waiting.
No it would be wise not to hold your breath, you would be long burried before these problems are fixed in my estimation!
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 13:58:21 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 10302 ms = 99.4 KB/sec, approx 819 Kbps, 0.8 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 9200 ms = 111.3 KB/sec, approx 917 Kbps, 0.9 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 7708 ms = 132.8 KB/sec, approx 1094 Kbps, 1.07 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 21261 ms = 96.3 KB/sec, approx 794 Kbps, 0.78 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 906 Kbps, 0.89 Mbps
I knew we`d get down here eventually:rolleyes:
Once again our 1Mb Set Top Box broadband connection is actually faster than the 20Mb Cable Modem.
EDIT...STB
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 15:04:54 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 8755 ms = 117 KB/sec, approx 964 Kbps, 0.94 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 8615 ms = 118.9 KB/sec, approx 980 Kbps, 0.96 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 9635 ms = 106.3 KB/sec, approx 876 Kbps, 0.86 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 17663 ms = 115.9 KB/sec, approx 955 Kbps, 0.93 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 944 Kbps, 0.92 Mbps
And coming round the T-time bend the cable modem takes the lead....
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:47:00 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 8726 ms = 117.4 KB/sec, approx 967 Kbps, 0.94 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 4820 ms = 212.4 KB/sec, approx 1750 Kbps, 1.71 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 11751 ms = 87.1 KB/sec, approx 718 Kbps, 0.7 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 17301 ms = 118.4 KB/sec, approx 976 Kbps, 0.95 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1103 Kbps, 1.08 Mbps
It`s neck & neck though...
Impz2002
25-11-2007, 18:20
Its peak time here 6pm on a sunday evening which is prob one of the busiest times of load on the UBR's. I am connected to :-
cpc4-harg1-0-0-cust733.leed.cable.ntl.com
My speedtest has returned the following :-
Today 18:08 19570 kbps (2.45MB/s) 729 kbps (91.1kB/s)
My point is there is so much anger on these forums these days and i imagine there are tens of thousands of other people out there that are more than happy with thier connection just like i am. i am not trying to say that these problems dont exsist as i am sure they do but VM are not totally useless as i get what i pay for just like other people who dont use this forum. Remember why you joined this forum, i joined as i like to help people out and share the knowledge i have managed to gain since the good ole Bell Cable Media Days.
I really hope things improve for everyone which i am sure they will as if it got that bad VM would not be getting any more customers as everyone would know it wasnt a good product. As others have said the only way to make VM realise is to let your feet do the talking and sign up for ADSL. if anyone really thinks thats a better idea then they are wrong. There isnt a hope in hell of getting 20meg through ADSL unless you live within a stone's throw of the exchange.
I hope things on the forum improve as i for one am sick of logging on and having to read through loads of posts bitching about how VM are ripping you off.
Please nobody take this the wrong way i am not here to upset people or make any enemies.
Well thats my view on the matter.
Impz
ultimate
25-11-2007, 18:51
thought I join in the fun here:
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 18:47:27 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 11266 ms = 90.9 KB/sec, approx 749 Kbps, 0.73 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 10844 ms = 94.4 KB/sec, approx 778 Kbps, 0.76 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 11015 ms = 93 KB/sec, approx 766 Kbps, 0.75 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 20844 ms = 98.3 KB/sec, approx 810 Kbps, 0.79 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 776 Kbps, 0.76 Mbps
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 19:03
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:00:41 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 3675 ms = 278.6 KB/sec, approx 2296 Kbps, 2.24 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 7031 ms = 145.6 KB/sec, approx 1200 Kbps, 1.17 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 9693 ms = 105.6 KB/sec, approx 870 Kbps, 0.85 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 29964 ms = 68.3 KB/sec, approx 563 Kbps, 0.55 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1232 Kbps, 1.2 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
slightly better than Ive had most of the day, but still far from acceptable!
Its peak time here 6pm on a sunday evening which is prob one of the busiest times of load on the UBR's. I am connected to :-
cpc4-harg1-0-0-cust733.leed.cable.ntl.com
My speedtest has returned the following :-
Today 18:08 19570 kbps (2.45MB/s) 729 kbps (91.1kB/s)
My point is there is so much anger on these forums these days and i imagine there are tens of thousands of other people out there that are more than happy with thier connection just like i am. i am not trying to say that these problems dont exsist as i am sure they do but VM are not totally useless as i get what i pay for just like other people who dont use this forum. Remember why you joined this forum, i joined as i like to help people out and share the knowledge i have managed to gain since the good ole Bell Cable Media Days.
I really hope things improve for everyone which i am sure they will as if it got that bad VM would not be getting any more customers as everyone would know it wasnt a good product. As others have said the only way to make VM realise is to let your feet do the talking and sign up for ADSL. if anyone really thinks thats a better idea then they are wrong. There isnt a hope in hell of getting 20meg through ADSL unless you live within a stone's throw of the exchange.
I hope things on the forum improve as i for one am sick of logging on and having to read through loads of posts bitching about how VM are ripping you off.
Please nobody take this the wrong way i am not here to upset people or make any enemies.
Well thats my view on the matter.
Impz
Any spare bandwidth Mister
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:09:39 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 3482 ms = 294.1 KB/sec, approx 2423 Kbps, 2.37 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 3387 ms = 302.3 KB/sec, approx 2491 Kbps, 2.43 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 3739 ms = 273.9 KB/sec, approx 2257 Kbps, 2.2 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 7731 ms = 264.9 KB/sec, approx 2183 Kbps, 2.13 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 2339 Kbps, 2.28 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
I want my 20 meg sometime in the next millennium Please
Well here are my tests from 9.54 this morning.
9.54 1.08
10.36 0.31
11.00 0.69
at this point lost the net altogether
net came back on at 11.15
11.19 3.67 wow hopes up
didnt last long 12.15 1.55
14.37 1.33
15.15 0.95
16.57 0.85
17.50 1.01
19.00 0.91
so there you go a snap shot of todays speeds for me. im on the bagley ubr and in stoke on trent.
Next door neigbour has been doing the tests on his sky connection the up to 16 meg and his hasnt dropped below 10 meg all day.:( he says even on a bad day he averages 7 meg and we are 3.75 killometers from the exchange as the crow flys.
ultimate
25-11-2007, 19:27
If anybody's "broadband" is fast enough for his, have a look at my speed only done minutes ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTillsk7AwI
If anybody's "broadband" is fast enough for his, have a look at my speed only done minutes ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTillsk7AwI
That sums up my connection at a weekend. Tomorrow night it will be back to normal then come next weekend it will be **** again.
Callumpy
25-11-2007, 19:34
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/13.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Im cancellin virgin!
ultimate
25-11-2007, 19:34
I think VM is hinting at something......."go and watch TV, use our on demand movies so that we can screw some more money out of you" !!!!!
stewlewis
25-11-2007, 19:39
I'm in Stoke too, ST5, and it's been terrible all weekend. my 2MB connection has been averaging 400kbps. There was trouble in Stafford erlier according to VM service bulletin, it's always the case with trouble round the M6, all the traffic cuts through Stoke.
My downstream power is 17.2dBmv, after reading some posts that seems high, not really paid any attention to it before.
I haven't dowloaded anything all weekend, traffic management hasn't screwed me up, but bog standard surfing is a right pain today.
Callumpy
25-11-2007, 19:41
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-zTjcO5YWY&feature=related
wtfh?
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 19:44
I'm in Stoke too, ST5, and it's been terrible all weekend. my 2MB connection has been averaging 400kbps. There was trouble in Stafford erlier according to VM service bulletin, it's always the case with trouble round the M6, all the traffic cuts through Stoke.
My downstream power is 17.2dBmv, after reading some posts that seems high, not really paid any attention to it before.
I haven't dowloaded anything all weekend, traffic management hasn't screwed me up, but bog standard surfing is a right pain today.
Yes it definately IS too high!
You will need to call Tech Support, but dont worry as they SHOULD refund the call costs and book an engineer out too!
Just make sure you let them know the problem and make sure they DO book then engineer for you :)
stewlewis
25-11-2007, 19:45
There's no point referring us to YouTube, the constant buffer stutter makes it unwatchable today.
20 mins on the squakbox to India and I should have a guy visiting on Fri. Call charge waivved.
Sun, 25 Nov 2007 21:41:37 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 9449 ms = 108.4 KB/sec, approx 893 Kbps, 0.87 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 10085 ms = 101.5 KB/sec, approx 836 Kbps, 0.82 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 11956 ms = 85.6 KB/sec, approx 705 Kbps, 0.69 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 19615 ms = 104.4 KB/sec, approx 860 Kbps, 0.84 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 824 Kbps, 0.81 Mbps
Cable Modem stumbled and fell at the final hurdle.......1Mb stb wins the race.
Stewards enquiry!!
:)
deed02392
25-11-2007, 22:33
Well I'm VERY pleased with this result! MySpeed gave me this on my 4mb connection:
Up:3927kbps
Dn:383kbps
QoS: 97%
It stuck at maximum speed, and it stayed at maximum speed, with a fantastic reliability at that level. And I've been downloading a linux distro all evening :p:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/11.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
back up to normal speed - i guess network work or something earlier then :)
ECW_Original
25-11-2007, 23:11
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/11.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
back up to normal speed - i guess network work or something earlier then :)
Same old s*** here again:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/12.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/11.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
back up to normal speed - i guess network work or something earlier then :)
Well it looks like the VM bod has been and switched off the restrictor for my area. My connection will be fine now till Friday and then WHAM i will be **** on again.
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 06:23:16 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 468 ms = 2188 KB/sec, approx 18029 Kbps, 17.61 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 500 ms = 2048 KB/sec, approx 16876 Kbps, 16.48 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 422 ms = 2426.5 KB/sec, approx 19994 Kbps, 19.53 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 1000 ms = 2048 KB/sec, approx 16876 Kbps, 16.48 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 17944 Kbps, 17.53 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
ECW_Original
26-11-2007, 07:09
Well by the looks of things, Ive been STM'd WITHOUT any of the equipment on and while Ive been asleep:
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:07:25 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 1532 ms = 668.4 KB/sec, approx 5508 Kbps, 5.38 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 1282 ms = 798.8 KB/sec, approx 6582 Kbps, 6.43 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 1763 ms = 580.8 KB/sec, approx 4786 Kbps, 4.67 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 2974 ms = 688.6 KB/sec, approx 5674 Kbps, 5.54 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 5638 Kbps, 5.5 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
THIS IS NOT BLOODY GOOD ENOUGH!!!
VIRGIN MEDIA: SORT YOUR F'N NETWORK OUT QUICKLY!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sirpingalot
26-11-2007, 09:50
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:49:12 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 453 ms = 2260.5 KB/sec, approx 18627 Kbps, 18.19 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 438 ms = 2337.9 KB/sec, approx 19264 Kbps, 18.81 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 453 ms = 2260.5 KB/sec, approx 18627 Kbps, 18.19 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 875 ms = 2340.6 KB/sec, approx 19287 Kbps, 18.83 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 18951 Kbps, 18.51 Mbps
Let's see if things stay this way throughout the day
ECW_Original
26-11-2007, 14:05
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 17:49:12 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 453 ms = 2260.5 KB/sec, approx 18627 Kbps, 18.19 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 438 ms = 2337.9 KB/sec, approx 19264 Kbps, 18.81 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 453 ms = 2260.5 KB/sec, approx 18627 Kbps, 18.19 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 875 ms = 2340.6 KB/sec, approx 19287 Kbps, 18.83 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 18951 Kbps, 18.51 Mbps
Let's see if things stay this way throughout the day
Grr @ u Sir :p:
Sirpingalot
26-11-2007, 17:10
Tue, 27 Nov 2007 01:09:30 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 2734 ms = 374.5 KB/sec, approx 3086 Kbps, 3.01 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 2110 ms = 485.3 KB/sec, approx 3999 Kbps, 3.91 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 2375 ms = 431.2 KB/sec, approx 3553 Kbps, 3.47 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 4859 ms = 421.5 KB/sec, approx 3473 Kbps, 3.39 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 3528 Kbps, 3.45 Mbps
ultimate
26-11-2007, 21:23
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:17:22 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 9438 ms = 108.5 KB/sec, approx 894 Kbps, 0.87 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 11453 ms = 89.4 KB/sec, approx 737 Kbps, 0.72 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 10984 ms = 93.2 KB/sec, approx 768 Kbps, 0.75 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 23469 ms = 87.3 KB/sec, approx 719 Kbps, 0.7 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 780 Kbps, 0.76 Mbps
SapperGB
26-11-2007, 21:45
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:41:30 UTC
1st 512K took 2234 ms = 229.2 KB/sec, approx 1889 Kbps, 1.84 Mbps
2nd 512K took 5719 ms = 89.5 KB/sec, approx 737 Kbps, 0.72 Mbps
3rd 512K took 3391 ms = 151 KB/sec, approx 1244 Kbps, 1.21 Mbps
4th 512K took 4015 ms = 127.5 KB/sec, approx 1051 Kbps, 1.03 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1230 Kbps, 1.2 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
---------- Post added at 21:42 ---------- Previous post was at 21:41 ----------
and seconds later....
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:42:21 UTC
1st 512K took 5031 ms = 101.8 KB/sec, approx 839 Kbps, 0.82 Mbps
2nd 512K took 4625 ms = 110.7 KB/sec, approx 912 Kbps, 0.89 Mbps
3rd 512K took 3360 ms = 152.4 KB/sec, approx 1256 Kbps, 1.23 Mbps
4th 512K took 7453 ms = 68.7 KB/sec, approx 566 Kbps, 0.55 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 893 Kbps, 0.87 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
---------- Post added at 21:45 ---------- Previous post was at 21:42 ----------
and cos these sites are unreliable i thought id try another....
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/6.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
TraxData
26-11-2007, 21:47
And just to prove how unreliable that speed test is
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:46:23 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 1656 ms = 618.4 KB/sec, approx 5096 Kbps, 4.98 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 2782 ms = 368.1 KB/sec, approx 3033 Kbps, 2.96 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 2234 ms = 458.4 KB/sec, approx 3777 Kbps, 3.69 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 3500 ms = 585.1 KB/sec, approx 4821 Kbps, 4.71 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 4182 Kbps, 4.09 Mbps
To repeat this test from the source server click here.
SapperGB
26-11-2007, 21:51
so you would rather fill the forums up with screenshots of us all downloading 4 files via BY or VM?
cos mine report exactly the same, thats 3 tests from 3 sources. surely they cant ALL be
unreliable
And just to prove how unreliable that speed test is
Yup....never rely on speedtests.....
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:48:53 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 19671 ms = 52.1 KB/sec, approx 429 Kbps, 0.42 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 13050 ms = 78.5 KB/sec, approx 647 Kbps, 0.63 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 18366 ms = 55.8 KB/sec, approx 460 Kbps, 0.45 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 30838 ms = 66.4 KB/sec, approx 547 Kbps, 0.53 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 521 Kbps, 0.51 Mbps
After all,i`m getting double what the speedtest would have you believe and can actually download a whopping 50% faster at a whole Megabit ..:shocked:
:sleep:
How come it still says Telewest Broadband???
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/5.png
TraxData
26-11-2007, 22:29
Yup....never rely on speedtests.....
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:48:53 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 19671 ms = 52.1 KB/sec, approx 429 Kbps, 0.42 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 13050 ms = 78.5 KB/sec, approx 647 Kbps, 0.63 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 18366 ms = 55.8 KB/sec, approx 460 Kbps, 0.45 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 30838 ms = 66.4 KB/sec, approx 547 Kbps, 0.53 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 521 Kbps, 0.51 Mbps
After all,i`m getting double what the speedtest would have you believe and can actually download a whopping 50% faster at a whole Megabit ..:shocked:
:sleep:
Well, i did that speedtest, then decided to try a download out.
Got full 20mbit (my business package got upgraded today, yay)
Speedtests are useless :p:
deed02392
26-11-2007, 22:37
Yup....never rely on speedtests.....
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:48:53 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 19671 ms = 52.1 KB/sec, approx 429 Kbps, 0.42 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 13050 ms = 78.5 KB/sec, approx 647 Kbps, 0.63 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 18366 ms = 55.8 KB/sec, approx 460 Kbps, 0.45 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 30838 ms = 66.4 KB/sec, approx 547 Kbps, 0.53 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 521 Kbps, 0.51 Mbps
After all,i`m getting double what the speedtest would have you believe and can actually download a whopping 50% faster at a whole Megabit ..:shocked:
:sleep:
Wouldn't that be 100% faster? Ah I guess that's not as bad as you first thought :D
Well you keep saying speedtests are useless, but the sad fact is they just corroborate what I already know about my so-called "up to 20Mb" connection.
While playing WoW during which I was having latency of 500ms + and then I get DC'd and can't reconnect.
I check my speed using Speedtest.net to get this fine specimen
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/11/4.png
Also got this to further back it up
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:16:58 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 19187 ms = 53.4 KB/sec, approx 440 Kbps, 0.43 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 19965 ms = 51.3 KB/sec, approx 423 Kbps, 0.41 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 25197 ms = 40.6 KB/sec, approx 335 Kbps, 0.33 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 40810 ms = 50.2 KB/sec, approx 414 Kbps, 0.4 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 403 Kbps, 0.39 Mbps
This is also after the modem firmware update, so nothing's changed as far as "performance" goes.
I've already got my bill for this month @ £0 due to crap service, and I'll continue to claim it until they give me what they want me to pay for.
I've also fairly suggested that I could always pay "up to £37pm" in line with the service I get, which is exactly what I'll do if they insist I pay anything. They might get a few pence out of me that way :dozey:
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/%5BURL=http://www.speedtest.net%5D%5BIMG%5Dhttp://www.speedtest.net/result/206151682.png%5B/IMG%5D%5B/URL%5D
Wouldn't that be 100% faster? Ah I guess that's not as bad as you first thought
It`s not just the broadband thats slow tonight........:o:
Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:30:41 GMT
Test 1: 1024K took 15211 ms = 67.3 KB/sec, approx 555 Kbps, 0.54 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 11789 ms = 86.9 KB/sec, approx 716 Kbps, 0.7 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 9301 ms = 110.1 KB/sec, approx 907 Kbps, 0.89 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 23673 ms = 86.5 KB/sec, approx 713 Kbps, 0.7 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 723 Kbps, 0.71 Mbps
It`s gathering speed though eh...
We`ll surely have a whole Mb come midnight at this rate:)
:sleep:
Well, i did that speedtest, then decided to try a download out.
Got full 20mbit (my business package got upgraded today, yay)
Speedtests are useless
Smug git you:p:
Anyway,i can get FULL speed too you know..I do need to use the 1Mb stb of course;)
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.