View Full Version : Can't it go any faster?
I am suposed to have 2Mb broadband (via cable) from VM but I have tested it with two seperate online speed testers at various times of the day over several days and it's consistently 1.5Mb.
Is it fair to say that, despite being on cable (ie not distance dependent like adsl), I would be wasting my money upgrading to a higher speed service?
Conversely, if a higher speed service is available to me, why don't VM give me the full 2Mb I currently pay for?
btw I just use it for email and a bit of browsing so I am definitely not exceeding VMs new usage limits.
I don't knpw if this will sort out your speed, but have you tried using this?
http://www.speedguide.net/downloads.php
Try a speedtest with that installed. :)
No thanks I am not loading some crapy app which claims to speed up a connection by teaking my registry. I have 4 pcs here and they all get 100mb across the lan and only 1.5mb via VM. This is a VM issue nothing wrong with my pcs.
xspeedyx
07-06-2008, 17:07
It optimzers your connection and opens up more MTU as the default MTU is fir dial up but why post and ask for help if you wont try it 1.5mb aint that bad for a 2mb connection as you said what u do with bb no need to upgrade I have 20mb which settles after 5pm at ariound 7mb so thank youself lucky
That's a very quick(and blinkered) diagnosis of the problem. Have you connected one of your PC's straight to your cable modem, just to rule out your router from the equation.
Registry tweaking of TCP/IP related parameters can have a drastic effect, as straight out of the box windows' TCP/IP stack is still tuned for optimum dial up performance. THe reason your seeing full speeds across your LAN is because all the PC's have the same dial optimised settings. Therfore, no or minimal dropped or fragmented packets.
TBH, you've got nothing to lose and everything to gain by installing the program that cmint linked to, it has a backup/return to default setting anyway. So if it doesn't do anything for you, you can retrun your machine to how it was bofre, and un-install the program.
Actualy I already have a pc app called winoptimizer which has an internet turning option built in. I don't claim to know exactly what it does but I suspect that my pcs are already well optimised. Suffice to say they all perform very very well and I have no intention of loading a bit of freeware which may cause other system problems.
If you pay for 20mb yet only get 7mb that tells me a) you shouldn't be happy either and b) you're endorsing a bit of shareware that hasn't helped you much either.
xspeedyx
07-06-2008, 17:20
Actualy I already have a pc app called winoptimizer which has an internet turning option built in. I don't claim to know exactly what it does but I suspect that my pcs are already well optimised. Suffice to say they all perform very very well and I have no intention of loading a bit of freeware which may cause other system problems.
If you pay for 20mb yet only get 7mb that tells me a) you shouldn't be happy either and b) you're endorsing a bit of shareware that hasn't helped you much either.
I know why my connections is slow I have inside people who help me
Actualy I already have a pc app called winoptimizer which has an internet turning option built in. I don't claim to know exactly what it does but I suspect that my pcs are already well optimised. Suffice to say they all perform very very well and I have no intention of loading a bit of freeware which may cause other system problems.
If you pay for 20mb yet only get 7mb that tells me a) you shouldn't be happy either and b) you're endorsing a bit of shareware that hasn't helped you much either.
Phone Virgin and complain then.
You really should try and isolate it a bit more befor blaming VM though, as I said before, connect one of your PC's to your CM and repeat the speed tests.
Also, can you start(don't need to let it complete) a medium to lage size file from a number of different sources, then report back what tranfer rate you got.
It is also possible that your area is over subscribled slightly, but as stated, if your getting 1.5M from a 2M line, it's not exaclty bad. Are you carrying the speed tests out at what could be called "peak periods. Do you have any close neighbours that are also on the 2M product? What sort of speeds do they get?
BTW, with reference to software, and possibly screwing up your machine, i'm an IT Technican, I don't reccomend software to other people if I haven't had direct and fairly comprehensive experience with them.
AbyssUnderground
07-06-2008, 17:54
The optimiser on speedguide wouldn't have been recommended if it wasn't any good. Thousands of people on CF use it. I have even tried it myself with good results. I suggest you try it. You can alway set the settings back to what they were before if it doesn't work out for you.
TCP Optimizer
Does that work on Vista? Thinking of trying it out...
No thanks I am not loading some crapy app which claims to speed up a connection by teaking my registry. I have 4 pcs here and they all get 100mb across the lan and only 1.5mb via VM. This is a VM issue nothing wrong with my pcs.
Agreed, I would never download an application like that.
It optimzers your connection and opens up more MTU as the default MTU is fir dial up but why post and ask for help if you wont try it 1.5mb aint that bad for a 2mb connection as you said what u do with bb no need to upgrade I have 20mb which settles after 5pm at ariound 7mb so thank youself lucky
Here's my results for my 2Mb connection, without running this application:
Sat, 7 Jun 2008 17:13:46 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 4063 ms = 252 KB/sec, approx 2076 Kbps, 2.03 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 4017 ms = 254.9 KB/sec, approx 2100 Kbps, 2.05 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 4063 ms = 252 KB/sec, approx 2076 Kbps, 2.03 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 8094 ms = 253 KB/sec, approx 2085 Kbps, 2.04 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 2084 Kbps, 2.04 Mbps
---------- Post added at 18:33 ---------- Previous post was at 18:15 ----------
Okay, installed the application to prove my point, and my speed was slower:
Sat, 7 Jun 2008 17:28:21 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 4734 ms = 216.3 KB/sec, approx 1782 Kbps, 1.74 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 5890 ms = 173.9 KB/sec, approx 1433 Kbps, 1.4 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 4062 ms = 252.1 KB/sec, approx 2077 Kbps, 2.03 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 9203 ms = 222.5 KB/sec, approx 1833 Kbps, 1.79 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1781 Kbps, 1.74 Mbps
Restored from backup, and now speed back to normal:
Sat, 7 Jun 2008 17:31:58 UTC
Test 1: 1024K took 4032 ms = 254 KB/sec, approx 2093 Kbps, 2.04 Mbps
Test 2: 1024K took 4048 ms = 253 KB/sec, approx 2085 Kbps, 2.04 Mbps
Test 3: 1024K took 4047 ms = 253 KB/sec, approx 2085 Kbps, 2.04 Mbps
Test 4: 2048K took 8110 ms = 252.5 KB/sec, approx 2081 Kbps, 2.03 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 2086 Kbps, 2.04 Mbps
AbyssUnderground
07-06-2008, 19:58
Does that work on Vista? Thinking of trying it out...
Its not required on Vista as it has an automatic TCP optimiser unlike previous OS versions.
I am suposed to have 2Mb broadband (via cable) from VM but I have tested it with two seperate online speed testers at various times of the day over several days and it's consistently 1.5Mb.
What speed do you get if you do a proper test?
Disconnect any home networking equipment you have (eg. a router) and only connect directly to the cable modem with a single computer.
Reboot your pc.
Close as many applications on your computer as possible, in particular any P2P, streaming or IM programs.
Start 2 simultaneous downloads from the VM demo games server (http://gamefiles.virginmedia.com/blueyondergames/demos/) plus 2 simultaneous downloads of Zen test files (http://fuller.zen.co.uk/test).
That's four file downloads happening at once!
Now add up each of the four concurrent download speeds to get your accurate download rate.
Is it fair to say that, despite being on cable (ie not distance dependent like adsl), I would be wasting my money upgrading to a higher speed service?
Conversely, if a higher speed service is available to me, why don't VM give me the full 2Mb I currently pay for?
Upgrading might be a waste of your money (especially if you don't download much) but it's not fair to draw that conclusion from your inadequate test reports.
I'll bet that they *are* giving you (very close to) the 2Mb/s connection that you pay for.
Actualy I already have a pc app called winoptimizer which has an internet turning option built in.
So what do you have the MTU set to?
So what do you have the MTU set to?
If you tell me how to find out I will check and post back.
Re all these suggestions to try a tcp/ip optimiser, I already have one from a reputable company (ashampoo) so I assume it is doing what is possible.
I will happily check/post settings if it helps but I am not going to install any more software. Like it or not, I have prior experience of these things and like jcw00 have found that they often make things worst, maybe riddled with spyware etc etc.
Now if VM published some recommended settings I would be more than happy to try them - do they?
Anyway a previous post suggests that Vista doesn't require this anyway?
Getting back to my original question - I didn't ask for a diagnosis I just asked whether I could expect a speed increase if I upgraded.
Now if VM published some recommended settings I would be more than happy to try them - do they?
VM offer plenty of advice (http://www.virginmedia.com/help/slow-broadband.php) on optimising your connection speed (http://www.virginmedia.com/help/20mb-broadband-optimisation.php) (equally relevant for your 2Mb connection) with specific notes for Vista.
(Notice that VM also recommend the "crappy app" you were (incorrectly, in my opinion) advised to try?)
Getting back to my original question - I didn't ask for a diagnosis I just asked whether I could expect a speed increase if I upgraded.
Have you tried the multiple file concurrent download test yet?
Angry@VMedia
08-06-2008, 02:25
snip, as straight out of the box windows' TCP/IP stack is still tuned for optimum dial up performance.
I would like to disagree with you there...
At my place, I have 3 desktop PCs and 2 laptops, all are different makes & models, fresh install of XP on them ALL, and I get the FULL speeds via ethernet, just like the OP does, and I will go as far as to agree with him, that the speed issue IS NOT a problem with his network, if he can move data around at FULL 100Mb speeds, and the internet crawls along, then it certainly IS NOT a problem with ANY of HIS equipment :)
it certainly IS NOT a problem with ANY of HIS equipment :)
Not quite, the router still has not been proven or disproven to be the cause. All the OP's own tests on data movement proves is that data flows at full speed from PC to PC via the built in switch on their router, No data flowing between thier PC's will go anywhere near the NAT/Firewall side of the router.
The router deffinatly IS a possible bottleneck.
BTW, I have set up more broadband connections/fresh installs of Windows XP than I care to mention, some(including mine) have worked at full speed without needing any tweaks. Some on the other hand have noticabley speeded up after applying the tweaks. It's very much a "your mileage may vary" thing.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.