PDA

View Full Version : NTL 120 Modems DO NOT support 10Mbps


Zee
17-05-2006, 15:37
I've now come to the conclusion that the 120 Modems DO NOT support the 10MB service, NTL engineers have said this, and when downloading a large file, once the speed reaches max or a little less, constant cut outs and disconnections.

Since we're paying for a service that we can't use properly because the hardware NTL supply doesn't support it, i demand that NTL replace everyone's modem to a 200 or 250 because we've had to pay £100 in callouts and calls to 0870 numbers with them telling us there is no problem, when they know perfectly well there is a problem.

There is no way i'm going to pay another £50 for a callout, i just want my modem swapped for free now because we've paid to much already to be told bullsh*t from NTL.

James Henry
17-05-2006, 16:20
It does seem strange that ntl have no problems with upgrading people for free, offering them silly deals to stay, etc, but begrudge replacing modems.

Just phone retentions and threaten to leave that usually hits the spot.

As far as replacing every modem, not going to happen until everyone is on 10Mbit or higher to be honest.

Why not consider a MaxDSL service or ADSL2+ if available, I see that you have Sky and a BT phoneline already.

Neil
17-05-2006, 16:45
I've now come to the conclusion that the 120 Modems DO NOT support the 10MB service, NTL engineers have said this, and when downloading a large file, once the speed reaches max or a little less, constant cut outs and disconnections.

Since we're paying for a service that we can't use properly because the hardware NTL supply doesn't support it, i demand that NTL replace everyone's modem to a 200 or 250 because we've had to pay £100 in callouts and calls to 0870 numbers with them telling us there is no problem, when they know perfectly well there is a problem.

There is no way i'm going to pay another £50 for a callout, i just want my modem swapped for free now because we've paid to much already to be told bullsh*t from NTL.

What have ntl said about this?

James Henry
17-05-2006, 16:52
What have ntl said about this?

The official word Neil is that they support 10Mbit fine.

Stephen
17-05-2006, 16:59
I have a 120 modem and have not had any problem with it since I went 10MB.

Zee
17-05-2006, 17:59
NTL say that the modem is completely fine without a problem then she cut me off when i tried explaining there is a problem (Indian call centre); i know there is a problem with the modem because of the constant disconnections since October, why are they being so mingy with replacing modems?

What would i gain to lie that my modem is having problems, if there was no problem at all, the NTL engineer said that the 120 modems can't properly support 10MB but it'd cost them a lot of money to replace everyone’s modem.

£100 on call-outs calls to 0870 numbers, this is costing us a lot and i'm getting no where with them.

I'll try emailing or something, if not fine they can have it their way i'll just pay £50 for a swap... this is not fair though that i'd end up paying either money for the modem and money for another engineer to come out.

Why can't they just send me one through the post for free and i'll send this one back...

etccarmageddon
17-05-2006, 18:30
it needs to be installed - mac address is different for a start.

Zee
17-05-2006, 18:43
it needs to be installed - mac address is different for a start.

Ohh i see thanks, i didn't know that. I thought i was able to install it over the phone.

We're not paying another £50 for them to come and do it ...

---------- Post added at 17:43 ---------- Previous post was at 17:41 ----------


Why not consider a MaxDSL service or ADSL2+ if available, I see that you have Sky and a BT phoneline already.

I'm not able to get ADSL2+ i'm able to get ADSL 6Mbps but, the computer is in another room, and don't really want to pay money for BT to install another line, plus anothe £11 linerental(?)

Rik
17-05-2006, 18:46
Well when i was upgraded to 10Meg I had a NTL 120 and it worked fine for a while!

The problems arose when NTL updated the modem with a certain version of firmware.

But replacing the 120s with 250s does solve the problem :)

mcmanic
17-05-2006, 18:50
Well when i was upgraded to 10Meg I had a NTL 120 and it worked fine for a while!

The problems arose when NTL updated the modem with a certain version of firmware.

But replacing the 120s with 250s does solve the problem :)

ditto, oo3 was the culprit, they rolled it back at the time, dunno what it is now but if they had the nerve not to replace it or to charge me for a new one just to change it because they wouldn't believe there was a problem then it would of had a accident, i probably paid 20x over for a replacement modem over the 10years i've been using NTL and its forerunners equipment

Dave2150
17-05-2006, 18:51
It does seem strange that ntl have no problems with upgrading people for free, offering them silly deals to stay, etc, but begrudge replacing modems.

Just phone retentions and threaten to leave that usually hits the spot.

As far as replacing every modem, not going to happen until everyone is on 10Mbit or higher to be honest.

Why not consider a MaxDSL service or ADSL2+ if available, I see that you have Sky and a BT phoneline already.

Hope you realise that with MAXDSL he could have a 288kbit connection (0.2mbit) - ADSL is heavily distance limited, and with BT's metallic network falling apart, full of aluminium and copper (aluminium kills the adsl signal) there is a good chance the service will be worse than his NTL service now.

Of course if it is close to his exchange AND has good routing then he could get 8mbit.

Stay on 10mbit IMHO mate.

etccarmageddon
17-05-2006, 19:01
I'm on a 120 using the 002 config file and get 6 to 9.5 meg depending on how lucky I am.

James Henry
17-05-2006, 19:11
Hope you realise that with MAXDSL he could have a 288kbit connection (0.2mbit) - ADSL is heavily distance limited, and with BT's metallic network falling apart, full of aluminium and copper (aluminium kills the adsl signal) there is a good chance the service will be worse than his NTL service now.

Of course if it is close to his exchange AND has good routing then he could get 8mbit.

Stay on 10mbit IMHO mate.
Actually no, aluminium in itself doesn't kill the signal at all, so long as it's thick enough which all of the early aluminium build is. A certain period of network build where BT used a thinner guage of aluminium is the one that's caused a lot of the issues. The only thing that causes issues where the guage of the cable is high enough is any joins there might be between aluminium and copper.

You don't have to be that close to get 8Mbit, I have a full 8 as do people 2km and more away, and have worked on ADSL technology so have a bit of experience with it.

Think I've seen people with lines of around 3.5km who are able to get a full 8Mbps and a stable 8Mbps at that on ADSL. Introduce ADSL2+ into the mix and for those who have lines good enough to achieve 8Mbps it can make a substantial difference.

Still let's deal with worst case scenarios to make the cable look better I guess. At least with ADSL he'd be in with a fair shout of having a more reliable service that doesn't drop out, and he might even have decent support, my own provider's support is really pretty good. For instance they don't ignore me and will at very least check things out while ntl by the looks have totally ignored this guy to the point where they refuse to supply him a new modem at a cost of a few quid, which if nothing else can be proven wrong should be a standard part of trouble shooting and is the least they can do if they're charging him £50 for a service call. Way to get customer satisfaction.

Perhaps if they spent money on improving service rather than giving out discounts and reducing their own income while cutting back on service this chap wouldn't be encountering these issues.

Neil
17-05-2006, 19:27
Perhaps if they spent money on improving service rather than giving out discounts and reducing their own income while cutting back on service this chap wouldn't be encountering these issues.

And there it is, right there.

Sir, you have hit the nail on the head. :tu:

Slyder
17-05-2006, 19:28
I've now come to the conclusion that the 120 Modems DO NOT support the 10MB service,

I could of told you that the day 10meg was the norm... I had a 120 and had all the problems you are having. I got it swapped for a 250 and now I dont have any problems.

Maybe its time your 120 had an "accident" ;) ;) ;)

Zee
17-05-2006, 20:00
Ok, so lets say my 120 had an "accident" would i be charged for a replacement or be charged for the call-out?

We'd be happy to pay £50 to replace it, but because they are screwing us over each time we pay for a call-out i only find it fair that I do not pay for the modem or the call-out.

They could have saved me all these issues if they had just changed the modem on the first call out, but noooo .... 2nd callout noooo 3rd callout was only £20, £50 for the first 2, but nooooo they still didn't change it.

Damn woman on the phone had no idea what she was on about.

---------- Post added at 19:00 ---------- Previous post was at 18:57 ----------

By the way, i really do appreciate all the help you guys do on this forum, the mods and the normal posters, maybe i haven't said thanks in the past, but i'm saying thanks now!

James Henry
17-05-2006, 20:09
Were your modem to bizarrely fail there wouldn't be much that ntl could do if they couldn't prove that it was your fault.

Paul
17-05-2006, 20:13
The official word Neil is that they support 10Mbit fine.As I recall - they need version 002 of the firmware to get above (about) 5.5 Meg. That was certainly the case with my 120.

Zee
17-05-2006, 20:16
How do i find out which Firmware i use?

Dave2150
17-05-2006, 20:43
Actually no, aluminium in itself doesn't kill the signal at all, so long as it's thick enough which all of the early aluminium build is. A certain period of network build where BT used a thinner guage of aluminium is the one that's caused a lot of the issues. The only thing that causes issues where the guage of the cable is high enough is any joins there might be between aluminium and copper.

You don't have to be that close to get 8Mbit, I have a full 8 as do people 2km and more away, and have worked on ADSL technology so have a bit of experience with it.

Think I've seen people with lines of around 3.5km who are able to get a full 8Mbps and a stable 8Mbps at that on ADSL. Introduce ADSL2+ into the mix and for those who have lines good enough to achieve 8Mbps it can make a substantial difference.

Still let's deal with worst case scenarios to make the cable look better I guess. At least with ADSL he'd be in with a fair shout of having a more reliable service that doesn't drop out, and he might even have decent support, my own provider's support is really pretty good. For instance they don't ignore me and will at very least check things out while ntl by the looks have totally ignored this guy to the point where they refuse to supply him a new modem at a cost of a few quid, which if nothing else can be proven wrong should be a standard part of trouble shooting and is the least they can do if they're charging him £50 for a service call. Way to get customer satisfaction.

Perhaps if they spent money on improving service rather than giving out discounts and reducing their own income while cutting back on service this chap wouldn't be encountering these issues.

I am 3.5KM from my BT exchange. I sync at 2300-2800kbps. A BT engineer who installed my second phone line (I bought a second line in the hopes it would have less attenuation that the first, and it was actually alot worse....) said that the line is exactly 3.6KM from the greenbox at my street to the exchange. My house is 60M from the greenbox.

He said that the reason my Attenuation is 58db is because of the alumimum lines installed decades ago. I can only guess that as you said, I got lucky and got the "special" low grade aluminium somewhere along the way.

You say that in the worse case scenario adsl is still stable. Lets use my line for example. I sync at 2800kbps during the day, but during the evening when everyone comes home, crosstalk or some interference comes into play and affects my SNR, causing my modem to loose sync, and resync at 2300-2400 etc. This can happen few times a day/night, depending on who is firing up their connectinos I assume. Loosing sync is a nightmare for me, being a heavy online gamer, or when im downloading overnight etc.

Also, as I assume you are unaware, when the sun does down ADSL SNR is affected - even on the really short low attenuation lines, the SNR drops a db or two. This can lead to more CRC errors, which will affect your throughput. BT have combated this by introducing interleaving, which increases our pings by 10-20ms :) Great if you are an online gamer.

As for ADSL ISP's service, check some of these forums out:

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=talktalk

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=tiscali

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=e7even

In fact our ADSL is so bad our estate of 7 newly built houses are in talks with NTL to costshare £5999 between us to have it cabled up.

DieDieMyDarling
17-05-2006, 21:00
How do i find out which Firmware i use?

http://192.168.100.1/ and put "root" in both boxes.
Then click on 'operation configuration'.
I had the dodgy firmware like everyone else on the 120, when they first took everyone to 10mb, then they rolled it to a 002 firmware, which worked fine. The problems have only started happening agian a few weeks ago, and i noticed a few days ago that the firmware is back to the dodgy 003 one.

I started a few threads about it, but not many people were interested.
I don't really wanna go through the hassle of getting out an engineer, making time to be here for them, hoping they come on time, on the right day, etc, all because of a firmware error. Surely they can just roll it back to 002? I passed on my details to one of the CF staff, but nothing has changed (been a few days now).

Also, the 003 firmware handles the speeds fine, i can get about 8mb, it just randomly cuts out, sometimes when i'm downloading at full whack, sometimes when i'm not doing anything.

Zee
17-05-2006, 21:22
The firmware version i have is 002, is this good or bad?

I only get 2-5Mbps when downloading files and on speed tests.

James Henry
18-05-2006, 00:35
I am 3.5KM from my BT exchange. I sync at 2300-2800kbps. A BT engineer who installed my second phone line (I bought a second line in the hopes it would have less attenuation that the first, and it was actually alot worse....) said that the line is exactly 3.6KM from the greenbox at my street to the exchange. My house is 60M from the greenbox.

Unfortunate.

He said that the reason my Attenuation is 58db is because of the alumimum lines installed decades ago. I can only guess that as you said, I got lucky and got the "special" low grade aluminium somewhere along the way.

Yep probably.

You say that in the worse case scenario adsl is still stable. Lets use my line for example. I sync at 2800kbps during the day, but during the evening when everyone comes home, crosstalk or some interference comes into play and affects my SNR, causing my modem to loose sync, and resync at 2300-2400 etc. This can happen few times a day/night, depending on who is firing up their connectinos I assume. Loosing sync is a nightmare for me, being a heavy online gamer, or when im downloading overnight etc.

Nah I said you were quoting the worst case scenario :) Max can be painful and for some people has been, however a large number of people are getting better speeds on it. I agree it could have been handled better.

Also, as I assume you are unaware, when the sun does down ADSL SNR is affected - even on the really short low attenuation lines, the SNR drops a db or two. This can lead to more CRC errors, which will affect your throughput. BT have combated this by introducing interleaving, which increases our pings by 10-20ms :) Great if you are an online gamer.

Actually no I was quite aware of the effects, it's largely from increased RF interference from people coming home, switching their own DSL on causing near end crosstalk, switching microwaves, TVs, etc on and that causing problems.

Interleaving is a part of the DSL standards and is there to introduce stability. If you don't want the convolutional interleaving there you can ask your ISP to set your line interleave free. If it's a gack line though you may well see lower throughput from the CRCs you describe anyway.

Did you know ntl have *slight* interleaving on their network to combat noise as well?

As for ADSL ISP's service, check some of these forums out:

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=talktalk

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=tiscali

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=e7even

Again worst case scenario, find the cheapest ISPs with the worst service. You could just as easily have linked to someone like Zen whose customer service is very well respected, however rather than this you persued your own agenda by linking the cheap and nasty services.

In fact our ADSL is so bad our estate of 7 newly built houses are in talks with NTL to costshare £5999 between us to have it cabled up.

Sorry to hear that. You're the exception rather than the rule, I trust you realise this. There are millions who are quite happy, you may not be and that's unfortunate but not everyone is that way. Same with most things that have 8 million customers and counting unfortunately.

Fact is you're generalising. You know this and I know this and because DSL is a bad product for you it certainly doesn't mean it would be for OP. If he's in a similar situation to me he could obtain a far higher quality of service from DSL than ntl are providing at the moment.

Chrysalis
18-05-2006, 05:36
My 120 never crashed and rebooted but then again I was on the v1 firmware which maxed out at 6mbit :D

My 250 arrived before the dreaded firmware updates.

Slyder
18-05-2006, 07:33
Ok, so lets say my 120 had an "accident" would i be charged for a replacement or be charged for the call-out?

50/50....

Not the best answer, but it’s the correct one. I wasn’t charged myself for either the call out or the replacement... might be the Cov engineers have big hearts - but I have heard others on here getting charged.

Personally if I was in your shoes, "If I got charged the call out of fee" it would still be worth it as it would ultimately solve all the issues. :)

I dont know how much the replacement modems cost, so I wouldnt like to advise you there, but personally I would bite the bullet either way.

mcmanic
18-05-2006, 09:47
your payment are for the rental of the goods needed to use their service, if they are not upto the job and you been paying years on rental charges then sorry IMHO you should get a replacement free of charge and with no callout, after all its them that want you to use their service

Bytecon
18-05-2006, 23:48
http://192.168.100.1/ and put "root" in both boxes.
Then click on 'operation configuration'.
I had the dodgy firmware like everyone else on the 120, when they first took everyone to 10mb, then they rolled it to a 002 firmware, which worked fine. The problems have only started happening agian a few weeks ago, and i noticed a few days ago that the firmware is back to the dodgy 003 one.

I started a few threads about it, but not many people were interested.
I don't really wanna go through the hassle of getting out an engineer, making time to be here for them, hoping they come on time, on the right day, etc, all because of a firmware error. Surely they can just roll it back to 002? I passed on my details to one of the CF staff, but nothing has changed (been a few days now).

Also, the 003 firmware handles the speeds fine, i can get about 8mb, it just randomly cuts out, sometimes when i'm downloading at full whack, sometimes when i'm not doing anything.

I am also on the 003 firmware and am experiencing, is it possible to get downgraded back to 002?

Zee
23-05-2006, 21:14
Ok, just got off the phone.

Customer Services had a clue what i was talking about, but said they didn't have the tools to check my modem etc ... so they put my through to Technical Support.

She had no idea what i was saying or what she was saying, which was funny, but the good thing, and i'm gratful to her about it is that i won't be charged for it, or so she says.

She says if no one is in i'll be charged £10.

She said she can't promice they will change the modem, but she put it on her notes.

Hopefully they will change the modem this time around since i explained i'm on the 10Mbps service (Before was on 1Mbps then 2Mbps)

The guy/girl (?) is coming round to check it this Saturday, she said i could have it before then but i wouldn't be at home.

All in all i'm happy (so far) unless they don't change my modem, i'll be back on the phone to them and i won't be so nice this time around.

Slyder
24-05-2006, 19:33
All in all i'm happy (so far) unless they don't change my modem, i'll be back on the phone to them and i won't be so nice this time around.

On the morning they are due to come, disconnect your modem and box it all up. Tell him the girl at CS told you to do this as the engineer would upgrade the modem.

Worked for me... ;)

Zee
27-05-2006, 11:45
The guy came on went within 15 minutes, he changed my ntl: 120 for an ntl: 250 right away, he said they have thousands and thousands of the silver modems in storage now ...

Anyway, on speed tests there is a noticeable speed change, getting 9Mbps on tests, where as i was only getting at best 5.5Mbps with the old modem.

Seriously if you have an old 100 or 120 modem get it changed to a 250, you will notice the difference.

Thanks ntl:

monkey2468
27-05-2006, 12:15
Ive got the 120 and always get stable 10Mbps out of it, is there a difference between ambit120 modems?

Zee
27-05-2006, 15:48
I think it's safe to say i spoke to soon.

Sat, 27 May 2006 13:03:51 UTC

1st 512K took 1125 ms = 455.1 KB/sec, approx 3750 Kbps, 3.66 Mbps
2nd 512K took 954 ms = 536.7 KB/sec, approx 4422 Kbps, 4.32 Mbps
3rd 512K took 953 ms = 537.3 KB/sec, approx 4427 Kbps, 4.32 Mbps
4th 512K took 1140 ms = 449.1 KB/sec, approx 3701 Kbps, 3.61 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 4075 Kbps, 3.98 Mbps

What's next?

EvilRix
27-05-2006, 17:26
I have a 120 and 10Meg and I have absolutely no problems at all.

Zee
27-05-2006, 17:49
I have a 120 and 10Meg and I have absolutely no problems at all.

What area are you in?

Run the speed test and paste the results you get: www.cableforum.co.uk/board/speed.php (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/speed.php)

Anyone in the North or North West London area on 10Mbps getting s**t speeds?

Zee
29-05-2006, 12:03
Perhaps someone was maxing out their connection for the last 3 weeks ...

1st 512K took 328 ms = 1561 KB/sec, approx 12863 Kbps, 12.56 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 422 ms = 1213.3 KB/sec, approx 9998 Kbps, 9.76 Mbps

Overall Average Speed = approx 10628 Kbps, 10.38 Mbps

banjo
29-05-2006, 15:39
Does the 100 modem support 10 meg ?

Stuart
29-05-2006, 15:51
You don't have to be that close to get 8Mbit, I have a full 8 as do people 2km and more away, and have worked on ADSL technology so have a bit of experience with it.

Depends on the area. I don't have ADSL, so can't verify this, but despite being physically less than 400 metres from the exchange (I can actually see the roof out of our back bedroom window), and apparently, about the same distance on the network, BT will not guarantee more than 6.5 meg on my phone line.


Perhaps if they spent money on improving service rather than giving out discounts and reducing their own income while cutting back on service this chap wouldn't be encountering these issues.

Agreed, and a point we have both made several times.

---------- Post added at 14:51 ---------- Previous post was at 14:50 ----------

Does the 100 modem support 10 meg ?

Yes.

EvilRix
29-05-2006, 17:13
Luton...

Mon, 29 May 2006 15:12:34 GMT

1st 512K took 437 ms = 1171.6 KB/sec, approx 9654 Kbps, 9.43 Mbps
2nd 512K took 422 ms = 1213.3 KB/sec, approx 9998 Kbps, 9.76 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 9826 Kbps, 9.59 Mbps

monkey2468
01-06-2006, 23:36
I take back what I said about my Ambit 120 being stable on 10Mb!! It has started rebooting under heavy load like it did with duff firmware 6 months ago. (still get full 10Mb though)

Horace
02-06-2006, 04:44
Opening too many connections reboots my 120, simply downloading at full speed is fine, but since the majority of my downloading requires I open multiple connections to get full speed it pretty much has the same effect.

Using ntlhm120_ntl0002.cpr firmware.

monkey2468
02-06-2006, 10:35
Same firmware. :(

James Henry
02-06-2006, 11:11
Depends on the area. I don't have ADSL, so can't verify this, but despite being physically less than 400 metres from the exchange (I can actually see the roof out of our back bedroom window), and apparently, about the same distance on the network, BT will not guarantee more than 6.5 meg on my phone line.

Ah understood. BT won't guarantee anything above 6.5Mbit regardless of how close you are to the exchange, they play conservatively with their speed estimations. 6.5Mbit really means that you should synch at the full 8Mbit but they don't want to claim that just incase there's a slight fault on line or whatever which causes it to be unable to reach that rate.

Nothing really that interesting there just BT covering their own backsides, nothing personal to you :)

FWIW according to the BT checker I'm only good for 5.5 for sure, but synch above 8.

Path0gen
02-06-2006, 17:19
I think my 120 may need to have an accident too
keeps dropping out when I "use" the connection too much
max i've had is 300KB/s down 60KB/s up (UL ok then)

----------

Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:06:03 UTC
1st 512K took 1468 ms = 348.8 KB/sec, approx 2874 Kbps, 2.81 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1313 ms = 389.9 KB/sec, approx 3213 Kbps, 3.14 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1484 ms = 345 KB/sec, approx 2843 Kbps, 2.78 Mbps
4th 512K took 1500 ms = 341.3 KB/sec, approx 2812 Kbps, 2.75 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 2936 Kbps, 2.87 Mbps

----------

Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:06:54 UTC
1st 512K took 1375 ms = 372.4 KB/sec, approx 3069 Kbps, 3 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1296 ms = 395.1 KB/sec, approx 3256 Kbps, 3.18 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1016 ms = 503.9 KB/sec, approx 4152 Kbps, 4.05 Mbps
4th 512K took 1156 ms = 442.9 KB/sec, approx 3649 Kbps, 3.56 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 3532 Kbps, 3.45 Mbps

----------

Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:07:17 UTC
1st 512K took 1078 ms = 475 KB/sec, approx 3914 Kbps, 3.82 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1000 ms = 512 KB/sec, approx 4219 Kbps, 4.12 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1297 ms = 394.8 KB/sec, approx 3253 Kbps, 3.18 Mbps
4th 512K took 984 ms = 520.3 KB/sec, approx 4287 Kbps, 4.19 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 3918 Kbps, 3.83 Mbps

----------

Fri, 2 Jun 2006 15:07:32 UTC
1st 512K took 1343 ms = 381.2 KB/sec, approx 3141 Kbps, 3.07 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1172 ms = 436.9 KB/sec, approx 3600 Kbps, 3.52 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1282 ms = 399.4 KB/sec, approx 3291 Kbps, 3.21 Mbps
4th 512K took 968 ms = 528.9 KB/sec, approx 4358 Kbps, 4.26 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 3598 Kbps, 3.52 Mbps