Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Speed Test

speed.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 216 posts

Re: Speed Test

#191

Post by hackmiester »

dawnerd wrote: post #143
dspillett wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've found Fast.com gamed sometimes … the ISP prioritizes Netflix traffic The other side of this is why Netflix created Fast.com in the first place: ISPs throttling Netflix traffic (or just having poor peering arrangements that affected it) and blaming Netflix when customers complained about poor video quality (due to Netflix downgrading when experiencing congestion) because some speedtest (that likely the ISP prio…

And they’ve figured out how to get around that. T-Mobile will show full speed on fast but if you have SD video enabled it’ll throttle Netflix videos but not fast.

I was about to bring up T-Mobile because fast.com shows AWFUL results for me, revealing that T-Mobile is in fact throttling Netflix.

Re: Speed Test

#192

Post by nerdbert »

dom96 wrote: post #175
p1mrx wrote: post #148

Nice. Every speed test should have a "latency under load" graph, because we can't fight bufferbloat if we can't see it. DSLReports had the first bufferbloat test I'm aware of, but it's broken now. Another example is https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat Ideally this problem should be fixed by ISPs and modem manufacturers, but individuals can use OpenWrt with luci-app-sqm, at least when the connection has a predi…

Wow, +500ms latency under upload load for me with Hyperoptic. Incredibly poor. https://www.waveform.com/tools/bufferbloat?test-id=8205ec7e-...

It's probably your router. The ones supplied by ISPs, as well as many cheap off-the-shelf ones, are terrible at managing load.

Re: Speed Test

#193

Post by nerdbert »

capableweb wrote: post #92
Aachen wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Europe it's all equally fast. I don't remember ever having a throttled service, that sounds like a page out of the dystopian scenarios produced in the era where net neutrality legislation was being proposed/promoted ten years ago or something. There were rumors back then that bittorrent was being throttled (and corresponding protocol obfuscation and port changing) but I never had that myself

> Here in Europe it's all equally fast Well, Europe has lots of different countries and I've definitely been in countries that are considered to be in Europe where it's not equally fast, and using a VPN can speed up a lot of things.

Obviously there are faster and slower broadband connections; by "equally fast" I assume GP meant that various services can be reached without ISP choking or throttling, thanks to EU-wide network neutrality rules.

Re: Speed Test

#194

Post by nerdbert »

akino_germany wrote: post #133
jgrahamc wrote: post #77

If you're interested in this then you might be interested in the global Internet quality data we are publishing: https://radar.cloudflare.com/quality and https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-radar-internet-quali...

Your layout is broken in everything but Chrome.

Works for me in Firefox. Plugins maybe?

Re: Speed Test

#195

Post by nerdbert »

dgb23 wrote: post #54
gorgoiler wrote: post #41

Why do these speed tests start out slow and then get faster over the course of a few seconds? Is it something about the internet that means the speed changes so much over the course of the test?

I can't answer your question directly, because I don't know. But the first keyword I would look at would be BGP. Generally speaking, routing decisions are dynamic and constantly changing. Add the unreliability of the network layer, corporate politics and optimization heuristics to that and you get varying results. https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/security/glossary/what-i... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Gat…

Definitely nothing to do with BGP.

Re: Speed Test

#196

Post by btgeekboy »

jeroenhd wrote: post #126
btgeekboy wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fast.com frequently tells me speeds that cannot exist. Why yes, I am definitely getting 1.2gbps over this gigabit Ethernet and 940mbps Internet connection.

Fast.com seemingly tries to compensate for the overhead. Bandwidth includes every bit on the wire and that's why "940mbps" internet is usually just normal gigabit with a bunch of packet headers and intentionally unused transmit space consuming the phantom 60mbps. It's hard to guesstimate the exact bandwidth of the data that arrives in your browser because of differences in protocol, MTU, header compression and all th…

I'm familiar with why they sell it as 940mbps vs gigabit; that doesn't concern me. I also don't buy the explanations of MTU, accurate timing, etc for one big reason: other sites like Speedtest.net and the Cloudflare speed test we're on the discussion thread for simply do not have this problem.

And of course, I'd not expect them to want me to pull down 1gbps of streaming video. But I would expect them to burst my connection when downloading videos for offline viewing, their own bandwidth permitting. Unused bandwidth at a point in time is wasted bandwidth. But more central to my original point, I'd also expect their browser-based speed test to not claim I'm going faster than is physically possible. Let's be honest - however they're measuring the actual connection speeds is not as accurate as some of the alternatives on the same playing field.

Re: Speed Test

#197

Post by albert_e »

xp84 wrote: post #185
albert_e wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is it possible for ISP to distinguish Netflix video streams from connections to Fast.com ? (and throttle them differently) PS: my latest ISP router doesn't let me change DNS to my local pi-hole. haven't explored all options yet - just got new one 2 days ago -- but currently my DNS queries are going to whatever is the default set by my ISP.

What's the motivation to rent an ISP router? That's a lot more control than many people would prefer to give to an entity that is likely anywhere from "greedy and dumb," to greedy and outright hostile. Having DOCSIS, I buy a modem, and own my router. I am aware that for more exotic technologies like fiber, a rented/ISP-owned 'modem' or network terminal of some sort may be compulsory, but a router is a bridge too far…

(Not in the US.)

Well, here the major ISPs are bundling the FTTH Fibre modem and th WiFi router into a single device.

I wanted to experiment with Mesh router for better wifi coverage but the prices of mesh routers here are high, brands unproven, and returns policy iffy. So I went with the mesh router option offered by ISP for ~1 USD a month.

(I do have a spare wifi router to add if I really feel like. Our location has occassional power outages and the backup power doesn't flip on instantly enough - causing router restarts if we don't add a small battery powered backup to each individual router. So the setup gets bulky and messy.)

Re: Speed Test

#198

Post by xyzelement »

CrLf wrote: post #160
xyzelement wrote: post #118

I recently discovered the networkquality tool on Mac. As far as I can tell it's the only tool that measures simultaneous upload and download speeds which is more reflective of real world video conferencing use cases. I was using it to see if my new hardcore gaming router gave me better range than the old one. On isolated up and down tests, it did. But on combined tests, the advantage especially for upload disappeared…

> which is more reflective of real world video conferencing use cases What's more reflective of real world use cases is a hot discussion topic. :) The "networkQuality" tool on macOS and other implementations(1) of the "RPM" algorithm(2) are very good to see how an Internet connection behaves under high stress. But the real world is seldom high stress (100Mbps+ connections are rarely pushed to the limit, honestly). In…

Yes fair enough. I know my link is great - I pay for 300 up and down and that's what I get. I was running measurements to track degradation in wifi performance due to distance from the router - out in the yard - and how much difference one of these 8 antenna monster routers made. My use case is 100 video conferencing that I want to do reliability from the yard.

Re: Speed Test

#199

Post by stephen_g »

ghshephard wrote: post #168
jedberg wrote: post #162

I think this is great service, and here is another one that Netflix provides: https://fast.com That one uses Netflix servers, so you get a valid test as long as your ISP isn't throttling Netflix. Of course they created it so that people would call their ISP and complain they aren't getting the speed they pay for, but it turns out it's a pretty good test most of the time. And most importantly, it isn't prioritized lik…

The prioritization is critical for speedtest.net - it's entire purpose is to provide an assessment of your PHY - not your Network, and certainly not your Internet speed. speedtest.net should tell you if the physical installation of your cable was done properly - nothing more.

Surely 98% of the people who use Speedtest.net don't understand that though...

Re: Speed Test

#200

Post by LoganDark »

cpfohl wrote: post #65
LoganDark wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't measure file size in bits. I don't want to multiply/divide by 8 when roughly estimating how long a download will take. I end up doing 10 instead for maximum ease and pessimism.

Link speed has always been measured in bits/s or as sibling comment suggests baud which is, still, just bits per second. Obviously a huge part of this is marketing for modems, ISPs, network cards, etc. but it’s consistent. The conversion to GB/s is fairly simple and doable with the super key, or super space on Mac in every modern OS… I agree with you that the difference is irritating, but wouldn’t have done any diffe…

> The conversion to GB/s is fairly simple and doable with the super key, or super space on Mac in every modern OS…

Or the dedicated button on my keyboard that spawns a calculator. I don't care, though.

Post reply on HN