Anybody Running 1 GBPS At Home?

[OVERKILL]

Just running Windows Defender and Maywarebytes Premium. I've never changed any major settings in them. I think I have my modem/router set to like a medium security level for the firewall setting. Wouldn't a firewall effect downloads more than uploads?

Not necessarily. Could try disabling MWBP to see if that has an impact. Did you have a chance to try the Windows 7 computer yet?

I think it's ADSL2+ (two pairs of phone wires are used), and it's only 60 Mbps download and 5 Mbsp upload speed.

Sounds like VDSL or VDSL2. ADSL2+ allows for around 25 down and 1.5 up. With Annex M the upstream can be up to ~3Mbit. VDSL2 greatly improves the upstream side of things and available downstream bandwidth. I went from 18/1 on ADSL2+ to 25/5 on the same loop with VDSL2.

 

[CarbonSteel]

I have AT&T Fiber and am running 1 Gpbs up and down with no data cap. Previously had Comcast cable that was 12 Mbps up and 300 Mbps down with a 1 TB data cap which was not hard to hit with 4 people working/schooling from home along with streaming.

Comcast is 2.5x more expensive than AT&T and they paid me $300 in gift cards to switch making it a no brainier.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Not necessarily. Could try disabling MWBP to see if that has an impact. Did you have a chance to try the Windows 7 computer yet?

I'll get on the Win7 machine tomorrow and run the test.

Sounds like VDSL or VDSL2. ADSL2+ allows for around 25 down and 1.5 up. With Annex M the upstream can be up to ~3Mbit. VDSL2 greatly improves the upstream side of things and available downstream bandwidth. I went from 18/1 on ADSL2+ to 25/5 on the same loop with VDSL2.

It's DSL two pairs of phone lines, each line does half of the total speed (2 lines at 30 Mbps each for 60 Mbps download speed). I just looked up the specs and it shows the following:

ADSL: 20 Mbps
ADSL2+: 20 Mbps
Bonded ADSL2: 40 Mbps, VDSL: 200 Mbps

 

[OVERKILL]

I'll get on the Win7 machine tomorrow and run the test.


It's DSL two pairs of phone lines, each line does half of the total speed (2 lines at 30 Mbps each for 60 Mbps download speed). I just looked up the specs and it shows the following:

ADSL: 20 Mbps
ADSL2+: 20 Mbps
Bonded ADSL2: 40 Mbps, VDSL: 200 Mbps

Sounds like VDSL to me (remember, ANY DSL technology is distance limited, just because VDSL2 can do 200Mbit on a short loop doesn't mean you'll get that). If you get 60 down, unless it's triple bonded ADSL2+ Annex M with a slightly reduced synch (bonded pair at 100% RCO would only give you 50 down, 6 up) I suspect it's either bonded VDSL or VDSL2. VDSL is up to 55/3 so conceivably that could be knocked down to 30/2.5 in a bonded setup to yield 60/5 but that may be the same case for VDSL2 in this instance, depending on loop length.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Sounds like VDSL to me (remember, ANY DSL technology is distance limited, just because VDSL2 can do 200Mbit on a short loop doesn't mean you'll get that). If you get 60 down, unless it's triple bonded ADSL2+ Annex M with a slightly reduced synch (bonded pair at 100% RCO would only give you 50 down, 6 up) I suspect it's either bonded VDSL or just VDSL2.

I'm thinking it's bonded VDSL2 because each pair right now gives 30 Mbps download, and is capable up to 40 Mbps (per wire pair I'm thinking). My IP said they were going to provide 80 Mbps that my modem would support for no extra cost after some infrastructure upgrades. Reminds me, I need to call them and see if it's available now in my area now.

 

[Revving2Redline]

Got a Docsis 3,0 and a 4K Sony XBR 960Hz and I streamed Ford vs Ferrari off it the other day. No lag,but it's hard wired with Cat6 cable and no one uses WiFi during movie time. Only have 300Mbps and 15 and it hasn't given me any trouble. I think the hard cap is like something insanely high . I'd like to move up to 3.1 but I think the highest possible is like 700 which is still moving. I remember having 50 down and 5 up and just destroying people on Halo 2 on Xbox. Would like Google Gbit but they ain't interested in the hillbilly areas LOL

 

[ZeeOSix]

Got a Docsis 3,0 and a 4K Sony XBR 960Hz and I streamed Ford vs Ferrari off it the other day. No lag,but it's hard wired with Cat6 cable and no one uses WiFi during movie time. Only have 300Mbps and 15 and it hasn't given me any trouble.

I streamed "Ford vs. Ferrari" over WiFi with only 60 Mbps service (probably actual through put via WiFi was 45-50 Mbps) ... steamed flawlessly. Also streamed "Greyhound" in 4K over WiFi to a 4K TV and it steamed perfectly too. I wouldn't even know what to do with 300+ Mbps internet service, lol.

 

[alarmguy]

I streamed "Ford vs. Ferrari" over WiFi with only 60 Mbps service (probably actual through put via WiFi was 45-50 Mbps) ... steamed flawlessly. Also streamed "Greyhound" in 4K over WiFi to a 4K TV and it steamed perfectly too. I wouldn't even know what to do with 300+ Mbps internet service, lol.

^^ Yes, I agree. You dont "only have" 60Mbps service, with a proper set up anything should be able to stream 4k with 25 Mbps with no issues at all. Granted most homes have much more wifi going on now so I guess I wouldn't want any less then the 60.
AS you most likely know now, we have 20+ Wifi devices with perfectly working 100Mbps service (actual speed average 117 Mbps) and its lightening fast no matter what we do. Of the 20+ devices we have 3 full time wifi security cameras and 1 DB Camera plus a remote Indoor camera when we are not home, 5 Roku players though never more then 2 running at a time. Kids grown and out of the house now! )

 

[uc50ic4more]

^^ Yes, I agree. You dont "only have" 60Mbps service, with a proper set up anything should be able to stream 4k with 25 Mbps with no issues at all.

Squishing a 4k video stream into a 25mbps connection might be possible; but at some point you're going to begin reckoning with some very real video compression artifacts (not network inconsistency, but video quality degradation). Using h264 I think the optimal bitrate (read: minimum without overtly visible consequences) is ~50mbps.

 

[ZeeOSix]

@OVERKILL. Ran speedtest ( http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest ) from my Win7 desktop that's Cat5 hardwired to the modem/router. Same basic outcome where the download is low bufferbloat but the upload has high bufferbloat. Same results using Firefox, Edge and Google Chrome.

 

[OVERKILL]

@OVERKILL. Ran speedtest ( http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest ) from my Win7 desktop that's Cat5 hardwired to the modem/router. Same basic outcome where the download is low bufferbloat but the upload has high bufferbloat. Same results using Firefox, Edge and Google Chrome.

View attachment 34421

So, sounds like it's the router then. Is this a unit your ISP provides?

 

[ZeeOSix]

So, sounds like it's the router then. Is this a unit your ISP provides?

Yes. Guess I can go into the settings and check what they are set to as suggested earlier in this thread.

 

[OVERKILL]

Yes. Guess I can go into the settings and check what they are set to as suggested earlier in this thread.

Yes, please do.

 

[OilReport99]

Same results using Firefox, Edge and Google Chrome.

Os OVERKILL suggested, check router settings and/or installed packages. They can make it or break it.

 

[ZeeOSix]

ZeeOSix said: Yes. Guess I can go into the settings and check what they are set to as suggested earlier in this thread.

Yes, please do.

QoS was on, so I disabled it. Made no difference in the bufferbloat on upload stream.

Also changed my modem/router firewall from "Medium" to "Low", and that didn't make any difference either. Setting the modem/router firewall to "High" didn't allow the speed test to run correctly.

Any other suggestions?

 

[OVERKILL]

ZeeOSix said: Yes. Guess I can go into the settings and check what they are set to as suggested earlier in this thread.



QoS was on, so I disabled it. Made no difference in the bufferbloat on upload stream.

Also changed my modem/router firewall from "Medium" to "Low", and that didn't make any difference either. Setting the modem/router firewall to "High" didn't allow the speed test to run correctly.

Any other suggestions?

Was there the option of "off" ?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Was there the option of "off" ?

For the firewall? Yes, but is that safe to do just for the test, then enable after that?

The bufferbloat load is probably due to my IP ... their DNS fails the self diagnostic tests 9 out of 10 times, so knows what else might be flaky on their end, lol.

 

[OVERKILL]

For the firewall? Yes, but is that safe to do just for the test, then enable after that?

The bufferbloat load is probably due to my IP ... their DNS fails the self diagnostic tests 9 out of 10 times, so knows what else might be flaky on their end, lol.

Perfectly safe to do as a test. You'll still be behind NAT, so you aren't exposing anything on your LAN in doing so.

I remember how sketchy your ISP is, lol.

 

[alarmguy]

update on buffer bloat. Again, love learning about this stuff, actually may whole life, which has been pretty long so far..
Personally for anyone reading these posts I think they need to pay attention to ping and jitter first, then onto the next level with bloat if they wish but doubt if they have low ping and jitter they will ever know a difference on a 100 mbps connection, from my experience anyway simply because I am so happy with my service and set up.. I am certainly not contradicting others in here that know far more then me and posting this stuff as I learn myself.

Anyway, per my past posts I just did one other interesting test today that tells me, (and I kind of read this too) all the different influences on buffer bloat, from router, to the computer itself, well, here is something interesting.

I decided to run the test through my VPN which is VPNsecure.me vpn service.
Im really happy with this VPN, download speeds come within 10% of what I get without the VPN, meaning I get 117 without the VPN and 108 to 112 with. Ping and Jitter come within 15% of what I get without, all very good, in fact sometimes I forget I have the VPN on and do speed tests forgetting I have it on, that's how fast the VPN is.
Ok, with that said, I ran the test for bloat for the first time with the VPN on, ran it two times to confirm, bloat went through the roof on the upload side. up to 200 to 300MS compared to 0 to 5ms with the VPN off. ran the test two times both on and off, results were the same.
This chart below is with the VPN on, I posted many charts in previous posts with it off so no sense repeating. This is the first with VPN on.

 

[OVERKILL]

update on buffer bloat. Again, love learning about this stuff, actually may whole life, which has been pretty long so far..
Personally for anyone reading these posts I think they need to pay attention to ping and jitter first, then onto the next level with bloat if they wish but doubt if they have low ping and jitter they will ever know a difference on a 100 mbps connection, from my experience anyway simply because I am so happy with my service and set up.. I am certainly not contradicting others in here that know far more then me and posting this stuff as I learn myself.

Anyway, per my past posts I just did one other interesting test today that tells me, (and I kind of read this too) all the different influences on buffer bloat, from router, to the computer itself, well, here is something interesting.

I decided to run the test through my VPN which is VPNsecure.me vpn service.
Im really happy with this VPN, download speeds come within 10% of what I get without the VPN, meaning I get 117 without the VPN and 108 to 112 with. Ping and Jitter come within 15% of what I get without, all very good, in fact sometimes I forget I have the VPN on and do speed tests forgetting I have it on, that's how fast the VPN is.
Ok, with that said, I ran the test for bloat for the first time with the VPN on, ran it two times to confirm, bloat went through the roof on the upload side. up to 200 to 300MS compared to 0 to 5ms with the VPN off. ran the test two times both on and off, results were the same.
This chart below is with the VPN on, I posted many charts in previous posts with it off so no sense repeating. This is the first with VPN on.View attachment 34563

Encrypting/decrypting traffic as well as the addition of many more hops is going to have a significant impact on this parameter, so those results should not be surprising.