Paying for 200mbps, getting 60mbps

[TOdom]

I have the latest network adapters and I'm showing that my adapter speed is capable of up to 1Gbps (shown in pic). We had a guy from our ISP come out about 3 months ago and show us that the Cat6 I'm running my PC from is getting the promised 200mbps. I used to get 200mbps, but I recently changed my motherboard and processor. But, like I said, I've gone ahead and downloaded all the chipset and network drivers I need as displayed by the picture. Am I getting throttled or does the '1Gbps' in the pic not mean what I think it does (I think it means my network adapter can receive up to as much as 1Gbps)




 

[mynameisjuan]

Do you have other devices to test with? What does fast.com (netflix's speed test) give you?

[TOdom]

1 minute ago, mynameisjuan said:

Do you have other devices to test with? What does fast.com (netflix's speed test) give you?

It gives me even less, 30mbps, I'll run a speedtest on my phone real quick

 

[TOdom]

2 minutes ago, TOdom said:

It gives me even less, 30mbps, I'll run a speedtest on my phone real quick

 

My phone is giving me 50mbps. I'll give the router a reset once my brother gets done playing his game. Him playing online shouldn't have any affect on my performance because of the router we have and the package we're paying for though

[mynameisjuan]

Its right around 60/10 which is a common package. Try rebooting the modem instead of your router and see. If you are still getting ~60 check your account and see if it is still 200

[PopsicleHustler]

Check speed on both phone and PC. Reset router and try again. If it doesn't help, you should contact your provider.

[mynameisjuan]

Resetting a router is nothing but placebo

[TOdom]

21 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Its right around 60/10 which is a common package. Try rebooting the modem instead of your router and see. If you are still getting ~60 check your account and see if it is still 200

I'll try it, next step after checking package would be to call the isp I guess

[Blue4130]

2 hours ago, TOdom said:

I'll try it, next step after checking package would be to call the isp I guess

Also note that 60Mbps is roughly 480mbps. Check the package and verify the units. 

[Jarsky]

3 hours ago, TOdom said:

My phone is giving me 50mbps. I'll give the router a reset once my brother gets done playing his game. Him playing online shouldn't have any affect on my performance because of the router we have and the package we're paying for though

We don't know what your wifi is like, so it's best to test from another device connected via ethernet. 

Are these speedtests on Ookla to a speedtest server hosted by your ISP? If not, have you checked to see if your ISP has a Speedtest server?

The router they gave you definately has a 1Gbit interface on it? (I've seen plenty of times people upgrade plan to 200Mbit+ and they still have an old router with a 100Mbit WAN port)

Also keep in mind that 200Mbps is the ideal speed, but generally isn't guaranteed. Most CIR is around 2.5Mbps on residential consumer plans. 

[Jarsky]

26 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

Also note that 60Mbps is roughly 480mbps. Check the package and verify the units. 

That's MBps or MB/s.

Mbps and mbps are the same canonical unit for Megabits per second.

[mynameisjuan]

11 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

We don't know what your wifi is like, so it's best to test from another device connected via ethernet.

Hes on ethernet

11 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

Are these speedtests on Ookla to a speedtest server hosted by your ISP? If not, have you checked to see if your ISP has a Speedtest server?

He tried fast.com also

11 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

The router they gave you definately has a 1Gbit interface on it? (I've seen plenty of times people upgrade plan to 200Mbit+ and they still have an old router with a 100Mbit WAN port)

He would have still capped out around 100mbps

11 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

Also keep in mind that 200Mbps is the ideal speed, but generally isn't guaranteed. Most CIR is around 2.5Mbps on residential consumer plans. 

Thats false. It all depends on your plan and type of service

[Jarsky]

7 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Hes on ethernet

He said his second test was from his mobile 

Quote

He tried fast.com also

fast.com is Netflix's speedtest servers and not guaranteed to be hosted inside his ISP's network to confirm his throughput to the network

Quote

He would have still capped out around 100mbps

Yes, but I was just querying what router he had as old crappy ISP ones also had less powerful CPU's, and with heavy NAT could easily fall below the 100Mbps max. 

 

Quote

Thats false. It all depends on your plan and type of service

No it is not. Speed is generally good because large ISP's have large customer bases that use their speed in varying ways. 

CIR (guaranteed minimum speed) is considerably lower than your rated plan. I'm not saying this is why his speed is so low, im pointing out not to expect 24x7 200Mbit (even though tbh I can max my 1Gbit 99.9% of the time)

[Blue4130]

22 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

That's MBps or MB/s.

Mbps and mbps are the same canonical unit for Megabits per second.

@Jarskyyou are correct. I was too quick in my reply, but left it as a reminder to myself to slow down and read before posting

[mynameisjuan]

24 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

He said his second test was from his mobile 

After testing wired

24 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

fast.com is Netflix's speedtest servers and not guaranteed to be hosted inside his ISP's network to confirm his throughput to the network

Doesnt matter in the grand scheme of things. He just need to ensure his WAN is getting the throughput. Also almost every ISP has a direct CDN peering and will get full throughput

24 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

Yes, but I was just querying what router he had as old crappy ISP ones also had less powerful CPU's, and with heavy NAT could easily fall below the 100Mbps max. 

But the original post is he was getting 200 until he got a new motherboad/CPU. The router doesnt appear to be the issue.

24 minutes ago, Jarsky said:

No it is not. Speed is generally good because large ISP's have large customer bases that use their speed in varying ways. 

CIR (guaranteed minimum speed) is considerably lower than your rated plan. I'm not saying this is why his speed is so low, im pointing out not to expect 24x7 200Mbit (even though tbh I can max my 1Gbit 99.9% of the time)

No, CIR is not guaranteed minimum, its maximum. With consumer connections there is actually no guaranteed speed on shared platforms, GPON, cable. This limit is at the port and the chassis uplink. Your bandwidth is shaped/policed at a given rate you pay for. Yes you cannot guarantee speed 100% of the time but there is no guaranteed speeds.

[Blue4130]

@TOdom after swapping mobo and chip, did you do a fresh windows install? It's not unheard-of that conflicts with old registry entries cause network issues. 

[intertan]

 

6 hours ago, TOdom said:

I used to get 200mbps, but I recently changed my motherboard and processor. But, like I said, I've gone ahead and downloaded all the chipset and network drivers I need as displayed by the picture. Am I getting throttled or does the '1Gbps' in the pic not mean what I think it does (I think it means my network adapter can receive up to as much as 1Gbps)

sounds like you have issues. everything worked till you changed hardware.

To do a proper speed test you must only have 1 device connected, nothing else on wifi or Ethernet. You would be surprised how many people complain about speeds only to find our there kids are using P2P or some malware on there pc.

[Alex Atkin UK]

17 hours ago, mynameisjuan said:

No, CIR is not guaranteed minimum, its maximum. With consumer connections there is actually no guaranteed speed on shared platforms, GPON, cable. This limit is at the port and the chassis uplink. Your bandwidth is shaped/policed at a given rate you pay for. Yes you cannot guarantee speed 100% of the time but there is no guaranteed speeds.

That depends on your ISP/country.  Openreach in the UK are actually implementing guaranteed minimums on their FTTP connections, presumably dictating what their contention ratio is on the PON.  Even their DSL services have minimums where if you drop below them in sync rate, you have certain freedoms to change your subscribed package, even when within the minimum contracted term.

[mynameisjuan]

11 hours ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

That depends on your ISP/country.  Openreach in the UK are actually implementing guaranteed minimums on their FTTP connections, presumably dictating what their contention ratio is on the PON.  Even their DSL services have minimums where if you drop below them in sync rate, you have certain freedoms to change your subscribed package, even when within the minimum contracted term.

Those are not CIR though. With PON the standard is max 32 per PON because of loss per splice. Then raitio out max per customer. That's not guaranteeing anything other than limiting over subscription.
Second scenario is just able to essentially get out of a package early if you copper is just terrible.

CIR is a queuing method, neither of those fall in the category

[Alex Atkin UK]

On 1/1/2020 at 11:27 AM, mynameisjuan said:

Those are not CIR though. With PON the standard is max 32 per PON because of loss per splice. Then raitio out max per customer. That's not guaranteeing anything other than limiting over subscription.
Second scenario is just able to essentially get out of a package early if you copper is just terrible.

CIR is a queuing method, neither of those fall in the category

I kinda assumed on the PON they would give a minimum time slice per customer to guarantee the minimum speed.  There must be something as if its just contention ratios then that wouldn't prevent a user on Gigabit still saturating everyone else at peak hours.

[mynameisjuan]

10 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

I kinda assumed on the PON they would give a minimum time slice per customer to guarantee the minimum speed.  There must be something as if its just contention ratios then that wouldn't prevent a user on Gigabit still saturating everyone else at peak hours.

There is no minimum. We can over subscribe to the point that 3 or more customers can starve out everyone out. Your time slices are upload only and actually cannot be over subscribed. At least in the 3 different vendors I used.

There is a reason you don't offer gigabit on GPON, NGPON is where gigabit can be offered.

[Alex Atkin UK]

2 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

There is no minimum. We can over subscribe to the point that 3 or more customers can starve out everyone out. Your time slices are upload only.

There is a reason you don't offer gigabit on GPON, NGPON is where gigabit can be offered.

Its my understanding that in fact Openreach WiLL be offering Gigabit over GPON, but charging a higher connection fee to pay for upgrading to the area to NGPON "once it becomes necessary".

Its hard to really be sure how any of this works as Openreach have a rather none-standard way of managing FTTC to begin with (they have a dynamic line management system that adjusts parameters and throttles the traffic to avoid sending more traffic down the backhaul than can be delivered to the customer), so I wouldn't be shocked to see something similar on their FTTP system too.  It does kinda make sense though, drop the excess traffic as far up the chain as possible so its not wasting bandwidth on the smaller links that are closer to the customer.

[mynameisjuan]

7 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

Its my understanding that in fact Openreach WiLL be offering Gigabit over GPON, but charging a higher connection fee to pay for upgrading to the area to NGPON "once it becomes necessary".

You can do it if you keep the amount of customers down. 32 tends to be the limit because light loss from splicing but nothing it stopping from say putting 5-10 on a PON at gigabit. Sure they cannot all go balls out but TCP will at least be able to balance out the traffic if that shall happen.

 

It's not ideal but can be done.

 

9 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

Its hard to really be sure how any of this works as Openreach have a rather none-standard way of managing FTTC to begin with (they have a dynamic line management system that adjusts parameters and throttles the traffic to avoid sending more traffic down the backhaul than can be delivered to the customer), so I wouldn't be shocked to see something similar on their FTTP system too.  It does kinda make sense though, drop the excess traffic as far up the chain as possible so its not wasting bandwidth on the smaller links that are closer to the customer.

It's pretty common. Most providers shape right after the access platforms which is on the way to the core or like us we router right after. We have multiple cores though.
Current access platforms actual can shape right off the chassis. Old chassis you had to manually shape and allocate resources which would prevent oversubscribyion altogether.

[Alex Atkin UK]

4 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

You can do it if you keep the amount of customers down. 32 tends to be the limit because light loss from splicing but nothing it stopping from say putting 5-10 on a PON at gigabit. Sure they cannot all go balls out but TCP will at least be able to balance out the traffic if that shall happen.

 

It's not ideal but can be done.

 

It's pretty common. Most providers shape right after the access platforms which is on the way to the core or like us we router right after. We have multiple cores though.
Current access platforms actual can shape right off the chassis. Old chassis you had to manually shape and allocate resources which would prevent oversubscribyion altogether.

That's interesting, as several people told me I was talking BS when I explained it on here before, but really its only logical to not send more traffic to the customer than can be delivered.  Even if TCP ultimately throttles down, why have that initial burst of traffic wasting bandwidth on the links when it could never be delivered?