Permanent packet loss

Oalei · June 10, 2019

I'm using pop os and before i switched im not having a permanent packet loss only a bit but after I switched it's like everytime, ping is not the best but usually 20-50ping all the time to like a 1mb internet connection. I know an Ethernet will reduce or make it completely gone but I'm using a laptop which I don't want a cable around or conveniently have a switch/router nearby everytime. So what can I do about this?

WereCatf · June 10, 2019

6 minutes ago, Oalei said:

I don't want a cable around or conveniently have a switch/router nearby everytime.

So, you want a magical connection? Too bad, no such thing. You'll just have to suck it up and either go with a cable or install an access-point closer to where you use the laptop.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

Just now, WereCatf said:

So, you want a magical connection? Too bad, no such thing. You'll just have to suck it up and either go with a cable or install an access-point closer to where you use the laptop.

well if thats the only choice im going to do that than thanks dude, im still a very reasonable person anyway. Well for any reason my room have the router anyway so i think i can still manage for this, but outside well whatever i geuss.

WereCatf · June 10, 2019

3 minutes ago, Oalei said:

well if thats the only choice im going to do that than thanks dude, im still a very reasonable person anyway. Well for any reason my room have the router anyway so i think i can still manage for this, but outside well whatever i geuss.

You could always buy a USB WiFi-adapter with external antennas and see if that improves things, but it's going to be an ugly thing sticking out of your laptop and could be a complete waste of money as well.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

1 minute ago, WereCatf said:

You could always buy a USB WiFi-adapter with external antennas and see if that improves things, but it's going to be an ugly thing sticking out of your laptop and could be a complete waste of money as well.

well maybe getting a better Hz on that thinkg would be anotther way, but i havent tried re installing OS tbh or change OS maybe i will try that first before i waste money just like you mention.

Windows7ge · June 10, 2019

Assuming the network drivers are up-to-date/proper I wouldn't see using different OS's to make any significant difference in terms of packet-loss. Would that be 50ms to the router or to your game server? 50ms on something like 2.4GHz Wi-Fi isn't terrible especially if that's 50ms all the way to the server. Ethernet would get you <1ms to the router.

So you're kind of out of luck. TCP exists for a reason and so does UDP. Both function on the principal that you will never have a lossless network. All you can do is mitigate that loss.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

Just now, Windows7ge said:

Assuming the network drivers are up-to-date/proper I wouldn't see using different OS's to make any significant difference in terms of packet-loss. Would that be 50ms to the router or to your game server? 50ms on something like 2.4GHz Wi-Fi isn't terrible especially if that's 50ms all the way to the server. Ethernet would get you <1ms to the router.

So you're kind of out of luck. TCP exists for a reason and so does UDP. Both function on the principal that you will never have a lossless network. All you can do is mitigate that loss.

Router, IDK it's pretty old maybe 802.11A or something. Well if its like a stable 500-700kb I think it's more than enough for my daily gaming and watching YouTube anyway.

IDK what is TCP and UDP, but i don't mind learning it tbh.

1 thing to note is Windows 10 doesn't give me a packet loss that often.

2 thing to note I tried like checking my ping in my terminal and messes things up that makes me have a packet loss for some reasons, so maybe re installing will solve it.

Windows7ge · June 10, 2019

11 hours ago, Oalei said:

Router, IDK it's pretty old maybe 802.11A or something. Well if its like a stable 500-700kb I think it's more than enough for my daily gaming and watching YouTube anyway.

IDK what is TCP and UDP, but i don't mind learning it tbh.

1 thing to note is Windows 10 doesn't give me a packet loss that often.

2 thing to note I tried like checking my ping in my terminal and messes things up that makes me have a packet loss for some reasons, so maybe re installing will solve it.

Ping is different from bandwidth. You could have Googles 1Gbit (125MB/s) network plan and still have a terrible ping.

Network packets are encapsulated using either TCP or UDP. Without going too far into it TCP is used when data loss is not an option. TCP has a multitude of checks to verify the packet got delivered and to send the next one. If the packet doesn't make it or arrives fragmented the same TCP packet is resent before the rest can go.

TCP would be used in applications such as file transfers. The background connection to websites, they perform the function of handling the control packets for live sessions such as your games. Ping exists because their's feedback from the sessions TCP control packets.

UDP is quite the opposite of TCP. UDP skips all of these checks and simply sends the data out onto the network with a destination address and hopes it gets there. There are no verifications as to if it arrived successfully. This is good for very delay sensitive applications such as video and audio streams (such as webcams, cells, and IP phones), or the active tracking of enemies in an online map. You'll see them glitching around with the stability of the network. This is UDP packets not arriving successfully (the packet loss you describe) causing the players to dart around the map as in-between packets arrive and update their position.

The loss of TCP packets in this context is when you get booted from the server and you're told the connection was lost.

1. The network drivers would be different between the two platforms. Swapping platforms is different from swapping Linux distros. Between distros you might only end up with a different version of the same drivers. With a different platform you'd end up with driver written by a completely different developer meant to interact with a completely different OS.

2. It's pretty circumstantial as to weather or not that would help at all. You'd be better off running Linux on a thumb drive and running a ping test from there. If the results are better you can say it's something about your current install. If the results are the same reinstalling would not help at all.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

19 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

2. It's pretty circumstantial as to weather or not that would help at all. You'd be better off running Linux on a thumb drive and running a ping test from there. If the results are better you can say it's something about your current install. If the results are the same reinstalling would not help at all.

How do I test ping? I only know the one using google as host.

I need to stop being as stupid as a brick and use speedtest.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Oalei

Windows7ge · June 10, 2019

4 minutes ago, Oalei said:

How do I test ping? I only know the one using google as host.

I need to stop being as stupid as a brick and use speedtest.

This is dependent on what website/service you're looking to reach. You can use the ping command you then just have to choose a server. Most commonly pinging a DNS server is a fair overall indicator of your ping since most/all your internet requests go there first anyway.

xAcid9 · June 10, 2019

I second loading up another distro live image and do a ping test to several websites.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

9 hours ago, Windows7ge said:

This is dependent on what website/service you're looking to reach. You can use the ping command you then just have to choose a server. Most commonly pinging a DNS server is a fair overall indicator of your ping since most/all your internet requests go there first anyway.

5 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

I second loading up another distro live image and do a ping test to several websites.

yeah it got fixed after i re install OS. Well im somewhat an idiot myself for messing around with something idk, but something you dont know give you something to know and i know how to fix it not knowing the cause.
1. It got better score than before of 2mbps of download and 700kb of upload now its 3.5mb and 1.5mb idk about the packet loss havent tried anything related to that except Speedtest for now.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Oalei

Windows7ge · June 10, 2019

17 minutes ago, Oalei said:

yeah it got fixed after i re install OS. Well im somewhat an idiot myself for messing around with something idk, but something you dont know give you something to know and i know how to fix it not knowing the cause.
1. It got better score than before of 2mbps of download and 700kb of upload now its 3.5mb and 1.5mb idk about the packet loss havent tried anything related to that except Speedtest for now.

Running a ping test can tell you how many and what percent of packets were lost.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

Just now, Windows7ge said:

Running a ping test can tell you how many and what percent of packets were lost.

well unfortunate l forgot the command.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

10 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

Running a ping test can tell you how many and what percent of packets were lost.

its mostly around 20-32ms but sometimes jump to like 50-120ms well its normal for a router that next to me does that.

xAcid9 · June 10, 2019

5 minutes ago, Oalei said:

idk about the packet loss havent tried anything related to that except Speedtest for now.

just open Terminal and run ping www.google.com or any website you want. let it run for 10 secs or so and then press Ctrl+C to stop it.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

Just now, xAcid9 said:

just open Terminal and run ping www.google.com or any website you want. let it run for 10 secs or so and then press Ctrl+C to stop it.

yeah already did that after remembering some stuff

Quote

its mostly around 20-32ms but sometimes jump to like 50-120ms well its normal for a router that next to me does that.

Windows7ge · June 10, 2019

1 hour ago, Oalei said:

well unfortunate l forgot the command.

1 hour ago, Oalei said:

its mostly around 20-32ms but sometimes jump to like 50-120ms well its normal for a router that next to me does that.

So you remembered how to ping but did you consider trying several websites like xAcid9 mentioned then automating it with a script?

nano ping.script // Start a file editor with a pre-dertermined name

// Start of script (The -c arguement will specify how many times to ping before stopping)
ping 8.8.8.8 -c 10
ping 1.1.1.1 -c 10
ping www.youtube.com -c 10
ping www.linustechtips.com -c 10
ping www.newegg.com -c 10
ping www.amazon.com -c 10
// End of script

// Save & Exit
Ctrl+O
Ctrl+X

// Make the script executable 
chmod 744 ping.script

// Execute it
./ping.script

You should see an output similar to this:

PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=31.6 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=45.8 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=29.3 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=34.5 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=33.8 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=31.10 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=31.4 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=29.3 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=28.0 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=10 ttl=55 time=34.9 ms

--- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 22ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 28.021/33.059/45.831/4.784 ms

PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=54.1 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=28.6 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=29.7 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=30.2 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=31.1 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=42.8 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=30.9 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=56 time=28.9 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=56 time=28.6 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=56 time=32.8 ms

--- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 23ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 28.586/33.773/54.141/7.869 ms

PING www.youtube.com(ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e)) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=41.8 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=30.5 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=39.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=27.8 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=35.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=33.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=7 ttl=54 time=32.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=8 ttl=54 time=44.7 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=9 ttl=54 time=32.4 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=10 ttl=54 time=52.6 ms

--- www.youtube.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 23ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 27.791/37.249/52.569/7.126 ms

PING www.linustechtips.com(2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599)) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=31.4 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=37.6 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=35.9 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=33.9 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=30.4 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=34.1 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=7 ttl=54 time=29.3 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=8 ttl=54 time=30.3 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=9 ttl=54 time=36.6 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=10 ttl=54 time=37.9 ms

--- www.linustechtips.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 24ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 29.261/33.738/37.937/3.075 ms

PING e5638.g.akamaiedge.net (23.45.145.97) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=46.8 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=36.5 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=47.6 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=49.2 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=5 ttl=58 time=50.6 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=6 ttl=58 time=29.2 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=7 ttl=58 time=144 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=8 ttl=58 time=36.9 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=9 ttl=58 time=118 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=10 ttl=58 time=40.1 ms

--- e5638.g.akamaiedge.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 22ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 29.195/59.863/144.027/36.535 ms

PING d3ag4hukkh62yn.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=1 ttl=244 time=41.3 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=42.3 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=3 ttl=244 time=46.4 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=4 ttl=244 time=57.3 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=5 ttl=244 time=56.8 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=6 ttl=244 time=41.6 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=7 ttl=244 time=45.6 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=8 ttl=244 time=44.4 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=9 ttl=244 time=60.6 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=10 ttl=244 time=45.6 ms

--- d3ag4hukkh62yn.cloudfront.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 23ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 41.314/48.180/60.569/6.836 ms

Those are my stats. Really unless your ping is in the multiple 100's of ms or quite possibly 1 full second then your online gaming experience should be fine. You can adjust the -c argument to make this run much longer so as to get a better idea of your potential long term packet loss. If you don't want to see the details of every single ping and just want the summaries you can add the -q argument. This may be desirable since you'll probably want to set the ping to at least -c 100 if not higher.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

19 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

So you remembered how to ping but did you consider trying several websites like xAcid9 mentioned then automating it with a script?


nano ping.script // Start a file editor with a pre-dertermined name

// Start of script (The -c arguement will specify how many times to ping before stopping)
ping 8.8.8.8 -c 10
ping 1.1.1.1 -c 10
ping www.youtube.com -c 10
ping www.linustechtips.com -c 10
ping www.newegg.com -c 10
ping www.amazon.com -c 10
// End of script

// Save & Exit
Ctrl+O
Ctrl+X

// Make the script executable 
chmod 744 ping.script

// Execute it
./ping.script

You should see an output similar to this:


PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=31.6 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=45.8 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=29.3 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=34.5 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=33.8 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=31.10 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=31.4 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=29.3 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=28.0 ms
64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=10 ttl=55 time=34.9 ms

--- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 22ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 28.021/33.059/45.831/4.784 ms

PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=54.1 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=28.6 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=29.7 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=30.2 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=31.1 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=42.8 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=30.9 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=56 time=28.9 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=56 time=28.6 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=56 time=32.8 ms

--- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 23ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 28.586/33.773/54.141/7.869 ms

PING www.youtube.com(ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e)) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=41.8 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=30.5 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=39.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=27.8 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=35.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=33.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=7 ttl=54 time=32.9 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=8 ttl=54 time=44.7 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=9 ttl=54 time=32.4 ms
64 bytes from ord38s09-in-x0e.1e100.net (2607:f8b0:4009:816::200e): icmp_seq=10 ttl=54 time=52.6 ms

--- www.youtube.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 23ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 27.791/37.249/52.569/7.126 ms

PING www.linustechtips.com(2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599)) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=31.4 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=37.6 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=35.9 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=33.9 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=30.4 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=34.1 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=7 ttl=54 time=29.3 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=8 ttl=54 time=30.3 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=9 ttl=54 time=36.6 ms
64 bytes from 2606:4700:30::681b:a599 (2606:4700:30::681b:a599): icmp_seq=10 ttl=54 time=37.9 ms

--- www.linustechtips.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 24ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 29.261/33.738/37.937/3.075 ms

PING e5638.g.akamaiedge.net (23.45.145.97) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=46.8 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=36.5 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=47.6 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=49.2 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=5 ttl=58 time=50.6 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=6 ttl=58 time=29.2 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=7 ttl=58 time=144 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=8 ttl=58 time=36.9 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=9 ttl=58 time=118 ms
64 bytes from a23-45-145-97.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.45.145.97): icmp_seq=10 ttl=58 time=40.1 ms

--- e5638.g.akamaiedge.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 22ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 29.195/59.863/144.027/36.535 ms

PING d3ag4hukkh62yn.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=1 ttl=244 time=41.3 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=2 ttl=244 time=42.3 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=3 ttl=244 time=46.4 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=4 ttl=244 time=57.3 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=5 ttl=244 time=56.8 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=6 ttl=244 time=41.6 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=7 ttl=244 time=45.6 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=8 ttl=244 time=44.4 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=9 ttl=244 time=60.6 ms
64 bytes from server-99-84-125-170.ewr52.r.cloudfront.net (99.84.125.170): icmp_seq=10 ttl=244 time=45.6 ms

--- d3ag4hukkh62yn.cloudfront.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 23ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 41.314/48.180/60.569/6.836 ms

Those are my stats. Really unless your ping is in the multiple 100's of ms or quite possibly 1 full second then your online gaming experience should be fine. You can adjust the -c argument to make this run much longer so as to get a better idea of your potential long term packet loss. If you don't want to see the details of every single ping and just want the summaries you can add the -q argument. This may be desirable since you'll probably want to set the ping to at least -c 100 if not higher.

well its not the best but a ok i think

--- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 20ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 23.328/27.985/43.427/6.430 ms
qurnia@pop-os:~$ ping 1.1.1.1 -c 10
PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=28.2 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=27.1 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=131 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=33.0 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=25.7 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=32.9 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=52.3 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=57 time=248 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=57 time=171 ms
64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=57 time=49.4 ms

--- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 20ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 25.680/79.770/247.625/73.103 ms
qurnia@pop-os:~$ ping www.google.com -c 10
PING forcesafesearch.google.com (216.239.38.120) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=60.3 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=127 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=58.4 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=182 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=63.8 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=259 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=29.3 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=30.7 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=42.9 ms
64 bytes from any-in-2678.1e100.net (216.239.38.120): icmp_seq=10 ttl=55 time=26.7 ms

--- forcesafesearch.google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 22ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 26.676/87.960/258.667/73.601 ms
qurnia@pop-os:~$ ping www.linustechtips.com -c 10
PING www.linustechtips.com (104.27.164.153) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=193 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=194 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=192 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=197 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=192 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=191 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=191 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=189 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=190 ms
64 bytes from 104.27.164.153: icmp_seq=10 ttl=55 time=190 ms

--- www.linustechtips.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 19ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 188.975/191.938/197.226/2.284 ms
qurnia@pop-os:~$ ping www.facebook.com -c 10
PING star-mini.c10r.facebook.com (157.240.13.35) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=26.6 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=26.0 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=27.3 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=25.6 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=24.10 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=25.6 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=26.3 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=26.0 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=26.2 ms
64 bytes from edge-star-mini-shv-02-sin6.facebook.com (157.240.13.35): icmp_seq=10 ttl=55 time=25.10 ms

--- star-mini.c10r.facebook.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 21ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 24.995/26.070/27.319/0.595 ms
qurnia@pop-os:~$ ping www.tokopedia.com -c 10
PING e17427.a.akamaiedge.net (23.37.202.248) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=1 ttl=61 time=13.0 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=2 ttl=61 time=13.9 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=3 ttl=61 time=12.3 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=4 ttl=61 time=12.6 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=5 ttl=61 time=12.6 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=6 ttl=61 time=11.8 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=7 ttl=61 time=45.7 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=8 ttl=61 time=35.1 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=9 ttl=61 time=22.9 ms
64 bytes from a23-37-202-248.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com (23.37.202.248): icmp_seq=10 ttl=61 time=55.0 ms

--- e17427.a.akamaiedge.net ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 23ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 11.761/23.495/55.035/15.256 ms
qurnia@pop-os:~$ ping www.bukalapak.com -c 10
PING www.bukalapak.com (103.117.83.35) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=37.8 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=395 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=23.1 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=22.2 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=20.8 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=14.6 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=21.4 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=8 ttl=57 time=15.3 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=9 ttl=57 time=18.1 ms
64 bytes from 103.117.83.35 (103.117.83.35): icmp_seq=10 ttl=57 time=73.7 ms

--- www.bukalapak.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 19ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 14.633/64.215/395.083/111.542 ms

Windows7ge · June 10, 2019

9 minutes ago, Oalei said:

well its not the best but a ok i think

A ping of nearly 400ms is pretty bad but most of your other pings look acceptable. You don't suffer from mass packet loss but you'd still want to extend the -c substantially to get a better idea of how much you're dealing with.

It seems more likely you have a ping issue than a packet loss issue.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

5 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

A ping of nearly 400ms is pretty bad but most of your other pings look acceptable. You don't suffer from mass packet loss but you'd still want to extend the -c substantially to get a better idea of how much you're dealing with.

It seems more likely you have a ping issue than a packet loss issue.

well im not from europe or us so server is pretty bad the ones that is server base from my country is tokopedia and bukalapak. Well when i play dota and csgo there is a clear packet loss indicator in-game with fps and stuff.
well its only a 1mbps internet connection peak so that is understandable with some people using it currently that might cause the high ping

Edited June 10, 2019 by Oalei

Windows7ge · June 10, 2019

1 minute ago, Oalei said:

well im not from europe or us so server is pretty bad the ones that is server base from my country is tokopedia and bukalapak. Well when i play dota and csgo there is a clear packet loss indicator in-game with fps and stuff.

Does it seem any better wired as oppose to wireless? A chunk of your ping comes from just a WiFi connection to your Router. If you must have wireless look into 5GHz. It will help.

Oalei · June 10, 2019

1 minute ago, Windows7ge said:

Does it seem any better wired as oppose to wireless? A chunk of your ping comes from just a WiFi connection to your Router. If you must have wireless look into 5GHz. It will help.

well yeah why not, its a D-Link Dir-612 a single band 2.4hz yeah might buy a new router or just buy a cable thanks man.

Sign In

Permanent packet loss

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites