Faster download

[The Belgian Waffle]

Hi guys,

I have a question that might sound pretty retarded, but :

 

Is it faster to download a bunch of files at the same time, or to download the same number of files but one at a time?

[MorganO]

2 minutes ago, The Belgian Waffle said:

Hi guys,

I have a question that might sound pretty retarded, but :

 

Is it faster to download a bunch of files at the same time, or to download the same number of files but one at a time?

one at a time

[Anghammarad]

really depends on the servers you are downloading from. If there are a few that can't provide the bandwidth needed, you can run multi downloads simultaniosly and finish faster than downloading one at a time. I usually experience this when doing a driver run for a new machine or fresh setup.

 

Then there are servers that can deliver your max download speed, then running multiple downloads will be slower than one at a time, due to TCP-IP Overhead. 

[vanished]

One at a time would probably be slightly faster, unless the bottleneck is the server you're downloading from and not your local connection, in which case you could start up another one (or more) at the same time until yo are saturating your connection.

[The Belgian Waffle]

That was what I had guessed then.
Thank you  

[Guest]

Depending on what you are downloading, from what source and what kind of programs you use to download... Multiple files at once = faster.

 

My reasoning? If you MANUALLY start them next downloads, you might miss a completed download, so you will be at idle.

 

Depending on file size/download speed, I like multiple files at once, even tough it might be a few seconds slower. I will take a smoke break, get a cup of coffee or watch some offline content while the stuff gets in. The "hard work" of selecting all them files to download has been completed.

 

This changes greatly however, when talking about torrents, which I think is not allowed on these boards.

[vanished]

Aside from the pure technical answer, there are practical considerations too.   Even if multiple in parallel might be ever so slightly slower, it might make more sense if, for example, you can start them all now, and then be away for a few hours, returning to find them all complete.  You couldn't do that one at a time without a special tool to schedule them for you.  On the flip side, if you need a lot of stuff but could start using one right away, do one so it finishes asap, then start working on/with that file while the next one downloads, etc.

 

4 minutes ago, Dutch-stoner said:

This changes greatly however, when talking about torrents, which I think is not allowed on these boards.

Talking about torrents is fine, encouraging or assisting with piracy is not.

[Guest]

@Ryan_Vickers Then I can elaborate on the great change with Torrents. When I download a bunch of mallware filled things, I like to set high priority to the file I like to get first. All other files are also started but no more then 5 (fast) downloads at a time.

 

The high priority file will come in rather quick, and then my eyes can start proccessing the downloaded content. During this time, all other 4 (or 5 if there were more queued) downloads will get completed.

 

*PS: I have a "slow" connection compaired to all options in the netherlands, and I throttle my torrent program since I like my upload. (max upload speed limited to 30 kb/s, which will throttle my download speed to 1.4 mb/s max, which does result in "coffee break time" downloads) When I unlock uploads, torrents will most likely eat up most of my download speed, and all of my spare upload speed which makes my browser less happy.

 

Download speeds are all relative, and you would need to look at what your needs are, then look at the ever so slightly speed differences for total download speed overhead.