Do these numbers sound correct to you?
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
Posted by on March 14, 2006, 8:49 am
Please log in for more thread options I recently ordered a SOHO DSL package from a Covad reseller. It was the 1.5M/768k package. My download/upload numbers are currently 160k/70k. I am not an expert on the vagaries of Internet throughput, but something seems horribly wrong to me. Shouldn't these numbers be significantly higher. More like 600k/300k, at least? They have a satisfaction guarantee, so depending on the response I recieve, I may cancel the service. Thank you for your input. -Vincent | ||||
|
Posted by Ken Abrams on March 14, 2006, 9:10 am
Please log in for more thread options You have to pay attention to the UNITS of measure. LINK speeds are usually quoted in BITS per second (1.5M/768K). Download speeds are usually quoted in BYTES per second (160K/70K). If that is true in your case, multiply your download numbers by 10 to get both measures into BITS and you are right in the ballpark. | ||||
|
Posted by Vincent on March 14, 2006, 9:40 am
Please log in for more thread options
Don't you mean multiply by 8? Not to rant on the subject, but why would anyone purchase DSL, then? When I was on cable at a former residence, I was pulling 550k down and paying less. | ||||
|
Posted by Bert Hyman on March 14, 2006, 9:46 am
Please log in for more thread options
animedreamer@verizon.net (Vincent) wrote in > Don't you mean multiply by 8?
All network protocols introduce some overhead. Taking the raw bit rate of a DSL or cable connection and dividing by 10 to get an expected byte rate gets you in the ballpark. > Not to rant on the subject, but why would anyone purchase DSL,
> then? When I was on cable at a former residence, I was pulling > 550k down and paying less. Your choice, based on your market. Around here, that's not the case. -- Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com | ||||
|
Posted by Tim Smith on March 23, 2006, 10:53 pm
Please log in for more thread options
>> Don't you mean multiply by 8?
>
> All network protocols introduce some overhead. Taking the raw bit rate of > a DSL or cable connection and dividing by 10 to get an expected byte rate > gets you in the ballpark. What I prefer to do is measure the bytes transfered at the network interface. For example, on Linux, /sbin/ifconfig will report the RX bytes for each interface. If I take the rate I'm getting there, in bytes/second, multiply by 8 to get bits/second, then divide by (1024*1024) to get mbits/second, I get 5.01. My line is 5 mbit/second down. That kind of surprised me. I had expected DSL providers to use 1000000 bits/second for mbit/second, to be able to advertise a higher speed. -- --Tim Smith | ||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Do these numbers sound correct to you? | March 14, 2006, 8:49 am |
| How does my tracert numbers look? | August 1, 2005, 1:26 pm |
> 160k/70k. I am not an expert on the vagaries of Internet throughput,