Got the Cisco E3000

Could you please shine some light into the darkest brain of mine about this one. As I have mentioned that even I have been using router, then wireless for quite some years, but I never care to learn more about it so I am pretty much in the dark about networking. Or I just know some basic to get the router running, and you may have read that the reason I upgraded the router cuz with my older Buffalo wireless router I can't be able to connect more than one wireless system for many years.

Also, I do not really care about the faster speed than whatever I pay for, and I know nothing about 2.4Mhz and or vs 5Mhz (besides more band). But to me $83 for the lesson or answer is cheap enough for me so I bought the Motorola SB6120 DOSCIS modem to replace a working SB5120 just to find out the answer.

- Before the SB6120 arrived, I done some speed test just to have some record to compare with the newer modem, And the max speed was around 25Mb/s

- And with the SB6120 DOSCIS 3.0 modem I was getting around 35Mb/s

- I was ok with that, and reported the result here with the promise that I will do few more at different time.

a. Yesterday, I found out that different test site (even from the same company, web but different states) give different result. So I tried to find more test sites with option to connect the SAME testing program or java script whatever they use to different states

b. And I reports the huge difference results as you can see from the original report.

I was thinking that I just post the final report then disappear for years like I did before, but then I got the 76Mb/s so I probably stay foot a little longer to find some little more about the max speed.

I'm sure there's a question in there, but I'm damned if I can work out what it actually is.

theres another part you are forgetting, if you run the speed test multiple times, the info is sometimes in your cache after the first time and used from there intead of it being transferred again not to mention xfer size, buffer size, lag time, relay time etc for example, sat can download big stuf faster than bat snot/most terrestial isp's, but in real time it's essentialy too slow for voice

hard to say exactly since you are only giving final numbers and who knows how they are calculated

Thanks for the warning and advice about the test, as I said that I never care for this type of test or this is pretty much the first time in decades of modeming. But I do know some basic of the catching and other basic behaviors of browser and internet in general. And I hate to go through all small detail of what I know, what I don't know, or what I try to avoid etc..

- That's why I do different tests from different sources

- That's why I tested multiple times from the same web page with multiple test sites.

- That's why I don't do all at once but as you have realized that I am not trying at different TIMES but also in several DAYS. And if it loads from catched files (I don't think the test site is this clumsy not to have this old issue covered) then I shouldn't getting the exact same 25-30Mb/s from the same sites.

Since I don't gain anything if the test gives false report, or whatever reason. I mean I can only have what I now have, and I try to report the result for anyone who wants to know or interest to find out more detail themselves.. and that's why I GAVE the LINKs

And I don't think my question is too complicate, but may be a little too simple to give more detail? It's very simple.

- I don't know exactly what's the max speed I can get from the current setting is (I am talking about COX setting not specific plan). And since I get 76Mb/s at Chicago, IL test site, does this mean with the current setting (or COX hasn't capped the max speed yet) I can get up to 76Mb/s or more (if connect to faster site)?

- I do realize that the speed may not stay the same all the time, or if I test it again today then I may not get 76Mb/s from Chicago, IL site like yesterday, and it's possible that I may get a faster speed from the slower sites.

IOW, I do understand those very basics so I DON'T ASK something like why I get faster speed from Chicago, IL, but I REPORT the DIFFERENCES.

forget which version of windows you run, but basically, with older versions, you can clear the buffers before you run the test (run or command then) (ipconfig /flushdns) the switch /flushdns clears the buffer....

the ipconfig command does a lot of useful stuff, you can always use ipconfig /? to get a list of all the switches/commands

as i recall, you used wired ethernet right? so no matter what speed you get it's still gonna be less than 100 for non gigabit wired ethernet, so what you use now, runs faster than your new modem.

Peter, I am trying to tell you that CATCHING doesn't seem to be the problem. Because if it reads the data from my system then the speed should be very close to each other.

- And I have been saying that I tested *different* TIMES and *different* DAYS, and *different* testers as well as same tester but *different* STATES

- And I have been saying that I re-tested the same states multiple times at different time/day.

Yes, I tested from wired system

- The ethernet is 10/100/1000Mb

- The modem supoorts up to 1000Mb

- The router supports up to 1000Mb

Other than that I don't know much about network to say more, and that's why I ask the question.

Actually, you're most likely right that caching is no longer a problem. I'm not aware of any speed test sites that still fall into that trap. However, that's the only good thing I can say about speed test sites. They are absolutely not accurate, for the reasons I gave earlier in this thread.

BTW, "ipconfig /flushdns" doesn't flush the browser cache, so it wouldn't have helped anyway.

Either check your bill or call COX. It's one thing to want to test your download speed, but it seems rather pointless when you don't know what you should be getting.

What does that mean?

The short answer is no, because web-based speed tests lie. Use one of the methods I outlined earlier in this thread if you really want to know what your Internet connection is capable of.

Bad assumption.