monello
join:2006-06-22
Schiller Park, IL | How to get full 12/2 speed.....?? Download Speed: 11.515 Mbps (11515 kb/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 1.47 Mbps (1470 kb/sec transfer rate)
I have the 12/2 uverse internet and is there any way to get the full 12/2 speed. I am 800ft away from VRAD.
Here is my DMT & stats link.
h**p://adslm.dohrenburg.net/tools/db-link.php?link=3597 |
|
| It's actually 12/1.5 and with the overhead your speeds are typical of the 12/1.5 connection. |
|
 NuckfutsPremium
join:2003-10-18
Joliet, IL | On speed tests you are never gonna see the full amount you are advertised. I am 900' from the VRAD and on the 18/1.5 and get 17.56/1.48 roughly. |
|
| How much closer do you want to get??? |
|
 NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 | reply to monello
There is probably some kind of encapsulation overhead for the backhaul. At least it isn't the 15% seen by users on an ATM backhaul.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
monello
join:2006-06-22
Schiller Park, IL | reply to tlylework
I remember with cable we used to get over the amount of bandwidth advertised. When we switched to DSL shortly after I remember reading forums how to improve your bandwidth and was wondering how to do it with Uverse. |
|
monello
join:2006-06-22
Schiller Park, IL | reply to NormanS
Thanks for the info......This explains it in detail.
wand.cs.waikato.ac.nz/~513/2006/readings/adsl-2.pdf |
|
cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | Nice paper. ('tho ATM has no overhead. What they are calling "ATM" is the AAL5 cell format.) However, Uverse VDSL and ADSL are PTM (ethernet) networks, not ATM. So, there's a 14 byte per IP frame overhead just like any ethernet link. (18 with a vlan tag)
Given the overhead of ethernet + IP, he's getting almost exactly what he should. |
|
| reply to monello
Most of the time with cable you would have some junk like PowerBoost skewing your test results. So it doesn't necessarily mean that you got more bandwidth than advertised, just meant that they use their "technology" to lie to you about what you're really getting. |
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | reply to monello
With 12/2 cable I get 13.1/2.2 because of over-provisioning, not sure what cable you're talking about. |
|
 maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | reply to monello
said by monello:Download Speed: 11.515 Mbps (11515 kb/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 1.47 Mbps (1470 kb/sec transfer rate)
I have the 12/2 uverse internet and is there any way to get the full 12/2 speed. I am 800ft away from VRAD.
You have 12/1.5, - there is no 12/2 plan.
Looking at your speeds, that's about all you are going to get. Typically, because of both *DSL protocol overhead and TCP/IP overhead, you'll see about 90-95% of the advertised speed as the maximum throughput.
I have 24/3, and I typically get about 23 Mbps down, and about 2.8 Mbps up - which is right on the money.
You almost have *perfect* speeds for a 12/1.5 plan, nothing to improve.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" |
|
maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | reply to monello
said by monello:I remember with cable we used to get over the amount of bandwidth advertised. When we switched to DSL shortly after I remember reading forums how to improve your bandwidth and was wondering how to do it with Uverse.
Cable has the same thing, you get about 90-95% of the speed advertised. Now, some cable providers have gotten a little tricky..... e.g, they advertise "10/1", and then provision the modems for 11/1.2 or something like that, and then when they reach 90%, they actually reach the advertised speed. I suppose AT&T U-Verse could have sold you a "10/1" connection, and you would have been happy. 
But no.... not even FIOS fiber gets 100% of the speed, there is always overhead on TCP/IP due to the way the protocol is designed.
In a nutshell: If you get 90%+ of advertised speed, you are in good shape.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" |
|
monello
join:2006-06-22
Schiller Park, IL | Yeah.....I fully understand just thought of when we had cable and thought there was a way of getting exact (or over) with uverse by "tweaking" settings in the modem and computer. |
|
|
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | reply to maartena
It's better than that for cable. Our connection is advertised at 12/2, provisioned at 13.2/2.2, and gets 13.1/2.1 for long, sustained transfers (far more for shorter ones with PowerBoost). |
|
| I think maartena already explained that one. Also they (can) give you more speed until your node gets crowded then it's down to the advertised speeds (or lower.) The way DSL works, there is no crowding so AT&T doesn't do that.
As for PowerBoost, it's a load of malarkey as it only "boosts" the speed for some ridiculously low amount like the first 10-15MB. Basically just enough to fool the speed tests, not very useful for much else (unless you're constantly downloading tiny files.) |
|
maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | reply to BiggA
said by BiggA:It's better than that for cable. Our connection is advertised at 12/2, provisioned at 13.2/2.2, and gets 13.1/2.1 for long, sustained transfers (far more for shorter ones with PowerBoost).
Yeah cable providers have some nice tricks. Powerboost is one of them, it gives you 30 seconds of double speed or something like that, totally skewing speed test results.
Another thing they do is indeed what you said: They advertise say.... 15/2, but then they provision the modem for 16/2.5, meaning you'll always get 15/2 if you get 90+% of the 16/2.5.
This all doesn't take away from the fact that there is overhead on both the DSL and/or cable protocol, AND on TCP/IP. General rule on any internet connections is that if a line has a theoretical rating of X, then the actual speed you get is usually X -5% as the absolute maximum, and X -10% as the threshold of a "good" connection.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" |
|
| DSL providers can also overprovision to make up for overhead as well, but seriously, who's going to notice 1Mbps difference on the download or 0.13Mbps on the upload. |
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to WhyMe420
DSL and cable are both shared. Cable is shared at the node, DSL is shared at the CO, on the bandwidth behind the DSLAMs. I have heard of DSL speeds tanking, I rarely hear of cable speeds tanking. I have NEVER, with the exception of when the system just went down and is coming back online, seen it lower than about 105% of advertised bandwidth. Comcast, as much as I hate them, does deliver what they advertise.
PowerBoost is sort of cheating, and should NEVER be advertised as the speed, since it's not, HOWEVER, it makes streaming and relatively small file downloads absolutely FLY. When you're pulling 25mb/s to download a 10MB file, it goes pretty darn fast. Same for loading video streams and such. It also makes Pandora load faster, it can load a whole song in a few seconds when it's loading 128kbps music at 2.1MB/s.
@maartena: Yes, there is overhead, but it's small, as I'm seeing about 100kbps of overhead on a 13.2mbps provision.
@WhyMe420: Those of us who speed test, and watch the router bandwidth to make sure we're getting what we are paying for. I'm fairly happy with Comcast. When I move out on my own, I'm hoping to be able to get the 25/4 Comcast Blast! connection. It's like $60/mo, and bursts up into the 50+mbps range with DOCSIS 3.
AT&T really need to get their heads out of the sand, and get some FTTH. They can talk to me about their service when they do. Until then, Comcast gets my business. |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to WhyMe420
said by WhyMe420:I think maartena already explained that one. Also they (can) give you more speed until your node gets crowded then it's down to the advertised speeds (or lower.) The way DSL works, there is no crowding so AT&T doesn't do that.
DSL is subject to congestion from "overcrowding. It happened to me about seven years ago. It is currently happening to many AT&T traditional ADSL users because AT&T is pushing to replace traditional ADSL with IP-DSLAM, so the old ADSL loops are often left to languish. And some of the other DSL providers (Centurylink, Fairpoint, and Frontier) have had or are having congestion problems as a consequence of acquisitions (CL buying Qwest, Fairpoint and Frontier picking up Verizon discards).
Properly managed, there should be no congestion with either cable or DSL. Poorly managed, and each will show signs of congestion.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
| Except that cable is a lot more likely to become overcrowded due to the node location. Of course DSL is shared at the DSLAM with DSL but that's completely different. Everything is shared at some point but nodes are the weak point of cable and they are far more susceptible to crowding. |
|
