jmn1207 Premium Member join:2000-07-19 Sterling, VA 1 edit |
to NYGiants0
Re: What Accounts for the Higher Score?I understand megabyte and megabit, this is not new to me. I'm saying that Netflix is using megabits in their report to show the average performance of their streams.
It does not make sense that Sprint, which shows an average of .59 in this month's report, would have an average Netflix stream of nearly 4800 kbps. I'm certain the report is using megabits per second, which would place an average stream at around 600 kbps for Sprint. |
|
Vchat20Landing is the REAL challenge Premium Member join:2003-09-16 Columbus, OH |
to silbaco
Re: No benefitsaid by silbaco:No. 2. is not true. It depends on the provider entirely. I have seen some providers selling download/upload at a 100/1 ratio over fiber. They sell those plans, but it is not a technical limitation. The tech is fully symmetrical by design. On the other hand, Cable and DSL are both asymmetrical by design and upload speeds there cannot go much higher than they are now. |
|
|
to FastLearner
Re: Save itsaid by FastLearner:How about they take the money they spend on worthless rankings and spend it on more streaming CONTENT!! They just announced a deal with Warner Bros. ... » goo.gl/cMdNt |
|
|
Tony Horton
Anon
2013-Jan-7 8:53 pm
Pathetic AT&TLook at how AT&T is consistently at the bottom of both mobile and home speed lists. I wonder if that NSA splice in SF is the cause of AT&T's poor performance. |
|
aaronwt Premium Member join:2004-11-07 Woodbridge, VA Asus RT-AX89
|
to rradina
Re: Do WiFi Routers Have Impact?said by rradina:I'm curious if these rankings consider the quality of the link's last ~200 feet. WiFi has to be used by a majority of folks. Does that skew the results? I don't see how. We are only talking Netflix streaming bitrates. which are very low. Even 802.11g can handle that with no issues. But personally on my wireless, I have no issues getting 150Mb/s speeds over wireless. Almost as fast as the 155Mb/s I can get over my wired connection to the internet. Netflix streaming bitrates aren't even 5% of that speed. |
|
|
to NYGiants0
Re: What Accounts for the Higher Score?said by NYGiants0:it is megabytes a second not megabits a second, i understand the confusion though There's no confusion. Netflix uses "Mbps" (megabits per second) because that's the standard [notation] used for speed of a communications link. I myself average between 2 and 3 mbps with my FiOS connection when streaming from Netflix, so I can assure you--it is not "mega bytes a second". (This has been covered a number of times before, here and elsewhere.) |
|
rradina join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO |
to aaronwt
Re: Do WiFi Routers Have Impact?Not all WiFi networks are equal. As I said in another post, if more popcorn is needed while watching the movie, WiFi rates could drop through the floor -- perhaps all the way to 1Mbps with a lot of packet loss. |
|
|
|
to Skippy25
Re: No benefitAhhh I trunk Ports for Multiple of 10 gig on cisco for my storage gear, The core guys here have done it up to 80 gig as long as the switches support it.
Besides how many home users have 10 gig capable gear exactly? And how many ftth sellers have 10 gig ports on their home network gear ? Better yet how many offer a 10 gig option inside the service area ?
0 , in the datacenter 10 gig port are still pretty expensive and doing distance has to be fiber. sfp+ are really only for short interconnects and connecting the hosts to their switch. Incase you missed the sarcasm in the smiley. |
|
aaronwt Premium Member join:2004-11-07 Woodbridge, VA Asus RT-AX89
|
to rradina
Re: Do WiFi Routers Have Impact?said by rradina:Not all WiFi networks are equal. As I said in another post, if more popcorn is needed while watching the movie, WiFi rates could drop through the floor -- perhaps all the way to 1Mbps with a lot of packet loss. Not on my WiFi network. Of course my 5Ghz devices have no issues, but I've never had a problem with my 2.4Ghz devices either. Although my Microwave nowhere near my 2.4Ghz APs and at least 15 feet from the nearest 2.4Ghz device. |
|
rradina join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO |
But it does happen. I experience it. Want to beat a dead horse some more? |
|
|
FiberMarine
Anon
2013-Jan-8 4:32 pm
Proof is in the throughput ping time!!!» speedtest.net/result/235 ··· 4297.png...and there are others who get a full Gbps delivery, mine's listed at 100 Mbps for $55; DL/UL both!!! This is one to another fiber provider over 250 miles away: » speedtest.net/result/235 ··· 5445.pngNo matter how many of our devices are running at the same time, I have instant streaming when I view Netflix... in other words no buffering EVER with 3-5 seconds to determine my bandwidth and start the content. Top quality video delivery as well. Im still waiting for more 3D Video IP services since Dish doesnt serve 3D channels (like 3Net) but Id pay a small fee for IP access, having the available throughput and all. Apparently, Netflix didnt include my provider in their results, but you get the articles you pay for these days. Personally, we cant wait for more IPTV service providers. Big UPs to Utahs FIRST Internet Provider!!! |
|
JohnSJ join:2004-08-14 Lafayette, LA |
to massysett
Re: No benefitFolks seem to think that the only limit here is Google's. It's not.
Netflix streams its videos at a set rate according to how each movie you choose to use is encoded. Netflix's encoding tops out about 4.8 Mbps for HD, and a little over 2 Mbps for SD. That's all they need push....except a bit of a buffer at the beginning I suspect. So most of the time it's just coasting at the encoding rate.
So the oddly low numbers for _all_ the providers is just more pronounced for Google Fiber. I suspect that the Google numbers represent pretty near the max for the mix of SD and HD that Netflix subscribers download.
When Netflix feels able to use more bandwidth they will improve the HD codec to a less compressed version and there will be more headroom for FTTH to shine. That would push their HD streaming to around 7 I think. And then there's 3D and later that crazy 4K stuff. They've got good reasons of their own to want Google to look good. Fiber will give them the headroom they want to really improve their service.
(It's worth noticing that Netflix is not waiting on Google or the Muni's to hand them bandwidth on a platter. It is right now building its own CDN to get it's content _inside_ the big networks like Cox and Comcast--Charter just signed on�and is only offering their least compressed HD and 3D catalogs over ISPs who have already joined their free to the ISP CDN by putting content on a cache inside their network or pull directly from a big, fast peering center. Look up "open connect." You'll need a minimum of 7 megs to use it even if your ISP joins up and puts a cache next door.) |
|
|
to ITALIAN926
Re: Capt Obvious...I agree. Guarantee WOW has more customers than Google, yet WOW still isn't on the list. |
|
|
fuziwuziNot born yesterday Premium Member join:2005-07-01 Palm Springs, CA Hitron EN2251 Nest H2D
|
to 88615298
Re: mobile rankingssaid by 88615298:said by fuziwuzi:Interesting that on the mobile front, T-Mobile ranks above AT&T and Sprint. I guess their LTE offerings don't help them much. Where does Sprint have LTE? And at&t is not a whole lot better. Sprint has LTE in 49 markets. By AT&T's advertisements, you'd think they blanket the nation already. |
|