Reviews:
 ·Embarq Now Centu..
1 edit | reply to W4DRA
Re: Sierra 595U slow speed said by W4DRA:said by mooch:Just curiuos Dave, you had mentioned that you have issues with slow speeds...would you consider the 633/215 speed you posted as being one of your slow speeds? Its OK but I was faster when I first signed up with about 1500/350. But 633/215 is slow compaired to most tests posted here. So yes I would say its slow but not the worst I have had. And definitely not slower than dial-up like the OP.  |
|
 Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | said by ydoucare:said by W4DRA:said by mooch:Just curiuos Dave, you had mentioned that you have issues with slow speeds...would you consider the 633/215 speed you posted as being one of your slow speeds? Its OK but I was faster when I first signed up with about 1500/350. But 633/215 is slow compaired to most tests posted here. So yes I would say its slow but not the worst I have had. And definitely not slower than dial-up like the OP. What I've observed speed test results have little bearing on actual performance. Good speed does not guarantee good surfing. Mine has degraded to not much better than dial-up. Web sites load very slow using Firefox and/or IE7. I think Sprint's connection to the net is a problem. It's almost like I'm being throttled in some way. |
|
| Sprint's connection to the 'net isn't a problem, it's likely something local. Sprintlink is a tier 1 provider and has peering arrangements with several providers. |
|
 moochNo Booing Allowed
join:2001-11-11
Dublin, OH
·Embarq Now Centu..
 ·HughesNet Satell..
| My speeds were hardly ever over 500Kbs with my old yagi, after installing a parabolic grid antenna my speeds now range between 600 and 1000. The fastest times being in the mornings, late evenings and certain times during the weekends.
I'm basically pretty content with anything 500Kbs and above. After dealing with dial up and then flaky Hughesnet for too many years...the Sprint service is ok.
--
ex Hughesnet customer - thank goodness! |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to CMoore2004
said by CMoore2004:Sprint's connection to the 'net isn't a problem, it's likely something local. Sprintlink is a tier 1 provider and has peering arrangements with several providers. I'm in a very rural county, pop. 9000. Sprint has 5 or 6 towers sprinkled around with on them a big tower near Jim_in-VA from which Jim gets excellent speeds. I don't have a problem with connection, speed tests are fair to good. In fact this morning ~1242 up 270 down, -70 dBm. However loading any website it's like 1.2 to 13 which is much slower than the dialup I used to have. It takes forever to load a webpage especially one with images and graphics. It's not my computer as I can put the 680 in my wifes laptop and it does the same thing. I just wonder if Sprint has all the towers linked to one and combining them onto the web.
The image is when I was loading my local online newspaper site. It's representative of all my sites. |
|
Reviews:
·Embarq Now Centu..
4 edits | reply to Jack_in_VA
said by Jack_in_VA:What I've observed speed test results have little bearing on actual performance. Good speed does not guarantee good surfing. Mine has degraded to not much better than dial-up. Web sites load very slow using Firefox and/or IE7. I think Sprint's connection to the net is a problem. It's almost like I'm being throttled in some way. The point being, in most cases, if your connection were "slower than dial-up" you would not see 600+ Kbps on any speed test. With that said, high latency can have just as much of an affect on *browsing* speed as bandwidth, so take that into account as well.
said by Jack_in_VA:said by CMoore2004:Sprint's connection to the 'net isn't a problem, it's likely something local. Sprintlink is a tier 1 provider and has peering arrangements with several providers. I just wonder if Sprint has all the towers linked to one and combining them onto the web. I would doubt that. It's much more likely that they've run a T1 to the tower. I'm in a *very* rural area (pop 5000, which i'm 10 miles from), and have 0 issues (generally 1200 down 24/7). I'd have to see what you're describing in person, seems pretty odd that you would have no problems with speed tests, but websites load slow. If I were you, I would contact Sprint. |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | said by ydoucare:said by Jack_in_VA:What I've observed speed test results have little bearing on actual performance. Good speed does not guarantee good surfing. Mine has degraded to not much better than dial-up. Web sites load very slow using Firefox and/or IE7. I think Sprint's connection to the net is a problem. It's almost like I'm being throttled in some way. The point being, in most cases, if your connection were "slower than dial-up" you would not see 600+ Kbps on any speed test. With that said, high latency can have just as much of an affect on *browsing* speed as bandwidth, so take that into account as well. said by Jack_in_VA:said by CMoore2004:Sprint's connection to the 'net isn't a problem, it's likely something local. Sprintlink is a tier 1 provider and has peering arrangements with several providers. I just wonder if Sprint has all the towers linked to one and combining them onto the web. I would doubt that. It's much more likely that they've run a T1 to the tower. I'm in a *very* rural area (pop 5000, which i'm 10 miles from), and have 0 issues (generally 1200 down 24/7). I'd have to see what you're describing in person, seems pretty odd that you would have no problems with speed tests, but websites load slow. If I were you, I would contact Sprint. I know the difference that latency makes and this is NOT the case. My latency is not that bad. My signal is ~70 dBm. I have posted my speed tests. I have posted my netpersec which shows clearly that the websites load slow. I know what dialup was for me. It took me months working with Verizon to get a perfect pair of wires. On sites I could get a straight line at 38 KB/s. The same site now with SWBB it's 1.2 to 13 KB/s. It improved for several hours this afternoon but has reverted back. Speed tests show nothing different. I have observed many times prior to this latest problem that even when my down speed is 600 that the throughput is very fast. I also know what throttling is as Hughesnet gave me a bunch of experience in that. I also know what SMBB performance was prior to this. It's not even close to that level now. Same speed test results though. Same on my wife's laptop. |
|
| I recently got switched to a Sierra 595u usb modem and noticed a very significant slow down in connection speeds.
I used to have the older pantech pcmcia modem and it was at least 2x faster. Anyone have an idea of why this one is so much slower? Is it possible the card is provisioned incorrectly? Do they have different speeds? |
|
