thorin
join:2007-11-08
Liberty, MO Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to motorola870
Re: let the speculation begin! said by motorola870:said by DataRiker:I'm in Kansas City and after our upgrade 2 weeks ago, my speeds are horrendous.
I'm on 20/1 and get 6/1 during peak times ( even worse right after the upgrade, 0.5/1 with 300+ms pings )
100mbit/s is a pipe dream for Time Warner in this area.
they will have to do node splits I am sure have you made sure something is not wrong on your end? Have you complained? With every single speed tier getting a significant bump its even more important to have a docsis 3 modem/mta. They can even mail you one no charge. Until you get one the problems will more than likely continue. 100meg isn't really a pipe dream IMO with D3. |
|
|
|
| reply to antdude
Like Motorola870 said you are much less likely to have problem with DOCSIS 3.0 because with 2.0 you are only relying on one single channel. So if that channel gets congested then you get speed slow downs.
However with DOCSIS 3.0 and TWC you are going to have at least 4 downstream channels so if one is more congested they can utilize other channels that are not as congested. So all 4 together they are able to get constant and consistent speeds. You can still have speed problems but it is a lot less likely.
That is why you can see HUGE changes in performance going from a DOCSIS 2.0 modem to a 3.0 one. If you are already in a good service area for 2.0 then you won't really see any real difference. In some cases you might see performance decrease because Powerboost only works with 2.0. |
|
 antdudeA Ninja AntPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:4
·RoadRunner Cable
2 edits | said by nephipower:Like Motorola870 said you are much less likely to have problem with DOCSIS 3.0 because with 2.0 you are only relying on one single channel. So if that channel gets congested then you get speed slow downs.
However with DOCSIS 3.0 and TWC you are going to have at least 4 downstream channels so if one is more congested they can utilize other channels that are not as congested. So all 4 together they are able to get constant and consistent speeds. You can still have speed problems but it is a lot less likely.
That is why you can see HUGE changes in performance going from a DOCSIS 2.0 modem to a 3.0 one. If you are already in a good service area for 2.0 then you won't really see any real difference. In some cases you might see performance decrease because Powerboost only works with 2.0.
Can you define good service area? Is that uptime? If so, then yes, it is fine. To me, yeah it works well during non-peak hours like right now at 9 AM PST: 1.7-2.0 mB/sec from Steam. During peak hours, I noticed download speeds can go down to about 200 kB/sec.
Does TWC have DOCSIS3 modems for those with digital phone service? I think my parents still use a DOCSIS2 cable modem (Arris TM502G) from its summer's installation. |
|
| Yes I have phone service too.
They will not send out a new modem unless something is wrong with this one.
I might try the direct forum and see what they say. |
|
 swintecPremium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:4
 ·RapidVPS
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
 ·VoicePulse
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by DataRiker:Yes I have phone service too.
They will not send out a new modem unless something is wrong with this one.
Cant you stop by a local office?
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts |
|
thorin
join:2007-11-08
Liberty, MO Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to antdude
said by antdude:said by nephipower:Like Motorola870 said you are much less likely to have problem with DOCSIS 3.0 because with 2.0 you are only relying on one single channel. So if that channel gets congested then you get speed slow downs.
However with DOCSIS 3.0 and TWC you are going to have at least 4 downstream channels so if one is more congested they can utilize other channels that are not as congested. So all 4 together they are able to get constant and consistent speeds. You can still have speed problems but it is a lot less likely.
That is why you can see HUGE changes in performance going from a DOCSIS 2.0 modem to a 3.0 one. If you are already in a good service area for 2.0 then you won't really see any real difference. In some cases you might see performance decrease because Powerboost only works with 2.0.
Can you define good service area? Is that uptime? If so, then yes, it is fine. To me, yeah it works well during non-peak hours like right now at 9 AM PST: 1.8-2 mB/sec from Steam. During peak hours, I noticed download speeds can go down to about 200 kB/sec. Does TWC have DOCSIS3 modems for those with digital phone service? I think my parents still use a DOCSIS2 cable modem (Arris TM502G) from its summer's installation. Here at least they have two different D3 phone modems. Arris tg862/852 and a Ubee model. |
|
antdudeA Ninja AntPremium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:4 Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Here at least they have two different D3 phone modems. Arris tg862/852 and a Ubee model. |
|
| TWC didn't mind going back and forth, they have plenty of $ to waste.  |
|
| reply to DataRiker
said by DataRiker:Yes I have phone service too.
They will not send out a new modem unless something is wrong with this one.
I might try the direct forum and see what they say.
Seriously man how is not having slow internet not something that is wrong with your service. Like other have mentioned go to your local service station and get your modem swapped out for a DOCSIS 3.0 modem.
Or you can go buy your own modem and avoid the rental fee. So seriously you need to go do that before complaining more about your internet not working. Lots of people have problems with old modems. |
|
4 edits | I have already requested a new modem on the phone and was told this modem is correct for my service.
If a DOCSIS3 modem is required for their service they should have given me one.
As for driving to get another, standing in line, and explaining to some unhappy employee why i need a new modem ( and probably get the same model anyway), that does sound tempting. |
|
 pspcrazyAnime Freak
join:2008-02-06
San Diego, CA | reply to motorola870
Freaking awesome news. Now I wish they could do this over the next 2-3 months vs over the next 2 years like the last upgrade they did to docsis 3.0.
--
My Anime Site - AnimeCrazy.net |
|
| reply to motorola870
This one may be faster as the Docsis 3 upgrade involved changing a lot of equipment and programming in their headends, this should be changing some setting numbers and making sure their infrastructure can handle it (Which they claim it can). |
|
| reply to motorola870
Any update on the RGV? |
|
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
1 edit | reply to Fleeced
said by Fleeced:This one may be faster as the Docsis 3 upgrade involved changing a lot of equipment and programming in their headends, this should be changing some setting numbers and making sure their infrastructure can handle it (Which they claim it can).
same issue as with the original DOCSIS 3.0 rollout got to make room for the 4 new QAMs dedicated to HSI per node. So they have to reclaim analogs and reshuffle the QAMs around to do it. Also the CMTS cards might need to be swapped for denser cards I believe Cisco makes one that has 72 Downstreams per card and ARRIS makes one with 32 Downstreams per card along with a 24 upstream card as well from ARRIS. » www.arrisi.com/products/product.asp?id=73» www.arrisi.com/products/product.asp?id=72» www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collate···540.html» www.motorola.com/staticfiles/Vid···S-EN.pdfMy node is already running 6 downstreams bonded and 4 upstreams bonded we are just waiting on the last two downstreams to be added to have 8x4. |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to motorola870
Appears to be live - my 50/5 is now testing at 113/5.6. Peakview seems to struggle at that speed, and I had better results using the high bandwidth test ran by Verizon.
Actual performance seems to match, around 115-118mbit.
One speed test from speedtest.net using a Chicago source (the KC area hosts are all crap):
 |
|
 Smith6612Premium,MVM
join:2008-02-01
North Tonawanda, NY
kudos:22
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Frontier Communi..
| said by PrymeMover:Appears to be live - my 50/5 is now testing at 113/5.6. Peakview seems to struggle at that speed, and I had better results using the high bandwidth test ran by Verizon.
Actual performance seems to match, around 115-118mbit.
One speed test from speedtest.net using a Chicago source (the KC area hosts are all crap):
Nice. Let's see how long it will be until the upload is less anemic in comparison to the download  |
|
TWCdude
join:2006-04-28
San Antonio, TX
kudos:23 | reply to motorola870
Here in San Antonio the 4 channels are allocated but not lit up yet. I have a channel scanner that I used for my HD homerun Prime and it picked this up 597,591,585,579 for the 4 live channels looks like 573,567,561,555 are going to be the new ones.
Sorry no upstream channels as the lowest it scans is 57mhz and the upstream channels are in the 20 to 30 mhz range
SCANNING: 603000000 (us-irc:87, us-cable:87)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x16F9
PROGRAM 1129: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 1145: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 1174: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 62351: 0 (control)
SCANNING: 597000000 (us-irc:86, us-cable:86)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 591000000 (us-irc:85, us-cable:85)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 585000000 (us-irc:84, us-cable:84)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 579000000 (us-irc:83, us-cable:83)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 573000000 (us-irc:82, us-cable:82)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09CF
SCANNING: 567000000 (us-irc:81, us-cable:81)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09CD
SCANNING: 561000000 (us-irc:80, us-cable:80)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09CB
SCANNING: 555000000 (us-irc:79, us-cable:79)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09C9
SCANNING: 549000000 (us-irc:78, us-cable:78)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x0EB4
PROGRAM 180: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 181: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 310: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 350: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 1900: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 4000: 0 (encrypted) |
|
 Nick21
join:2010-02-03
New York, NY | reply to motorola870
100/25 sounds great, any rumors/insight on Manhattan? My hub is still at 6/4 bonding. |
|
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
| reply to TWCdude
said by TWCdude:Here in San Antonio the 4 channels are allocated but not lit up yet. I have a channel scanner that I used for my HD homerun Prime and it picked this up 597,591,585,579 for the 4 live channels looks like 573,567,561,555 are going to be the new ones.
Sorry no upstream channels as the lowest it scans is 57mhz and the upstream channels are in the 20 to 30 mhz range
SCANNING: 603000000 (us-irc:87, us-cable:87)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x16F9
PROGRAM 1129: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 1145: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 1174: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 62351: 0 (control)
SCANNING: 597000000 (us-irc:86, us-cable:86)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 591000000 (us-irc:85, us-cable:85)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 585000000 (us-irc:84, us-cable:84)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 579000000 (us-irc:83, us-cable:83)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
SCANNING: 573000000 (us-irc:82, us-cable:82)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09CF
SCANNING: 567000000 (us-irc:81, us-cable:81)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09CD
SCANNING: 561000000 (us-irc:80, us-cable:80)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09CB
SCANNING: 555000000 (us-irc:79, us-cable:79)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x09C9
SCANNING: 549000000 (us-irc:78, us-cable:78)
LOCK: qam256 (ss=100 snq=100 seq=100)
TSID: 0x0EB4
PROGRAM 180: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 181: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 310: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 350: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 1900: 0 (encrypted)
PROGRAM 4000: 0 (encrypted)
TWCdude 549MHz 555MHz 561MHz 567MHz in San Antonio are used for VOD sorry  but they are going to have to reorganize to get 8 channels in. Plans are to move everything off of 71 to 76 on the analogs in San Antonio to make room. Bravo from Standard Cable Channel 76 to Standard Cable Channel 23 CNBC from Standard Cable Channel 37 to Standard Cable Channel 73 (Digital Set-Top Box or Digital Adaptor Required) C-SPAN from Standard Cable Channel 23 to Standard Cable Channel 76 (Digital Set-Top Box or Digital Adaptor Required) FX from Standard Cable Channel 73 to Standard Cable Channel 37 History from Standard Cable Channel 74 to Standard Cable Channel 66 LMN from Standard Cable Channel 66 to Standard Cable Channel 74 (Digital Set-Top Box or Digital Adaptor Required) OWN from Standard Cable Channel 44 to Standard Cable Channel 71 (Digital Set-Top Box or Digital Adaptor Required) Syfy from Standard Cable Channel 72 to Standard Cable Channel 65 TCM from Standard Cable Channel 71 to Standard Cable Channel 44 these below are off of silicondust lineup for 78201 zip code in San Antonio so yes those four channels you mentoned are for VOD. qam256 79-17779 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17846 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17861 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17862 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17881 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17883 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17887 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17894 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17905 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17909 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17911 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17913 UNKNOWN qam256 79-17920 UNKNOWN qam256 80-17794 UNKNOWN qam256 80-17797 UNKNOWN qam256 80-17882 UNKNOWN qam256 80-17907 UNKNOWN qam256 80-17915 UNKNOWN |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to motorola870
Still 4 channels down and 1 up here. Then again, it took SD a very long time to get channel bonding/Ultimate in the first place, so I expect TWC to go to 8/4 long after the other major markets. |
|
