dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1047
share rss forum feed

johnfights

join:2001-11-19
Erie, PA

Ping times

What are ping times normally like for time warner cable? I just switch from DSL and the seem high from what I used to get. google.com would be around 25-30ms now its more like 130ms same with most site 100+ ms only time I get a low ping is using time warners speed test. Other sites offering speed test show lot higher pings no matter what location.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
Cable ping times are going to be higher than DSL in general. For me, pinging google I'll normally get between 12-20ms, with occasional spikes up to 200ms.

johnfights

join:2001-11-19
Erie, PA
12-20ms is a lot lower than what than I have been getting. I haven't seen pings over 100 in a long time except maybe random spikes or while maybe uploading/downloading. This seems to be avg even with nothing using the connection since switching.

LaRRY_PEpPeR

join:2010-03-19
Wentzville, MO
reply to Suit Up
said by Suit Up:

Cable ping times are going to be higher than DSL in general.

WTH?! Bull...


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Suit Up
said by Suit Up:

Cable ping times are going to be higher than DSL in general. For me, pinging google I'll normally get between 12-20ms, with occasional spikes up to 200ms.

My observation is that ADSL on "Fastpath" is about the same as cable, with a lower deviation. ADSL2+ and VDSL on "Interleaved" adds 10 ms to 20 ms to latency over "Fastpath". So, no, cable latency should not be higher than DSL "in general", and may even be lower; albeit with slightly higher deviation.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

whiteyonenh

join:2004-08-09
Keene, NH
reply to Suit Up
said by Suit Up:

Cable ping times are going to be higher than DSL in general. For me, pinging google I'll normally get between 12-20ms, with occasional spikes up to 200ms.

I'm not sure where you got this notion from... I regularly see 20-30ms lower ping to just about any game server when compared to my brother on dsl 15mins down the road, connected to the same game server.

Consider that loads of DSL ISPs enable Interleave on their lines for interference/stability reasons, which increases pings on average between 15-25ms above cable's 8-10ms first hop ping. I've yet to see a DSL line with lower than 30ms ping to the first hop while the line is in interleave mode. Many DSL ISPs will also not enable Fast Path anymore, even if you request it, and your line is capable of it.

Tracing route to google.com [173.194.43.14]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms tomato-router [192.168.222.1]
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 * 15 ms 15 ms gig5-1-18.ptldme02-rtr001.ne.northeast.rr.com [24.31.154.6]
4 13 ms 11 ms 11 ms g10-5-1-0.ptldmehx-rtr001.ne.northeast.rr.com [204.210.69.230]
5 51 ms 39 ms 39 ms rdc-204-210-69-49.ne.northeast.rr.com [204.210.69.49]
6 32 ms 31 ms 31 ms ae-5-0.cr0.nyc30.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.74]
7 46 ms 39 ms 39 ms 107.14.17.172
8 49 ms 47 ms 39 ms 66.109.9.30
9 40 ms 37 ms 37 ms ae-1-0.pr0.dca10.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.165]
10 43 ms 43 ms 40 ms 66.109.9.66
11 39 ms 43 ms 43 ms 209.85.252.80
12 39 ms 37 ms 45 ms 72.14.236.146
13 45 ms 40 ms 45 ms 72.14.239.92
14 44 ms 36 ms 43 ms 209.85.251.34
15 42 ms 38 ms 37 ms 72.14.237.252
16 45 ms 39 ms 39 ms lga15s34-in-f14.1e100.net [173.194.43.14]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\Rob>ping -n 15 173.194.43.14

Pinging 173.194.43.14 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=36ms TTL=54
Reply from 173.194.43.14: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 173.194.43.14:
Packets: Sent = 15, Received = 15, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 36ms, Maximum = 47ms, Average = 41ms

I don't see anything wrong with this whatsoever...

I Have RR Extreme 30/5, with a Zoom 5341J Modem, and a Linksys E3000 running Tomato USB Firmware.

Also, 12-20ms pings to google, is GREAT, not something I'm capable of doing though, Southwest NH, to Maine, to NYC, and hitting google's servers in VA/Wash DC area. Can't outdo the laws of physics.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
I used to see ~10ms to the aggregation router with ADSL on Fastpath. I generally see ~25ms now, with ADSL2+ on Interleaved profile. It reflects a different approach to connection speed between my old ISP (AT&T; limiting the MaxSync rate by tier) and my new ISP (Sonic.net; letting the connection run near the maximum sustainable rate).
Tracing route to www.google.com [74.125.224.112]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1    <1 ms     1 ms     1 ms  192.168.42.1
  2    26 ms    25 ms    25 ms  173-228-7-1.dsl.static.sonic.net [173.228.7.1]
  3    24 ms    25 ms    24 ms  gig1-4.cr1.lsatca11.sonic.net [70.36.243.13]
  4    24 ms    25 ms    25 ms  0.xe-5-1-0.gw.pao1.sonic.net [69.12.211.1]
  5    25 ms    24 ms    25 ms  0.xe-6-0-0.gw3.equinix-sj.sonic.net [64.142.0.185]
  6    26 ms    25 ms    25 ms  eqixsj-google-gige.google.com [206.223.116.21]
  7    26 ms    25 ms    26 ms  216.239.49.168
  8    27 ms    27 ms    27 ms  64.233.174.109
  9    27 ms    26 ms    26 ms  nuq04s08-in-f16.1e100.net [74.125.224.112]
 
Trace complete.
 
I don't think that is an awful result; but I probably could get Fastpath if I requested that they throttle back the MaxSync rate to raise the SNR to 10-11dB. I just don't need lower latency enough to bother.

A trace to one of the YouTube connections (currently streaming some Kajiura Yuki clips):
Tracing route to nuq04s09-in-f0.1e100.net [74.125.224.128]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
 
  1     1 ms     1 ms     1 ms  192.168.42.1
  2    25 ms    25 ms    25 ms  173-228-7-1.dsl.static.sonic.net [173.228.7.1]
  3    24 ms    25 ms    24 ms  gig1-4.cr1.lsatca11.sonic.net [70.36.243.13]
  4    24 ms    24 ms    24 ms  0.xe-5-1-0.gw.pao1.sonic.net [69.12.211.1]
  5    26 ms    25 ms    25 ms  0.xe-6-0-0.gw3.equinix-sj.sonic.net [64.142.0.185]
  6    27 ms    27 ms    31 ms  eqixsj-google-gige.google.com [206.223.116.21]
  7    26 ms    26 ms    28 ms  216.239.49.168
  8    26 ms    27 ms    26 ms  64.233.174.119
  9    29 ms    27 ms    26 ms  nuq04s09-in-f0.1e100.net [74.125.224.128]
 
Trace complete.
 

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

2 edits
reply to NormanS
said by NormanS:

albeit with slightly higher deviation.

That's the problem. Due to the nature of TDMA/CDMA, your ping times are going to depend on node congestion. During peak hours they will usually be higher than during non-peak times. So that's why I say in general Cable ping times are going to be higher. But yes, in perfect conditions, they can be lower.


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA

1 edit
reply to whiteyonenh
said by whiteyonenh:

Also, 12-20ms pings to google, is GREAT, not something I'm capable of doing though, Southwest NH, to Maine, to NYC, and hitting google's servers in VA/Wash DC area. Can't outdo the laws of physics.

Yeah, I'm lucky to be in the LA area as Google has servers here. 11 hops for me. If I do a traceroute to 173.194.43.14 which you posted, it's 17 hops with a minimum ping of 84.757ms. If I try 74.125.224.112, which NormanS posted, it is 14 hops with a minimum ping of 21.281ms.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to Suit Up
Congestion can afflict DSL, as well. A congested DSL aggregation router can send latency through the roof. OTOH, a well managed HFC can avoid congestion.

Deviation is a measure of the spread around the average. With my Interleaved ADSL2+ connection, deviation is normally 1ms to 2ms; same as my old Fastpath ADSL connection. My observation of cable latency is a deviation of 4ms to 5ms.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:13
reply to Suit Up
Here in L.A. I'm seeing identical times between cable and DSL:

TWC:
PING www.google.com (74.125.224.240) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=1 ttl=54 time=11.0 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=2 ttl=54 time=11.2 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=3 ttl=54 time=11.1 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=4 ttl=54 time=9.45 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=5 ttl=54 time=9.67 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=6 ttl=54 time=10.8 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=7 ttl=54 time=8.90 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=8 ttl=54 time=9.46 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=9 ttl=54 time=9.33 ms
64 bytes from lax04s08-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.240): icmp_req=10 ttl=54 time=10.7 ms
--- www.google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9012ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 8.907/10.186/11.250/0.856 ms
 

AT&T ADSL2+:
PING www.google.com (74.125.224.209) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=11.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=10.1 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=10.1 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=4 ttl=53 time=10.1 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=5 ttl=53 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=6 ttl=53 time=9.98 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=7 ttl=53 time=10.2 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=8 ttl=53 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=9 ttl=53 time=10.3 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f17.1e100.net (74.125.224.209): icmp_seq=10 ttl=53 time=10.2 ms
 
--- www.google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9003ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 9.988/10.243/11.097/0.308 ms
 

/M


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
reply to NormanS
said by NormanS:

Congestion can afflict DSL, as well. A congested DSL aggregation router can send latency through the roof. OTOH, a well managed HFC can avoid congestion.

Yes that's true, but that aspect can affect cable as well, but DSL doesn't have the same problem as the TDMA/CDMA management at the first hop.

If your deviation is only 4-5ms, then that's pretty good. Right now mine is 46.651ms: even though I managed to get a min of 11.140ms, the max was still 210.431ms.


mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:13
said by Suit Up:

If your deviation is only 4-5ms, then that's pretty good. Right now mine is 46.651ms: even though I managed to get a min of 11.140ms, the max was still 210.431ms.

The only times I've ever seen pings that high is when I'm also up/downloading stuff. I just ran 2 tests back to back, the first one with an idle connection and the next while running a speed test (got 29.8 Mbps on my 30/5 connection BTW).

1st one, all <11.5 ms:
PING www.google.com (74.125.224.212) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=1 ttl=54 time=11.2 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=2 ttl=54 time=11.3 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=3 ttl=54 time=8.55 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=4 ttl=54 time=8.45 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=5 ttl=54 time=11.4 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=6 ttl=54 time=8.56 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=7 ttl=54 time=10.1 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=8 ttl=54 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=9 ttl=54 time=10.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s02-in-f20.1e100.net (74.125.224.212): icmp_req=10 ttl=54 time=11.4 ms
 
--- www.google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9011ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 8.456/10.140/11.472/1.194 ms
 

2nd one, while downloading at 29.8 Mbps:
PING www.google.com (74.125.224.176) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=1 ttl=54 time=99.9 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=2 ttl=54 time=151 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=3 ttl=54 time=197 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=4 ttl=54 time=234 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=5 ttl=54 time=284 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=6 ttl=54 time=336 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=7 ttl=54 time=12.3 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=8 ttl=54 time=21.0 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=9 ttl=54 time=16.7 ms
64 bytes from lax02s01-in-f16.1e100.net (74.125.224.176): icmp_req=10 ttl=54 time=37.6 ms
 
--- www.google.com ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 12.309/139.249/336.479/113.838 ms
 

So yes, if you're downloading something large then your pings will creep up. Otherwise they stay rather low. If yours are creeping while not downloading then I would replace your router as it's the most likely cause.

/M


Suit Up

join:2003-07-21
Los Angeles, CA
I wasn't downloading or uploading anything. My guess is it's just congestion and still being on DOCSIS 2.