dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1267
share rss forum feed

konowl

join:2011-04-04
Carleton Place, ON

How will my ping be affected moving from Bell to Teksavvy?

After Bell introduced unlimited options for $10 a month in an effort to really screw the small guys... I'm thinking of moving to the small guys!

I hate Bell.

For about 3-4 years I had a shitty line until they FINALLY fixed them. that being said, moving from Bell to Teksavvy, how will my overall PING be affected, as that's incredibly important to me


JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23

My move went from 250-290ms to 13ms on the same line.


MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to konowl

Mine went from an average of 115 down to anywhere from 10 - 30 (depending on the time of day) consistently.


Bugblndr

join:2010-03-02
Burlington, ON
reply to konowl

Ping to where?


MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON

Just about anywhere... Those are the general averages.


konowl

join:2011-04-04
Carleton Place, ON
reply to Bugblndr

General pings. I know it's hard to really determine specific instances but my more general question is: has anyone experienced increased latency in game pings moving from bell to teksavvy



jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Start Communicat..
reply to MrMazda86

said by MrMazda86:

Just about anywhere... Those are the general averages.

please... Bell has less congestion than TSI.


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON
reply to konowl

said by konowl:

General pings. I know it's hard to really determine specific instances but my more general question is: has anyone experienced increased latency in game pings moving from bell to teksavvy

Teksavvy has far superior routing to Bell, and as a result, you will generally experience lower latency to most locations around the world.


ekster
Hi there
Premium
join:2010-07-16
Lachine, QC
kudos:3
reply to jmck

Bell might have less congestion, but it has pretty poor routing.



MacGyver
Don't Waste Your Energy
Premium,ExMod 2003-05
join:2001-10-14
Canada
kudos:2
Reviews:
·voip.ms
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to konowl


Ping to NJ

Ping to San Fran
I play World of Tanks and my ping is consistently 35 to 45ms to their North American server in Washington DC. I rarely have any problems with lag, and I cannot ever remember losing a game because of lag.

My ping to west coast servers is 84ms, which is about as good as you can get considering the speed at which signals cross the continent and the number of routing points in between.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to jmck

said by jmck:

said by MrMazda86:

Just about anywhere... Those are the general averages.

please... Bell has less congestion than TSI.

I'm not sure if this is still the case but Bhell was also running data through DPI so even pings to google.ca would take over 250ms for me.

kovy

join:2009-03-26
kudos:8

said by JMJimmy:

said by jmck:

said by MrMazda86:

Just about anywhere... Those are the general averages.

please... Bell has less congestion than TSI.

I'm not sure if this is still the case but Bhell was also running data through DPI so even pings to google.ca would take over 250ms for me.

What that makes no sense at all... lets compare ping if you want... but 250ms to google thats BS.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by kovy:

What that makes no sense at all... lets compare ping if you want... but 250ms to google thats BS.

Agreed - that's why I moved to teksavvy. When I started getting 5-15ms ping times I was blown away at how crappy Bhell really was. And it does make sense, the simplified routing would be Modem->DSLAM->DPI server (takes time to determine what packets are what and how to influence them, it's one of the core technical arguments behind net neutrality)->Destination

kovy

join:2009-03-26
kudos:8

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

What that makes no sense at all... lets compare ping if you want... but 250ms to google thats BS.

Agreed - that's why I moved to teksavvy. When I started getting 5-15ms ping times I was blown away at how crappy Bhell really was. And it does make sense, the simplified routing would be Modem->DSLAM->DPI server (takes time to determine what packets are what and how to influence them, it's one of the core technical arguments behind net neutrality)->Destination

Is Bell really had pings of 250ms.... everybody would of left the ship... it makes absolutly no sense. My pings were the same before the DPI and after DPI wich was in the 30ms.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

What that makes no sense at all... lets compare ping if you want... but 250ms to google thats BS.

Agreed - that's why I moved to teksavvy. When I started getting 5-15ms ping times I was blown away at how crappy Bhell really was. And it does make sense, the simplified routing would be Modem->DSLAM->DPI server (takes time to determine what packets are what and how to influence them, it's one of the core technical arguments behind net neutrality)->Destination

Is Bell really had pings of 250ms.... everybody would of left the ship... it makes absolutly no sense. My pings were the same before the DPI and after DPI wich was in the 30ms.

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.


BliZZardX
Premium
join:2002-08-18
Toronto, ON
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile

4 edits
reply to squircle

said by squircle:

Teksavvy has far superior routing to Bell, and as a result, you will generally experience lower latency to most locations around the world.

I don't agree with this. Bell's international routing is definitely better than TekSavvy since they have more direct peering arrangements than TekSavvy does. They offer free peering at all the North American Equinix DC's. Local routes are getting better too, as of a few months ago Rogers started peering with Bell and my friends ping dropped in half from 35ms to 15ms:

Then: »pastebin.com/raw.php?i=Gq6ATWPn
Now: »pastebin.com/raw.php?i=gdPALzxc

I always complained about that, then one day they finally fixed it.

Anyway this argument about routing is useless since TekSavvy still doesn't have a looking glass and it takes forever to make a comparison by asking users to post their own traceroute. I made my decision which ISP to use after going to these two websites: 1) »www.as577.net/en/page/lg.html 2) »supernoc.rogerstelecom.net/ops/

ElectronicBox has one too »lg.electronicbox.net/ but for some reason right now it's not working.


squircle

join:2009-06-23
Oakville, ON

Bell's international routing is better than Teksavvy's, yes. But for most things in North America (especially the east coast) I've found Teksavvy's routes to be far superior to Bell's, mostly because Teksavvy peers at TorIX and Bell refuses to do so. I'd post some concrete examples, but it appears as though I'm on an overloaded GAS link right now and my first-hop ping times are 300ms


kovy

join:2009-03-26
kudos:8
reply to JMJimmy

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

Always google.ca - either way, even at 27ms TSI is half that.


jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Start Communicat..

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

Always google.ca - either way, even at 27ms TSI is half that.

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.


Jethro86

join:2005-05-27
Winchester, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to MacGyver

said by MacGyver:

I play World of Tanks and my ping is consistently 35 to 45ms to their North American server in Washington DC. I rarely have any problems with lag, and I cannot ever remember losing a game because of lag.

My ping to west coast servers is 84ms, which is about as good as you can get considering the speed at which signals cross the continent and the number of routing points in between.

In my world of tanks I get about 400-600ms ping between 7pm and 9pm most nights. DSL sucks big time most nights. No cable available.

kovy

join:2009-03-26
kudos:8

1 edit
reply to JMJimmy

said by JMJimmy:

said by kovy:

said by JMJimmy:

Dunno, with all my various times with Bhell internet at various locations (4 different ones) I never saw a ping time lower than 150ms. It's horrible and I will never go back.

Were you trying to ping china ?

Pinging google.com [74.125.226.193] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54
Reply from 74.125.226.193: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 74.125.226.193:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 27ms, Average = 27ms

Always google.ca - either way, even at 27ms TSI is half that.

I'm on IPTV profile... which is like a interleaved DSL profile.

Bring some testing if you wanna... I'm waiting... btw no where near 250ms though...

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to jmck

said by jmck:

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.

Flash 11.3 = no buffering issues for me.


jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·Start Communicat..

said by JMJimmy:

said by jmck:

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.

Flash 11.3 = no buffering issues for me.

yes, lets keep pretending it's a flash issue. let's ignore that people still had issues with youtube even without using flash (mobile devices, iPads, etc). let's also ignore that there's a huge thread going on where people who just came from other ISPs aren't having the issue or that people who just left TSI and went to another provider aren't seeing the issue.

JMJimmy

join:2008-07-23
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL

said by jmck:

said by JMJimmy:

said by jmck:

meanwhile TSI users can't even watch a youtube video without constant buffering? there's more to network quality then a few milliseconds here and there.

Flash 11.3 = no buffering issues for me.

yes, lets keep pretending it's a flash issue. let's ignore that people still had issues with youtube even without using flash (mobile devices, iPads, etc). let's also ignore that there's a huge thread going on where people who just came from other ISPs aren't having the issue or that people who just left TSI and went to another provider aren't seeing the issue.

Did I say that was the only thing that could be causing it? Cable users/time of day issues I don't doubt it's congestion. All I know is that's what resolved it for me. I've had no issues since downgrading.


jmck
formerly 'shaded'

join:2010-10-02
Ottawa, ON

well you probably don't want to run an outdated version of flash too btw, it's one of the biggest ways to get malware on your system these days along with older java plugin versions.


SLAMtech

join:2009-12-03
kudos:1
reply to konowl

Remember your asking about ping times in a teksavvy forum where you will generally get biased information from haters. Anything over 100ms ping is not normal especially to Google. On a fast path profile I generally ping to Google around 12-15 ms.


UK_Dave

join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2

Meanwhile I'm pinging 600ms to 800ms to teksavvy.com

I dream of sub 100ms pings - any time of the day.


Calmuser

join:2011-10-27
Canada
reply to konowl

I just got switched over from Bell to TSI.

My pings are similar, maybe about 5ms or so higher on TSI with brief testing.


MrMazda86

join:2013-01-29
Kitchener, ON
reply to jmck

said by jmck:

said by MrMazda86:

Just about anywhere... Those are the general averages.

please... Bell has less congestion than TSI.

That actually is all dependant on where you are. If you're in Toronto or Ottawa, then yes... That very well may be the case, however if you're in a more remote area such as St. George, the results of what you'll get are quite different in reality.