|reply to Rekrul |
Re: Not much increase here...
The difference you see could be related to the SpeedTest site vs. the download site. Your ISP could have a better route to the download site vs. the SpeedTest site. Try using a different SpeedTest site -- even if it's a bit further away -- to see if the results are more consistent.
Regarding getting ISPs to rate their service by MB/second...good luck with that. Marketing types love higher numbers when branding products. Remember when the Ghz barrier in processor speeds was hit? Before that, the newness of the processor was always closely associated with it's clock speed. Now it's core count + clock speed. The same thing happened with cordless phones. We went from 900 Mhz to 2.4Ghz to 5Ghz but suddenly we started seeing DECT 6.1 models (Implying 6.1Ghz but it was really using something like 1.7Ghz). 6.1 was used because it's been beat into our head that new stuff has "higher" model numbers.
True but as always, it depends. Even large markets with multiple premier backbone providers can have interesting routes. If two backbone providers don't share traffic until they get to a major hub (i.e. Chicago, NYC, WDC, etc.), a speedtest site in your hometown may require packets to leave town, go hundreds of miles away, cross over and return hundreds of miles. When this happens, it's far better to choose the speed test site at the major hub than the site next door.
As an example, the speed test site in St. Louis (where I am) stinks. It's better for me to use sites in Chicago, Dallas or Kansas City because Charter has direct routes to those cities. However, the local speed test site has traffic going to Chicago and back. (Download something like Ping Plotter and watch where the packets travel.)
Speed test sites are also not created equal. I've tried to use the speed test site in St. Louis from a lot of provider networks in town and I've never had great results.