dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1049
share rss forum feed


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

1 edit

[AZ] higher speeds 170/30 but also higher latency and jitter

So some days ago Cox turned on 150/20 in my area which is north of bell on 7th st in north phoenix..

I still have 6X3 on my DPC3010 tho not 8X4..




My slight issue and observation is that the latency has increased and jitter has increased. This makes sense as everybody on this top tier went to 150/20 and this additional load caused more stress on the backbone..

I chart latency with pings once a second to the cox gateway. The chart below shows 30 days of charting. The red packet loss is me doing stuff on the network.

You can clearly see where they switched on the 100/20 and the latency change is obvious.. At peak times latency is up 10% and jitter climes up 22%. That is actually a tad significant..

I didn't expect that. I thought latency would go down with a better connection.




xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Re: [AZ] higher speeds 106/20 but also higher latency and jitter

In fact... I now only get a B rating at pingtest.. I always got A before..


bryant313

join:2011-05-24
Las Vegas, NV

2 edits

i am on Firefox and can not run the packet loss test on pingtest.net due to the security issues with java

but when i do run the ping test i always get a B* due to the fact that i can not run the packet loss test

but in the past when i would run the packet loss test on pingtest.net (back when java and Firefox had no issues) i would always get a A* rating with the same ping and jitter results that you are receiving

so i think that because the test could not run the packet loss test it by default gives you a rating less then a A based on your ping and jitter

also isn't your area supposed to be 150mbps down and 20mbps up?



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Hmmm...... Trying other servers you might be right...



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

1 edit

Jeeze..... Who knew speedtest could count this high.. wow...


bryant313

join:2011-05-24
Las Vegas, NV

i am on the premier tier




xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Glad I updated to a high power router that can do 1 million packets per second

»www.ubnt.com/edgemax#EdgeMAXhardware

and a new WAP..

»www.arubanetworks.com/pdf/produc···ries.pdf

These really are required for these new speeds. And of course my modified DPC3010... »www.usbjtag.com/vbforum/showthre···p?t=8259



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

Consistent too. From more then one testing server.. San Diego seems pretty consistent..



08034016
Hallo lisa Aus Amerika
Premium
join:2001-08-31
Byron, GA

2 edits
reply to xymox1

Re: [AZ] higher speeds 170/30 but also higher latency and jitter

Yeah i get this mess and am 97 Miles from the HQ of Cox.



To be Honest i cant wait for another Cable provider to come into my area to see who's better them or Cox Communications and speed/prices. This speed increase mess i dont need why not up the CAP from 250 GIG to 400GIG..

I would really love for Google Fiber to come in my area 1gigbit sec for $70.00 i pay that now for 50 download 12 upload POWER BOOST not really the correct speed, its a illusion.


This is my so-called "POWER BOOST TO Germany "illusion speed"


Where everyone gets this 136/50 etc my area got the New UPgrade to 46/10 Oh btw am 97 Miles from Cox HQ
--
Holocaust survivors and their family's fill this out.
»online.ushmm.org/registry/update···form.php



xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ

So I tested various servers at Speedtest. Funny how the local ones produce higher ping times and slower speeds... Its all about how they route... I did these tests at 5am which is a times where the net is least loaded. Time of day makes a difference of course.. So for Phoenix the Sandiego server "I2B Networks" produced the best results and was consistent over ten tests..

Scary high numbers..


PinkyThePig
Premium
join:2011-05-02
Tempe, AZ
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
reply to 08034016

Well of course you arn't going to get max speeds when connecting to something overseas. But in regards to the cap I've never heard so much as a peep about it even when going way over. I think it's just there for certain markets and as an excuse to possibly bump people to higher tiers.



08034016
Hallo lisa Aus Amerika
Premium
join:2001-08-31
Byron, GA

1 edit

said by PinkyThePig:

Well of course you arn't going to get max speeds when connecting to something overseas. But in regards to the cap I've never heard so much as a peep about it even when going way over. I think it's just there for certain markets and as an excuse to possibly bump people to higher tiers.

God you never knew that Cox had caps am confused by your statement?

You think am paying more to go to a higher tier NO way am trying to get rid of Cox as my service provider..

DSL there's so many plans out there unlike in my area for Cable which is a Monopoly i though this was illegal? ever heard of the Baby bells,

LINK
»useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/···poly.htm

»amplicate.com/hate/cox-communications
--
Holocaust survivors and their family's fill this out.
»online.ushmm.org/registry/update···form.php

m33crob

join:2013-02-06
Phoenix, AZ
reply to xymox1

If ping times and jitter are really important to you, you should probably upgrade to fiber. These charts "could" indicate a change, but since ICMP packets are low priority, it could also just be that your tests have been de-prioritized.



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to 08034016

said by 08034016:

... ever heard of the Baby bells ...

All merged and bought out since the breakup of the original Bell monopoly (AT&T).
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


xymox1
Premium
join:2008-05-20
Phoenix, AZ
reply to m33crob

quote:
If ping times and jitter are really important to you, you should probably upgrade to fiber. These charts "could" indicate a change, but since ICMP packets are low priority, it could also just be that your tests have been de-prioritized.
Yes. Thats maybe whats interesting. Maybe they are doing more in-depth QoS. Some new system. That would be interesting. I was reading on another forum that a large number of gamers in phoenix are having trouble with some type of things like chat systems going offline. It started the day Phoenix switched on this new stuff. Very odd. But maybe its just coincidence. They did figure out its only effecting Cox customers, in certian areas of Phoenix. Gaming works fine, web works fine, but specifically Steam chat is going offline and coming right back online. Like its getting a low QoS priority. I think this is not related tho. But maybe..

Well there will be things to work out with any new deployment.


08034016
Hallo lisa Aus Amerika
Premium
join:2001-08-31
Byron, GA
reply to NormanS

said by NormanS:

said by 08034016:

... ever heard of the Baby bells ...

All merged and bought out since the breakup of the original Bell monopoly (AT&T).

THe breakup happened because of the Monopoly they had,Get another provider in here that would offer me 105/25 for $ 80.00 bye Cox and that's what they're worried about.

The two cities near me filled out for Google Fiber 1 GIGBIT Sec $70.00 per month.
»fiber.google.com/about/
--
Holocaust survivors and their family's fill this out.
»online.ushmm.org/registry/update···form.php


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:11
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

said by 08034016:

said by NormanS:

said by 08034016:

... ever heard of the Baby bells ...

All merged and bought out since the breakup of the original Bell monopoly (AT&T).

THe breakup happened because of the Monopoly they had ...Get another provider in here that would offer me 105/25 for $ 80.00 bye Cox and that's what they're worried about.

Actually, it happened with the consent of AT&T. Under their regulated public monopoly status they were prohibited from entering certain markets, such as computers. Instead of fighting in the courts, they consented to the breakup in exchange for removal of that prohibition.

They failed at everything they tried until they were in dire financial straits, when one of their spinoffs, SBC, bought them. Now AT&T is the "parent" of four of the seven Baby Bells, and a monopoly ILEC in 22 states. Verizon is the parent of two of the seven Baby Bells, and a monopoly ILEC in every state originally covered by Bell Atlantic, NYNEX, and GTE. CenturyLink is the parent of US West, and a monopoly ILEC in much of the rest of the nation.

Get another provider in here that would offer me 105/25 for $ 80.00 bye Cox and that's what they're worried about.

Cox, like the other incumbent MSOs, just quotes Alfred E. Neuman: "What? Me worry?"
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum