dslreports logo
 story category
Cisco: Average Connection Consumes 11.4 GB Per Month
P2P comprises just 38% of all Internet data

According to a new survey from Cisco studying global broadband use, the average broadband connection generates approximately 11.4 gigabytes of Internet traffic per month. The survey included anonymous, aggregated network usage data provided by a group of more than 20 global ISPs. The data, which included largely residential but some business customers, suggests that about 10% of global users comprise about 60% of all global traffic, and the top 1% consumed about 20%. Some additional key points:

• Globally, the average broadband connection consumes about 4.3 gigabytes of visual networking applications (defined as video, social networking and collaboration) traffic per month.

• Internet "prime time" usually runs from about 9 pm to 1 am globally, in contrast to TV prime time which spans the hours between 7 p.m. and 11 pm. 25% (or 93.3 megabytes per day per connection) of global Internet traffic is generated during this period.

• The study offers additional data to indicate P2P use is not the monster many had surmised, comprising just 38% of all Internet traffic. With all manner of video services growing a much faster rate, P2P's share is down from 50% in a recent Cisco survey.
view:
topics flat nest 
page: 1 · 2 · next

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

The numbers have shown what many have said - that transfer caps at 250 GB/mo and above are very reasonable and not some anti-competitive throttle on the internet. The only ones complaining are those who SHOULD BE paying more per month if they use more than that. And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more.

tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

1 edit

tiger72

Premium Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by FFH5:

And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more.
Why? What is the cost to ISPs? It's not like a road where increased traffic = increased wear and tear, decreasing longevity, and hurting investment. And this aint Pre-Docsis where a single user could destroy everyone else's bandwidth.

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by tiger72:

said by FFH5:

And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more.
Why? What is the cost to ISPs? It's not like a road where increased traffic = increased wear and tear, decreasing longevity, and hurting investment. And this aint Pre-Docsis where a single user could destroy everyone else's bandwidth.
Actually the problem is oversubscription. If everyone were on full throttle 24x7 no one would be able to use their connection.

The reality is that most people don't need a full throttle connection 24x7 which is why we can have affordable broadband for home use.

tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
MVM
join:2008-01-16
Gilbert, AZ

tubbynet

MVM

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by fifty nine:

If everyone were on full throttle 24x7 no one would be able to use their connection.
and a decent lot of isp gear would start dropping packets because even your switches/routers are oversubscribed.

q.
jimbo21503
join:2004-05-10
Euclid, OH

jimbo21503 to fifty nine

Member

to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:

Actually the problem is oversubscription. If everyone were on full throttle 24x7 no one would be able to use their connection.
One of the issues that causes issues when oversubscription is done is that there is no option to get that kind of connection. Networks overtaxed: Have the heaviest users moved over to a more dedicated, pricier service: ooops! This is not available to most people to begin with.
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

It's available for me. $3000 for a 100 Mbit connection. No thanks.
gorehound
join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME

gorehound to tiger72

Member

to tiger72
I host a large website and I am an artist with a lot of things for people to download.
The biggest download would be downloading my Holocaust DVD.
A Family Journey Backwards is a 5 1/2 hour detailed study of Jewish life in the Carpathian mountain/Northern Transylvanian region before,during,and immedaitely after World War 2.
This documentary is available on my site for free and can be downloaded at master quality 6 DVD Set.That menas your stupid 11 gig is krap because it would be equal to 2 months worth...it is a 23 roughly gig download.
I never want to see any capping of anyones accounts.i want to pay a flat rate.i do not want to see folks not want to download my art because of some stupid greedy cappping behavior.
if you are interested go here for my holocaust site before you are capped i guess.
»www.bigmeathammer.com/au ··· witz.htm

anonymoose
@sbcglobal.net

anonymoose to tiger72

Anon

to tiger72
damn it! why can't people today just be happy with only surfing web pages and reading emails!? If it was fine for 1995, then it is fine for 2009! then everyone can guarantee to be below current ISP caps and stop whining about caps.


tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

1 edit

tiger72

Premium Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by anonymoose :

damn it! why can't people today just be happy with only surfing web pages and reading emails!? If it was fine for 1995, then it is fine for 2009! then everyone can guarantee to be below current ISP caps and stop whining about caps.


Damn straight! Everyone, let's mandate we all use Netscape 3.1 again, and host everything on a 20MB Geocities account with a 100MB/month data transfer limit!

Ahh the good days...
gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC

gpmoo7 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
The problem is that people only use 10GB because they have caps ... if everyone were unlimited, they would use more data
People don't want to check their bandwith usage every day to see if they can do or not do what they want.

jester121
Premium Member
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

jester121

Premium Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

The data doesn't support that supposition at all.
gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC

gpmoo7

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by jester121:

The data doesn't support that supposition at all.
Which data? It's clear that the future is unlimited bandwidth for every one. That's it.
The future is FTTH starting à 100 Mb/s and going over Gb/s in a few years (that's a reality in some country, not in Canada).
All this bandwidth will be used by everyone ...

Of course, today, in Canada, people are stick to their 7Mb/s throttled Internet access with limited bandwidth so they just do IM, mails and Facebook ... who is going to rent an HD movie with this kind of Internet access ?
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB.
gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC

1 edit

gpmoo7

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by iansltx:

I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB.
Yes but 11.4GB is a worldwide average including countries where Internet is almost not used ... so the average in ... let's say, the G8 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, UK, US) should be more like 30GB or more ... (I hope )
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers. Also, 11.4 GB per connection seems to be about right...

tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
MVM
join:2008-01-16
Gilbert, AZ

tubbynet

MVM

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by iansltx:

I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers.
not quite an assumption i'm willing to make. i would assume that most of these isps would have to have a working relationship with cisco, in the form of account managers and sales engineers. through these relationships, cisco would pitch the box that collects the survey data onto the isp network.
a company that is running juniper switch/routers utilising alcatel dslams or motorola cmts units is not going to have the working relationship/trust with cisco to say "sure, through that big box collecting data into the network". in fact, just like there is an mac vs. windows debate, there is the same in the enterprise/service provider space with juniper and cisco (and some others like force10). some people patently refuse to run c* gear because they only like j* gear. from an issue of interoperability, it makes sense to stick with what you have, but i digress.

at any rate, if the isp does not have a working relationship with cisco, they aren't going to be part of this survey. i would say that this cuts out a good chunk of isps from the mix.

q.
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. TWC probably does. Though Comcast doesn't use Cisco on the CMTS side (because their CMTSes don't know how to load balance worth a crap).

weaseled386
join:2008-04-13
Edgewater, FL

weaseled386

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by iansltx:

Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does.
There is very little Cisco equipment in the AT&T Central Offices. What Cisco equipment is there is currently being phased out for Juniper (MX480's and MX960's). The VRAD backbone is Alcatel routers & switches.

Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium Member
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC

Matt3 to iansltx

Premium Member

to iansltx
said by iansltx:

Comcast uses Cisco. Pretty sure AT&T does. TWC probably does. Though Comcast doesn't use Cisco on the CMTS side (because their CMTSes don't know how to load balance worth a crap).
Time Warner definitely does.

jester121
Premium Member
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

jester121 to tubbynet

Premium Member

to tubbynet
said by tubbynet:

said by iansltx:

I'm pretty sure that Cisco picked twenty relatively high-profile broadband providers.
not quite an assumption i'm willing to make. i would assume that most of these isps would have to have a working relationship with cisco, in the form of account managers and sales engineers. through these relationships, cisco would pitch the box that collects the survey data onto the isp network.
a company that is running juniper switch/routers utilising alcatel dslams or motorola cmts units is not going to have the working relationship/trust with cisco to say "sure, through that big box collecting data into the network". in fact, just like there is an mac vs. windows debate, there is the same in the enterprise/service provider space with juniper and cisco (and some others like force10). some people patently refuse to run c* gear because they only like j* gear. from an issue of interoperability, it makes sense to stick with what you have, but i digress.

at any rate, if the isp does not have a working relationship with cisco, they aren't going to be part of this survey. i would say that this cuts out a good chunk of isps from the mix.
So be it. Please explain why ISPs using non-Cisco gear would expect to see drastically different results, if they had chosen to collect the same metrics?

tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
MVM
join:2008-01-16
Gilbert, AZ

tubbynet

MVM

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by jester121:

Please explain why ISPs using non-Cisco gear would expect to see drastically different results, if they had chosen to collect the same metrics?
the metrics may be the same, but the data outcomes could be drastically affected. again, this is a survey of *20* isps spread across the globe. because of the differences in content, restrictions, cultures, norms, and societal emphasis on technology, it is difficult to put anything into a "cookie cutter". sure, worldwide monthly average consumption is 11 gigs. great. however, that doesn't account for every isp in every part of the country and there is no differentiation between regions of the globe.
while you could make the argument that cisco wouldn't publish these results if they weren't accurate, i contend that the addition of several larger isps in each region and a breakout of each regions monthly consumption would be a better indicator.

q.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88 to iansltx

Member

to iansltx
said by iansltx:

I'm pretty sure that the sample size was big enough that caps weren't an issue. Everyone except mobile broadband providers have caps much higher than 11.4GB.
How do you know what?
quote:
Globally, the average broadband connection (primarily residential subscribers and some business users) generates approximately 11.4 gigabytes of Internet traffic per month.

Did they include every 3G phone with a phone-only data plan, or every 3G device with a laptop/tether plan? Did they include dialup users? What about satellite (WB, Hughes)? What about business grade satellite like Inmarsat? What about WISPs that put 200 users on 1 T1 for backhaul where the speed crawls to 100kbitps during peak usage (still better than 19kbitps on rural dialup)?
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

Cisco picked 20 ISPs who were using their equipment. 90% of the WISPs I know of use Mikrotik or similar. You're right in asking what's inside the "20 providers" black box but I'm inclined to believe that Cisco picked wireline or high-speed wireless options (not 3G) for the companies they studied.

Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium Member
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC

Matt3 to gpmoo7

Premium Member

to gpmoo7
said by gpmoo7:
said by jester121:

The data doesn't support that supposition at all.
Which data? It's clear that the future is unlimited bandwidth for every one. That's it.
The future is FTTH starting à 100 Mb/s and going over Gb/s in a few years (that's a reality in some country, not in Canada).
All this bandwidth will be used by everyone ...

Of course, today, in Canada, people are stick to their 7Mb/s throttled Internet access with limited bandwidth so they just do IM, mails and Facebook ... who is going to rent an HD movie with this kind of Internet access ?
I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now.
gpmoo7
join:2009-01-03
Montreal, QC

gpmoo7

Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by Matt3:

I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now.
That's the future of broadband Internet. Isn't great to know that the speed is not an issue because you can't find anything to use it all?
100 Mb/s today is like a virtually unlimited speed!
Tomorrow, HDTV will go IPTV with 20 Mb/s for an HD channel and multiple channels through the same Internet access ...
This tomorrow is going to happen sooner than you think ... at least in countries where unlimited bandwidth and 20 Mb/s is for everyone today (even if you doesn't think you need it ) and FTTH on his way.

As of today, I really think that unlimited 20Mb/s should be available for everyone ... at least in the biggest cities in North America.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88 to Matt3

Member

to Matt3
said by Matt3:

I've got access to a gigabit connection and a couple of 100Mbps ones. I can't find anything to tax the 100Mbps connection, much less the 1Gbps. There won't be a need for that type of bandwidth to the home for a lot longer than a couple of years, although I'd LOVE to be able to purchase one at a reasonable price right now.
Bluray is 36mbitps AFAIK. With a 100mbitps at home, I can stream content from my home to anywhere on the globe through a VPN. I'll never need to carry a portable HD around every again. The world is my LAN.
jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville

jay_rm to gpmoo7

Member

to gpmoo7
said by gpmoo7:

The problem is that people only use 10GB because they have caps ... if everyone were unlimited, they would use more data
People don't want to check their bandwith usage every day to see if they can do or not do what they want.
bah - I disagree.

My entire household uses an average of 8-12 Gb/mo. That's 2 young adults and their two tech savvy parents, one of which has a home office. We run our own mail server and a lightly used web server. We are NOT capped in any way.

The population as a whole uses WAY less then the average DSLR user. Frequent visitors to this site are probably all in the upper 10-15% of data volume.

Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium Member
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC

Matt3 to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
I would venture a guess that these numbers are inflated a little bit too. After all, Cisco wants to sell gear to ISPs so they can deal with all that traffic.

SLD
Premium Member
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA

1 recommendation

SLD to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
You really should change your screename to "Boss Hogg".

ZappaF
@verizon.net

ZappaF to FFH5

Anon

to FFH5
Well, with profit margins on Internet services at 80 percent and rising, I think the answer is more that those in the top percent maybe should pay more, but the rest of us should be paying less -- alot less.

Of course, in this market, prices only ever go up.

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Re: AVG off 11.4 GB/month shows caps not out of line

said by ZappaF :

Well, with profit margins on Internet services at 80 percent and rising
Care to back up that estimate of profit margin? SEC filed financial statements come NOWHERE NEAR that number.

•••
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx to ZappaF

Member

to ZappaF
Agreed. I'm sure I'm in the top 10%, though I'm not in the top 1%. I'll pay $80 per month for an internet connection. But my parents, who are the average case, sure as heck better be paying $20 for the same-speed connection. Oh wait...they aren't.

•••
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

Sammer to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more.
Any caps set to affect pricing will surely affect more than just the top 10%!

tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
MVM
join:2008-01-16
Gilbert, AZ

tubbynet to FFH5

MVM

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

The numbers have shown what many have said - that transfer caps at 250 GB/mo and above are very reasonable and not some anti-competitive throttle on the internet. The only ones complaining are those who SHOULD BE paying more per month if they use more than that. And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more.
but, per the article (and the survey which the article is pulling information from), this is *global* usage, which could include areas that have little to no "local" web infrastructure (websites hosted within the country, providing faster responses); there is no point in surfing to youtube from lebanon if you can't get a decent video to play.
additionally, while the survey is quite light on details on which isps were in the survey and where they were located, this one fact makes me question the *true* accuracy of the article
Cisco collects anonymous, aggregate data about network usage from over 20 service providers worldwide participating in the Visual Networking Index Usage program. Participants in the program receive benchmarking reports comparing their traffic composition and growth to the average of the other participants.
without knowing the subscriber base size and location of each isp, i'd say there is room open for speculation. i'd be more interested in a breakdown of the usage *strictly* in the us by *all* hsi isps. this would be a little more relevant to how broadband policy in the us should be shaped. i mean, after all, weren't you just criticizing countries with "socialized" broadband and now you want to dictate your usage based on them? can't have it both ways

q.

MovieLover76
join:2009-09-11
Cherry Hill, NJ
(Software) pfSense
Asus RT-AC68
Asus RT-AC66

MovieLover76 to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
The critical error in your logic is that that ISP's are making very good profits with the current unlimited model they have, they may need to apply some QoS to busy nodes, but there is no network need for a limit on Bits per month.

Also it is anti-competitive, when looking to forecast future bandwidth usage, you don't look at what the average is today, you look at what the early adopters / High Bandwidth users are using. A HD netflix movie is easily 5GB alone, and they have a lot of room for improvement still (surround sound please)

I don't use P2P and I easily go through 250gb a month when you consider my bandwidth and my roommates as well. Caps are designed to prevent adoption of future higher bandwidth replacements for traditional cable services like netflix etc.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

3 recommendations

ArrayList to FFH5

Premium Member

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

And if you are in the TOP 10% you should pay more.
funny, i say the same thing about taxes but those idiots don't seem to think so either.

•••••••
axiomatic
join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

axiomatic to FFH5

Member

to FFH5
I'm in the top 10% with mostly business traffic, and I pay for a premium tier of service.

So since I pay more because I use more, shouldn't my cap be higher? Or no cap at all?

Also, I want to buy a plan without a cap. Hey Mr. ISP can I pay my way out of a cap?

Didn't think so. I'm the best customer Comcast has paying them $300 per month (without fail) and I'm treated like a fucking crook. How that for value?

vapor2314
@lexis-nexis.com

vapor2314 to FFH5

Anon

to FFH5
again why go back to paying for usage? That is like going back to candles instead of the light bulb. We had pay for usage billing with dial up we have move on billing for usage is obsolete

grydlok
join:2004-01-06
Richmond, VA

grydlok

Member

Hmm

So now that a number been thrown out there will carriers need to place caps?

••••

Raphion
join:2000-10-14
Samsara

Raphion

Member

Guess I'm below average

hmmm... I've used 86.3GB so far this year, for an average of 7.8GB per month. Only two users on my connection though.

•••••
MyDogHsFleas
Premium Member
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX

MyDogHsFleas

Premium Member

This validates everything the ISPs have been saying.

That the average user is far, far below any of the proposed caps.

That a very small fraction of users create most of the traffic. 10% of users create 60% of the traffic. 1% creates 20%.

That P2P is a HUGE part of all traffic. 38% is not minimal, it's immense.

I would bet, btw, that if you cross-referenced high P2P usage against the 1% of users who create 20% of the traffic, you'd see a very large correlation.

•••••

pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium Member
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA

pokesph

Premium Member

11GB is a bit low

I think those numbers are purposely deflated.

I'm a average user, youtube, websurfing, email and so on, yet have well over 11GB /mo traffic usage.


Usage as of Oct 21 2009


Image only show 1 computer..
Madtown
Premium Member
join:2008-04-26
93637-2905

Madtown

Premium Member

Re: 11GB is a bit low

said by pokesph:

I think those numbers are purposely deflated.

I'm a average user, youtube, websurfing, email and so on, yet have well over 11GB /mo traffic usage.

[att=1]

Image only show 1 computer..
How much traffic do you use for Xbox Live and Netflix, it doesn't count that.

btw, how did you post that on here?, I would like to do the same thing.

Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium Member
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1

1 edit

Anonymous_ to pokesph

Premium Member

to pokesph
i use upto 500GB permonth
depends if i fell like downloading stuff | HD Shows

Robert
Premium Member
join:2001-08-25
Miami, FL

Robert

Premium Member

Too low.

I think 11GB a monthly is extremely low for an average home. I'm not where near a heavy users, but with 3 people using the Internet, we use on average 37GB a month (based on the data above in my image).

•••••••••••••

R4M0N
Brazilian Soccer Ownz Joo
join:2000-10-04
Glen Allen, VA

2 edits

1 recommendation

R4M0N

Member

Big push for Caps

Of course... They see digital delivery in the horizon and want to set the low caps now before everyone and their mamas find out the convenience of downloading a movie on your Xbox360, PS3, Samsung HDTV, etc...

At about 3gb for an HD movie, I can go way past that 11gb average using my HDTV alone, no need for any other equipment. And before even turning my PC on for other internet-related tasks

Come on, people. Open your eyes.

Almost everything is getting "Internet-enabled" nowadays and some of those things will be bandwidth hogs. Letting caps be implemented now is just letting ISPs shackle you into high-prices later.

Pashune
Caps stifle innovation
Premium Member
join:2006-04-14
Gautier, MS

Pashune

Premium Member

Re: Big push for Caps

It's anywhere from 60-100 gb per month for me.

TV sucks, I don't have any internet utilizing game consoles, and I try out some PC games, MMOs, etc., now and then.

I may download 11 gb in one day or download less than 1 gb in a day. It all depends on how busy I am...

5 people use my 5 mbit pipe; 2 of them being heavy users (My sister and I) and the other 3 being very light users.

Stay away from the blasted caps as I'm already dealing with threshold caps to begin with! Not to mention, $60 per month for just 5 mbits!

DOGUser
@omcastbusiness.net

DOGUser to R4M0N

Anon

to R4M0N
R4MON,

You hit the nail square on the head!! People need to think ahead and realize most household devices will need to be connected to the internet in the near future. So will increase the amount of data flow to the average household. Just using Netflix watch instantly puts me over the 10 GB limit, not to mention all my other surfing and devices.

tek465
@frontiernet.net

tek465

Anon

11.4 GB That's just crazy

Everyone knows you can't use that much bandwidth, My ISP Frontier told me so...

" We all love the Internet, and Frontier is committed to offering you all the bandwidth you need and want to take full advantage of the Web! Our basic residential Internet packages offers 5GB usage -- that's the equivalent of 500,000 basic text e-mails, 2,500 Photos, 40,000 Web Pages, over 300 Hours of Online Game Time, 1,250 downloaded songs, or a mixture of the above!

How many gigabytes do I currently use per month?

Customer usage varies by household and by market. Our typical Frontier household uses less than 1.5GB or 1,500 megabytes a month. Many of our customers use a lot less than this amount and we only have a small number of customers who use more than this amount. "

»www.frontier.com/5GB/

In fact, since internet usage is so low, my ISP hasn't bothered to upgrade speeds for my area in over 5 years. Anyone coming over from Verizion is in for a real treat!

mlong
Premium Member
join:2000-05-27
Parker, CO

2 edits

mlong

Premium Member

Usage

Click for full size
one month
Click for full size
16 hours
This is my pfSense firewall/router (first). I just set it up the other day when I changed ISPs. I have a 7 meg circuit through Qwest and it's been up for about a week now. So far I've downloaded 7.7 gigs. The second is for a 16 hour period.

I work from home full time and would consider myself a sort of power users but not necessarily a heavy user. I have a proxy server setup that my wife uses from work for browsing the web and IM. So during the day we're both using the internet and we tend to use it much less at night. I'm constantly using the internet. I use a Cisco softphone, VPN, and all sorts of other applications. I tend to download MSDN ISO images, I have one Mac, a Windows 7 Media center PC streaming Netflix and whatnot, and probably eight other computers in various states of usefulness around the house. Typically Windows machines that are updating at various times. I also stream Pandora all day long.

If you averaged my download out it'd be about 33 gigs a month roughly. While I hate the idea of caps and other restrictions on use, it turns out I don't even come close to the 250 gig limits you hear about for Comcast and other cable providers.
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

My Situation

I could never live on a 5GB per month MBB connection. While I was doing work on such a connection back home, I used ~1GB in a day. So 30GB in a month just for me.

Granted, looking at DD-WRT logs, the rest of the family (four people) used ~12GB in the month, without me home. However that was on a crapy 512k connection. I GUARANTEE they would've used more if the connection was 1.5/512 with high quality. YouTube won't even load on it.

Then again, every family member has their own computer, and my brothers like to play various games.

On my 22/5 connection I've used 73.2 GB so far this month. Yes I'm sure I'm in the top 10% but OTOH I'm not int he top 1%. Yes I download HD TV shows but I do my torrent seeding elsewhere and download only two TV shows per week, or about an hour of high quality video. The rest is YouTube or similar, with other folks using my connection on a periodic basis. Mostly just me though.

I transfer files over the connection for my job at school, upload large-ish PDFs, etc. over my cable internet. I'm using under 250GB per month and not hosting any public-facing servers on the connection, so I'm not going to sign a business-class contract that I'll have to break in a little over a year when I graduate.

Last month I used 164GB.

I have two laptops, a desktop, a Wii and an iPhone that tend to be on the network on a regular basis. One laptop tends to serve as an HTPC. The other is what I take to class, so maybe 20% of its internet traffic is on my campus network. If you add in file transfers on the campus LAN, the number is actually more like 80%.

I'm definitely not the normal case for internet usage; I think the rest of the guys in my apartment complex use ~50GB per month on a Qwest DSL connection, and there are about twenty of them. OTOH they also ahve the campus network, which is a lot faster than a 5/896 DSL connection...and none of them are gamers or the like.
djeremy
join:2004-07-12
San Francisco, CA

djeremy

Member

Cisco is just trying to sell equipment

My guess is that they have some new device they are trying to peddle to ISPs that does some sort of data tallying per connection and needed a study/survey to help sell it.

Remember, Cisco came out with AT&T and Verizon a while back as being against network neutrality because they sell traffic prioritization and shaping devices.

Selenia
Gentoo Convert
Premium Member
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR

Selenia

Premium Member

Seems fishy

Are the ISPs providing this data or is Cisco measuring traffic being routed from the ISPs for this claim? I am down to about 80 GB/month use. I am unthrottled/unlimited. I use Free Open Source software(Linux ftw) and do frequent audio/video streaming(most of it not HD). I also keep one small folder synced with my other house(uses less than 10 GB, at most, but usually in the MBs/month) I don't download alot of large files(maybe a few CD images and 1 DVD image per month, legally). My computers regularly check repositories and update daily, which uses minimal bandwidth 99% of the time). Most apps I download from the repos are XX MB max, most are X MB(and still many are in the KBs in size). Other than that, I browse the web , play my fav MMO(FFXI) on a console(it can use several GBs on its own in a month just updating X 2 consoles), and chat like most people. Most of my intensive work is done locally.

I do realize I utilize the internet more than most and maybe for a few more things, but I don't do anything unusually bandwidth intensive. I only use torrents and such maybe a couple-few times/month. Most of them are not huge files. I'd hate to see what daily downloaders consume. I used to use them a bit more, which is why my usage used to be much greater than 80 GB.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC

IPPlanMan

Member

Comcast Usage Data Supposedly Shows 2-4 GB Median Use...

»customer.comcast.com/%28 ··· 1#normal

Comcast usage data supposedly shows 2-4 GB median use to justify 250 GB cap.

I call BS on this...

skuv
@rr.com

skuv

Anon

Not a lot of bandwidth

When you look at this in terms of bandwidth (data rate per second) instead of total transfer per month, you see a very low bandwidth average.

If you take a month as being 30 days, a normal billing cycle, then you get:

35kbits/sec as the average.

That jives with real data I have seen from a major ISP for 2008, which I have posted before, where their average per customer was 42k/sec.
nevtxjustin
join:2006-04-18
Dallas, TX

nevtxjustin

Member

11 GB max sounds right for average user

Reading over the responses, I see a lot of people saying how much more they use past 11 GB. The fact you are even posting that here in DSLReports would indicate you're more than just a cut above the average user, so of course your usage is going to be greater.

But what is an average user? Or even a light user? After I gave an example of a light user as someone in a Phoenix retirement community that uses the web to download pics of the grandkids and for Socialist Insecurity and Medicare forms, Rory pointed out it is those users that download tons of NetFlix and become heavy users.

Caps aren't about truly unlimited bandwidth, it isn't about the average user...its about limiting the small percent of users that can take down a system.
Madtown
Premium Member
join:2008-04-26
93637-2905

Madtown

Premium Member

Hmm wonder if that includes Netflix, Hulu

• Internet "prime time" usually runs from about 9 pm to 1 am globally, in contrast to TV prime time which spans the hours between 7 p.m. and 11 pm. 25% (or 93.3 megabytes per day per connection) of global Internet traffic is generated during this period.

TV Primetime is between 7pm and 11pm, I wonder if anyone watching The Office on Hulu or Dexter on Netflix during those times?
chimera4
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC

chimera4

Member

Just Ran the Numbers

I got bored and ran the numbers on this. According to those statistics the top 1% of users consume an average of 228GB per month while the bottom 99% consume an average of 9.21GB per month. To me this isn't actually that bad a spread. It means that top 1% only use 25 times the bandwidth of the bottom 99% of users. Assuming that they charge everyone the cost of providing 1.5 normal users access per month that means that they still make a healthy profit and can continue to expand their network. Knowing these numbers makes me support metered billing less.
Madtown
Premium Member
join:2008-04-26
93637-2905

Madtown

Premium Member

Netflix Traffic

How much traffic does Netflix use on the Instant Watch? Let say I watch a movie that is 2 hrs long.
slckusr
Premium Member
join:2003-03-17
Greenville, SC

slckusr

Premium Member

Re: Netflix Traffic

said by Madtown:

How much traffic does Netflix use on the Instant Watch? Let say I watch a movie that is 2 hrs long.
between that and hulu i think were killing the 11 gb average

duder
@rr.com

duder

Anon

bull

some one said The reality is that most people don't need a full throttle connection 24x7 which is why we can have affordable broadband for home use. bull tell the Japanese that crap 100 up 100 down
all about how much they can get and most people believe this shit .....

have a nice day saps......... for caps
landysaccoun
join:2008-10-10

landysaccoun

Member

20GB every other day

I have a client that uses aprox 20GB every other day.
chimera4
join:2009-06-09
Washington, DC

chimera4

Member

Re: 20GB every other day

So that's 10GB per day or roughly 300GB per month correct? That puts him in roughly the 99.5th percentile of all users according to this information. So, do you have over 199 other users that use less than him like these numbers would suggest?
page: 1 · 2 · next