dslreports logo
 story category
iPhone speed test
Something simple to start with

It has come to our attention that the iPhone, while very capable, lacks Flash or Java, so it cannot use any of the many "speed test" programs out there. For your iPhone amusement, here is a little speed test page that will work on your iPhone browser: tinyspeedtest.html. (Our older text.dslreports.com/mspeed test also works, although it is more of a hack).

As expected, results show the EDGE network has very poor latency (around 500ms) for tiny requests. Our older mobile speed test shows iPhones on the AT&T subnet logging between 45kbit and 175kbit (average just over 100kbit) but with even higher full page request latencies - over a second.

Wifi connected iphones are logging PC/Mac-like speeds on this and other speed tests.

The high latency of EDGE is why even graphics-lite but function rich sites take a long time to load fully. During loading, the anemic EDGE capacity is rarely totally utilized. Instead, the phone spends a lot of time waiting around for EDGE to recognize yet another small request is pending (even just to check a timestamp on a graphic or CSS or js file), and carry back the small answer.

AT&T EDGE at even a very conservative 64kbit speed would have been quite adequate for even complex web pages if married to reasonable latency.

Supporting data for this article: 5800 samples of iphone users testing speed using our original "mobile speed test". "dwn" is in kilobits per second. The AT&T data network is at least 32.x.x.x

select avg(dwn),avg(latency),count(*) from

mobile_result,x2id where x2id.id=mobile_result.uaid

and mid>1633213 and

x2id.k like '%iphone%' and ip like '32.%';

+----------+-----------------+----------+

| avg(dwn) | avg(latency) | count(*) |

+----------+-----------------+----------+

| 109.2486 | 1.2144346246334 | 5805 |

+----------+-----------------+----------+

1 row in set (0.71 sec)

Feel free to post the results your iPhone manages to get on this new speedtest, tinyspeedtest.html.

view:
topics flat nest 

Phoenix Gold
Hypocrite
join:2001-11-24
Port Angeles, WA

Phoenix Gold

Member

well it still looks cool

and i bet you look real cool using it.

function is overrated.

Mactron
el Camino Real
Premium Member
join:2001-12-16
PRK

Mactron

Premium Member

Re: well it still looks cool

It does look cool. But is it really useful?
I would really be disappointed after spending that kind of cash. V2.0 has to do better...
Time4aNAP
Premium Member
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL

1 recommendation

Time4aNAP to Phoenix Gold

Premium Member

to Phoenix Gold
said by Phoenix Gold:

function is overrated.
If any girl says that, she's just being polite.
thecalip
join:2002-08-22
New York, NY

thecalip to Phoenix Gold

Member

to Phoenix Gold
I haven't see anyone using one. Only seeing them use it as portable video player. For a $600 portable video player, it's quiet expensive.

MysticGogeta
The Robot Devil
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Katy, TX

MysticGogeta to Phoenix Gold

Premium Member

to Phoenix Gold
It would be like that one commercial of sprints mobile broadband vs AT&T there would be buzzards flying around you when you finally loaded a page lol
93254336 (banned)
Weapons Of Masturbation
join:2001-10-20

93254336 (banned)

Member

Pokey is as pokey does

For a real thrill in "molasses ballet," try viewing a https page from a bank, etc. on it.

- Dan

tekmunki
Tekmunki
Premium Member
join:2001-12-06
Lake City, FL

tekmunki

Premium Member

Question...

I was running this speedtest on Sprints network for comparison...

I get 396k (on evdo)...

but the latency reports back 1000ms 1000ms 0ms 0ms 1000ms... Mind you, this is directly using the phone browser.

I usually average around 100-150ms ping on my cell tethered to my PC. Anyone know why this speedtest reports back latency like this?

gdm
MVM
join:2001-06-15
Mchenry, IL

gdm

MVM

Re: Question...

I get 661kbps on att 3G network. The latency is the same as what you are getting. either 0ms or 1000ms.

AnonProxy
Premium Member
join:2001-05-12

AnonProxy

Premium Member

Re: Question...

Due to a wait state in the way the network handles requests.

en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

en102 to gdm

Member

to gdm
Tethered ZX-20 on AT&T 3G over bluetooth

Latency:313ms 312ms 344ms 1125ms 313ms 296ms 329ms 328ms 297ms 328ms

Speed: 499kbps

Latency is a bit high... but then again, I'm on the other side of the country

$ tracert i.dslr.net

Tracing route to i.dslr.net [209.123.109.176]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 149 ms 130 ms 151 ms 172.26.248.2
2 149 ms 156 ms 152 ms 172.26.248.2
3

$ ping i.dslr.net
PING i.dslr.net (209.123.109.177): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 209.123.109.177: icmp_seq=0 ttl=46 time=218 ms
64 bytes from 209.123.109.177: icmp_seq=1 ttl=46 time=203 ms
64 bytes from 209.123.109.177: icmp_seq=2 ttl=46 time=218 ms

----i.dslr.net PING Statistics----

justin
..needs sleep
Mod
join:1999-05-28
2031

justin

Mod

Re: Question...

yep that looks about right. Latency for icmp ping at 200ms would mean higher latency to completely fetch a null file.

en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

en102

Member

Re: Question...

Most definately.
bignate4
join:2005-12-05
Austin, TX

bignate4 to gdm

Member

to gdm
on my att 8525 on 3G i have seen as high as 900kbps down, 290kbps up, and about 100ms avg ping time.

but on average i would say it is more like: 770 down, 260 up, 130ms ping
nnaarrnn
join:2004-09-30
Charleston, WV

nnaarrnn to tekmunki

Member

to tekmunki
happens with sprint from handsets, especially if you're in a building or moving. I have the same issue with my 700wx, except when attached to an external antenna which is outside my office.

justin
..needs sleep
Mod
join:1999-05-28
2031
Billion BiPAC 7800N
Apple AirPort Extreme (2011)

justin to tekmunki

Mod

to tekmunki
said by tekmunki:

but the latency reports back 1000ms 1000ms 0ms 0ms 1000ms... Mind you, this is directly using the phone browser.

That browser (some phone browsers) are unable to do sub-second timings so you either get a full second, or zero seconds. Sorry. I should be able recalculate an average latency from 10 latencies like that, though, so all is not lost.

tekmunki
Tekmunki
Premium Member
join:2001-12-06
Lake City, FL

tekmunki

Premium Member

Re: Question...

said by justin:
said by tekmunki:

but the latency reports back 1000ms 1000ms 0ms 0ms 1000ms... Mind you, this is directly using the phone browser.

That browser (some phone browsers) are unable to do sub-second timings so you either get a full second, or zero seconds. Sorry. I should be able recalculate an average latency from 10 latencies like that, though, so all is not lost.
That makes sense. Thanks. I was using IE/WM5 on a Moto Q. Using tethering and a Vista PC, I get around 200-250ms.
Time4aNAP
Premium Member
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL

Time4aNAP to tekmunki

Premium Member

to tekmunki
Latency with TCP can be very different from latency with ICMP. That's my guess.

Personally I don't get why so much attention is paid to latency. I know that it's a big deal for gamers. Are 95% of all Internet users there just for games?

Any IP latency pales in comparison to the latency caused by the multiple DNS lookups that have become the norm on most popular websites. Everything else that I care about can be buffered.

justin
..needs sleep
Mod
join:1999-05-28
2031
Billion BiPAC 7800N
Apple AirPort Extreme (2011)

2 edits

justin

Mod

Re: Question...

Click for full size
here is why. To "complete" loading a page, even a well designed one like news.yahoo.com, there are too many requests to do all in parallel (on default configured browsers) and some requests wait, or are caused by, the completed loading of previous requests.

Anything with terrible latency multiplies perceived loading time many times as the serial nature of some of the request blocks involves waiting for the turnaround multiple times.

The DNS issue is different and IMO less important, if you use a site you've previously used, it is probably cached (unless the site uses a variety of different and annoying ad services which always seem to involve new DNS lookups).

Anyone based overseas using US sites immediately recognizes how annoying a high latency connection becomes, and that involes usually no more than a 250ms turnaround. If a wireless network tends to offer 500ms or more latency then you are standing the equivalent of 24,000 miles away from the site. This can be annoying if you're actually standing on a san francisco street, trying to load news.yahoo.com.

Evergreener
Sent By Grocery Clerks
join:2001-02-20
Evergreen, CO

1 edit

Evergreener

Member

Finally...

Latency has always been my biggest gripe about EDGE.

Depending upon what city I'm in, I get 128Kbps to 256Kbps "speed" with EDGE on my Nokia E50, but it's the latency of the EDGE network that hampers the web browsing experience.

I'd like to compare the tracert to a particular website between EDGE and my traditional Internet connection.

djrobx
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Reno, NV

djrobx

Premium Member

Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

On my Blackjack, I see speed tests up to around 240kbps, and latency as low as 200ms when the phone is on EDGE.

The behavior you describe (~60kbps, 500ms latency) is almost exactly what I used to see from my older EDGE capable phones. I'm told this is because they were not class 10 EDGE, but my HTC 3125 that performed poorly claimed to support class 10.

For whatever reason, our 3G capable Blackjack and 8525s perform MUCH better on the Edge network.

justin
..needs sleep
Mod
join:1999-05-28
2031
Billion BiPAC 7800N
Apple AirPort Extreme (2011)

justin

Mod

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

said by djrobx:

The behavior you describe (~60kbps, 500ms latency) is almost exactly what I used to see from my older EDGE capable phones. I'm told this is because they were not class 10 EDGE, but my HTC 3125 that performed poorly claimed to support class 10.
Does anyone know if iphone is Edge class 10 capable, and confrmed as operating at 240kbit ?

kfsutops
Premium Member
join:2002-08-19
Lutz, FL

kfsutops to djrobx

Premium Member

to djrobx
You must have something there. My Blackjack is the same thing. I get on average about 200k on edge.

Closer to 1000k when on the 3g network.

I haven't (and probably won't) run this speedtest they are talking of.

Edge isn't so bad on my blackjack...there definitely is some latency going on though.

gdm
MVM
join:2001-06-15
Mchenry, IL

gdm

MVM

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

I agree my BJ works pretty good in Edge areas. I will test it later tonight. To me ATT's EDGE works better then Sprints or Verizon non EVDO areas.
bignate4
join:2005-12-05
Austin, TX

bignate4

Member

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

my att 8525 on EDGE gets about 175 down, and 80 up but with avergae ping times of 500-600ms...8(

huntml
join:2002-01-23
Mullica Hill, NJ

huntml to gdm

Member

to gdm
True. But there's A LOT more EDGE only area on ATT's map than there is 1XRTT on Sprint's and VZ's maps.

gdm
MVM
join:2001-06-15
Mchenry, IL

gdm

MVM

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

True but I do go to places that are rural and when I had verizon it worked for crap. With ATT I at least get email and I can surf the web mainly for scores and weather.

huntml
join:2002-01-23
Mullica Hill, NJ

huntml

Member

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

It's like everything else, whatever works for you.

I live in metro PHL, and Sprint (my carrier) and ATTW both have 3g deployed in this area, and actually ATT is on average a bit faster. So if it was only about speed in my home market (and I didn't mind paying a bit more for speed, being capped, and not being able to stream stuff to my phone, etc....), ATTW wouldn't be a bad choice for me.

But when I go visit family in rural VA I can still get 3g while my sister gets very slow EDGE (like dialup speed).

ATTW won't even show their 3g coverage on their national map: you have to zoom in to like street level before they'll show it!

en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

en102

Member

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

just enter the state (no city, zip or street)
after it shows the state, click on 3g.

justin
..needs sleep
Mod
join:1999-05-28
2031

justin to kfsutops

Mod

to kfsutops
Yeah actually I looked at the dump of our older mobile speed test, and iPhones are logging between 48kbit and 175kbit max over EDGE (I ignored all the wifi connected examples), but with even worse recorded latencies. Interesting.

Bink63
Namedrop THIS
Premium Member
join:2002-10-06
Everywhere

Bink63

Premium Member

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...


I can't get this to run on my Sprint CrackBerry 8830.

I click the start button and get no activity and the ????? remain between the latency and speed labels.

Regards,

Randy

justin
..needs sleep
Mod
join:1999-05-28
2031

justin

Mod

Re: Err, EDGE isn't THAT bad...

yeah blackberrys suck for anything like this. All the web pages pass via a proxy server in canada, and the blackberry browser is broken with almost no javascript capability at all.

••••••••

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

FFH5 to djrobx

Premium Member

to djrobx
I like the results of the tinyspeed test on my Comcast HSI connection:
Latency:
24ms
21ms
30ms
27ms
20ms
28ms
25ms
21ms
23ms
21ms

Speed:
27744kbps

en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

en102 to djrobx

Member

to djrobx
My Samsung ZX-20 is rated as as Class 10 EDGE device... best I've receieved through tethering was ~146kbps ... of course, I've only tried it a couple times, as 3G is finally deployed here.

biggbrother
Premium Member
join:2001-11-07
Providence, RI

biggbrother to djrobx

Premium Member

to djrobx
I just ran that "Small Speed Test" on my HTC MDA on the T-Mobile Edge network and I got 173 kbps but crazy latency of 958ms.. with up to 1231ms at times.
ignatiuskc
join:2006-02-13
00000

1 edit

ignatiuskc

Member

Edge

What's the surprise? Edge is slower.
ossito16
join:2004-07-31
Whiting, IN

ossito16

Member

Chance for Treo or Blackberry

Well to me this all seems like a bust for the iphone. The hype created sold the initial phones. I think either Treo or Bberry can go for the kill in the smartphone war. All someone needs to come up with is a small well-built phone, with qwerty, REAL wifi, 2+ megapixel camera/video, gps, 1gb memory, and tons of 3rd party applications. Release to all carriers and the fight will have been won for good.

•••

tigers
join:2001-01-14
Cullowhee, NC

tigers

Member

iphone test

Well I just ran it twice here on my iphone. Got 5/5 bars on the signal strength in downtown Columbia, SC.

1st Test:
Latency:
3457,264,178,219,644,6062,471,2600,1177,297

Speed: 350kbps

Second Test
Latency:
1391,596,627,595,539,617,625,709,577,617

Speed: 108kbps

I don't know why the first test showed such a higher speed. I'm definitely not connected to wi-fi or anything.

justin
..needs sleep
Mod
join:1999-05-28
2031

justin

Mod

Re: iphone test

The first test had awful latencies, perhaps some of the 10 parallel test transfers failed leading to an optimistic speed.

en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

en102 to tigers

Member

to tigers
3G does a bit better
Latency:427ms 190ms 180ms 250ms 180ms 180ms 242ms 177ms 206ms 174ms

Speed: 680kbps

jgkolt
Premium Member
join:2004-02-21
Avon, OH

jgkolt

Premium Member

iPhone version 2

We knew there would be huge hype for this iPhone, that was a given. They are leaving it open to have the iPhone version 2 to make up all that they are lackign now. As a consumer i hate this since they release a product that they know will be outdated when they sell it. Now on thier side the more phones they sell the less expensive the r and d will be so they can bump up to the next version with little cost and sell it with large profits. thats how i see it.

Titus
Mr Gradenko
join:2004-06-26

Titus

Member

Re: iPhone version 2

said by jgkolt:

We knew there would be huge hype for this iPhone, that was a given. They are leaving it open to have the iPhone version 2 to make up all that they are lackign now.
The margin on this thing, if you're to believe the scuttlebutt, is a stockholders dream now. Hype was key, because ver. 2 won't have it (unless it flies out of Jobby Jobs arse during a keynote). They'll leverage some sort of convergence and add the oh-so-obviously missing features of ver 1. Toss in the old more storage trick (and gouging you for it with ridiculous markups on flash memory), and it'll be stockholders day part 2. I'll stick with a standard cell and my Macs.

Need BB
join:2001-12-21
New York, NY

Need BB

Member

Re: iPhone version 2

Verizon Wireless EVDO Rev. A:

Latency: 200ms120ms121ms120ms110ms120ms130ms120ms120ms140ms
Speed: 1922kbps
petecellar
join:2002-10-15
Philadelphia, PA

petecellar

Member

No Flash or Java?

...and the battery is soldered in.

What the hell are people paying for?

FiL25
Premium Member
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD

FiL25

Premium Member

Re: No Flash or Java?

The look...

People just like having button-less pieces of crap up against their faces.

The Linux based phone looks REAL good; if it drops, I'm buying it off the break. Thats a phone people could actually USE, and look kinda cool while at it...:)

coolnessfactor
@cg.Miami.EDU

coolnessfactor to petecellar

Anon

to petecellar
like oh em gee! it's got to be the totally kick ass and reliable service from the Deathst... err Ma Bel.... err AT&T and the totally crazy coolness factor!
GunnarDanne
join:2002-12-02
Crown City, OH

GunnarDanne

Member

3g

My new RAZR pulls down 3g most of the time. Sites load nearly as fast as they would on my pc. Occasionally it connects through EDGE and uh.. yea...
mrvoice
join:2001-02-22
Northridge, CA

mrvoice

Member

IPHONE & Slow Network

For me to switch. They better get the new Iphone 2.0 hardware to support 3G. Second, offer other carriers in addition to AT&T (Cingular is the Worst)

Make Iphone work with Sprint's EVDO Network and you've got a deal.

Broadband speed with Verizon with also be cool. But none of this GSM phone garbage.

It's a nice toy, but too pricey and low performance. I'll keep my $39.99/mo free incoming minutes 24/7 from sprint Thank You very much.

••••

RadioDoc

join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL

RadioDoc

More HSDPA results for you

Here's another AT&T 3G data point for you:

Latency:
240ms
230ms
241ms
250ms
250ms
261ms
240ms
230ms
261ms
250ms

Speed:
660kbps

This is with my LG CU500V tethered to my laptop and only one "bar" signal.

barqsdrinker
What Can I Photograph Today?
Premium Member
join:2001-02-26
Apo, AE

barqsdrinker

Premium Member

Is this reasonable??

First off, with the last post being on the 11th of July, I hope that someone will see this message.

I am currently stationed in Kuwait in the middle of the desert. My only option is via 3G service and using my cellphone as a modem. (Interestingly enough, the 3G is down and only EDGE is working right now.) From what I've been told, the tower that I connect to only has a "radio shot" to the next tower. There are multiple towers all with radio relays for about 60 km until it reaches towers that are cabled.

I also understand the route back to DSLR is quite a physical haul (9 timezones, oceanic cable, etc).

So my question is: does this result from the iPhone test look reasonable as tested from here in Kuwait??

Latency:
2161ms
1085ms
972ms
936ms
916ms
853ms
975ms
1137ms
921ms
960ms

Speed:
86kbps

Many thanks!