Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: An Accurate Broadband Speed Test?

First time accepted submitter kyrcant writes Is there a way to accurately really test my "broadband" connection? I don't trust the usual sites, the first ones I found via Google. I suspect (and found) that at least some of them are directly affiliated with ISPs, and I further suspect that traffic to those addresses is probably prioritized, so people will think they're getting a good deal. The speeds I experience are much, much slower than the speed tests show I'm capable of. For a while I thought it might be the sites themselves, but they load faster on my T-Mobile HTC One via 4G than on my laptop via WiFi through a cable modem connection. Is there a speed test site that has a variable or untraceable IP address, so that the traffic can't be prioritized by my ISP (call them "ConCazt")? If not, which sites are not in any way affiliated with ISPs? Is there a way to test it using YouTube or downloading a set file which can be compared to other users' results? (Have your own question for the teeming masses? Ask away — be sure to include appropriate detail and context — via the Slashdot submission form.)

20 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. Really? by Maxwell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How are people not aware of DSLReports and their speed tests? And how could this possibly make /.?

    Also, your wi-fi sucks. Get a cable if you want to know what your real speed is.

    1. Re:Really? by AaronLS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed he should accuse WIFI with no evidence, but at the same time it is not a legitimize test with WIFI in the loop. If he's experience connection issues or measuring performance of his cable connection, then he should do a direct connection to eliminate WIFI since it is very susceptible to many issues that could affect performance. Only then can he point fingers at the cable connection.

    2. Re:Really? by dotwhynot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not really fair to immediately disregard the quality of the WiFi connection. It could be well in excess of the ISP connection.

      I have a 40/20 mbps broadband, and independent local non-ISP speed tests give the same result on WiFi as ethernet, around 37-38/18-19 mbps. But, I do agree that if you get shitty results, you should try to rule out that shitty WiFi is the reason.

  2. VPS by ledow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Rent or trial a VPS. You can get them for literally a few pounds/dollars per month.

    Put a large file on Apache on it.

    Download the file from several places.

    Rename the file on the server to check it's not cached.

    The "upper limit" on this is then the VPS, which generally are connected direct to 100mbps lines in a datacenter somewhere. If you think it's limited by the VPS, get another from another provider. Or load up iptraf or some packet capture and see how it did.

    Speedtest websites are indicative only, and are cheated on by some places. Your own website can't be cheated on - you will see the request coming in and can watch the outgoing traffic to see where the bottleneck lies.

    1. Re:VPS by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Informative

      Rent or trial a VPS. You can get them for literally a few pounds/dollars per month.

      The old timey way of doing speed tests is to hit up FTPs and see what your max sustained speed is.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  3. ndt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    NDT - Argonne National Laboratory
    ndt.anl.gov/

    Not associated with any ISP.

    There are other ndt (network diagnostic tests) as well.

    Very detailed reports.

    1. Re:ndt by jeffmeden · · Score: 3, Informative

      Won't work if it's widely known.

      Speed test sites don't need to be in collusion. ISP's just prioritize their traffic. It's quite obvious with my ISP if I do speed test sites versus just finding something large to download from a cloud storage service.

      Doublepost...

      One does not simply measure bandwidth

      Without starting five or six torrents and leaving u/l and d/l limits turned off

    2. Re:ndt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I've done it. I've downloaded a large file from a friend that was taking forever, i.e. in the realm of two hours total time. A half hour in or so, I got sick of it and we both had bandwidth to spare. On a whim, he moved it to a folder on the exact same server called /speedtest/ and I tried again. The second download finished before the first one did and exceeded the bandwidth I was provided (my service is 2 MB/s and the file downloaded at over 3). Literally everything was the same, but one file downloaded at 3MB/s and finished in under 10 minutes and the other chugged along around 200KB/s.

      You should try it yourself sometime. Just follow the speedtest.net directory structure.

    3. Re:ndt by TemporalBeing · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Won't work if it's widely known.

      Speed test sites don't need to be in collusion. ISP's just prioritize their traffic. It's quite obvious with my ISP if I do speed test sites versus just finding something large to download from a cloud storage service.

      The obvious issue with that thesis is that you can't prove that the cloud storage site itself is performing slowly due to a bottleneck where it peers with your provider (or many other possible reasons) and while some providers are generally better than others about managing internal bandwidth, none can be said to have ALL uncongested peering points to ALL local customers and this obviously will have the same negative impact on user experience as a locally congested network.

      I've actually used the SpeedTest sites to help improve downloading of Linux DVD ISO images. When I started the download (FTP/HTTP download) the quoted time was well over 8 hours, and the transfer rate was abysmal (60KBps to 120KBps on a multi-MBps line). Out of curiosity I ran a speed test through DSLReports and then found that the download rate jumped to 300KBps. After a while it would drop back to down to the previous range; I'd run the speed test again and voila, but up it went. I ended up downloading the entire Linux DVD ISO in under 1hour.

      FYI, that was on AT&T DSL - not uVerse, just plain DSL since that is all we can get in our apartment. So obviously the ISPs are padding the numbers; which is a natural outcome of the FCC wanting people to report the ISPs that are not holding up.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
  4. I use speedof.me by AvitarX · · Score: 4, Informative

    And frequently score higher on my tmobile phone than on comcast (up to 30 vs up to 15)

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  5. Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    All right. Just who woke him up this time? Whoever it is, you need to put him back down in his bunker and this time LOCK THE DOOR.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  6. SamKnows from the FCC by NevarMore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    https://www.samknows.com/

    I have one of their boxes installed. It seems to provide a clear picture of overall performance with a monthly report. I'm doing this because I'd like to think it helps the FCC keep the ISPs honest.

    PS - Card carrying Libertarian. No the FCC isn't spying on me, and yes regulation of ISPs is appropriate. If we've broken the free market by granting a local monopoly or limited oligopoly then heavy regulation is appropriate. Consumer choice is better, but this is the best we can do with what we have today.

    1. Re:SamKnows from the FCC by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Other Libertarian here. ISPs are a product of government collusion (monopoly) practices. The further a government is away from me, the less I trust it.

      That being said, we do not need MORE regulation of ISPs, we need out of the box thinking to reframe the last mile problem. I have NO problem with a local municipality running last mile service, as long as I get to choose which provider gets to my house. This would require Fiber to the premise, running back to a COLO that is rented (funded) out to service providers to provide ANYTHING they want to the customer. A choice of four or six providers at the COLO to choose from, and a simple Network VLAN change to change providers.

      THIS would negate the need for ANY regulation. If Johnny Christian wants to have Jesus.net cable co, he can get it. If Mary Rotten wants all porn and drug channels, she is free to choose that. Comcast will be forced to stop playing games, because they will lose customers if they throttle YouTube and Netflix.

      Almost all problems we have right now, are caused by last mile monopolies. Lets inject CHOICE, rather than regulation into the market.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  7. No by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is no way to test "The internet"
    The fact of the matter is you make dozens of hops, even hundreds, to get anywhere. En-route you can hit any number of choke points. If you run a speed test I can almost guarantee your ISP knows about the speed test site and is going to prioritize your traffic. Add to that the fact that the speed test site is likely hosted somewhere like the Amazon cloud and all you're testing is your route to about the easiest place to get to.

    Is your ISP throttling Torrents? Netflix? Youtube? A test to any other site is useless if they prioritize that and throttle where you actually want to go. Is there a problem with your NID? The remote you connect to? The peering they have setup?

    On top of all of that, speed test sites are just a test of downloading various file sizes. That's easy... flawless movie playback and seamless online game play? That's an entirely different story. You've no idea how many friends I've had complain about their ISP throttling their game, only to find out later the problem cleared up when they got a new video card. lol

    So if your ISP is not working for your needs, you need to switch. If you have other options, most offer a contract free option now-a-days. Try that out and cancel if it's no better. If you have no other options, you're stuck with it anyway.

    Your best bet, if you're stuck with that ISP, is to make friends with a tech. Get one out there for some reason, offer him a beer, whatever. Joke, laugh, etc... he'll probably tell you what's up. Once you know where the problem is, often you can figure out how to talk them into a better solution. In these situations you're usually fighting their bureaucracy... its not that they don't want to help, it's just a lot of paperwork to get that help. Be more annoying than the paperwork.

  8. Xfinity Speed Test by jbov · · Score: 4, Funny

    Use the Xfinity speed test at speedtest.comcast.net.
    As far as I can tell, they are not affiliated with any ISP.

  9. Short answer: No by Morgor · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm a network engineer at an ISP, so I would say I have a bit of experience with this from both ends of the table. First of all, there's a difference between your broadband connection speed and your perceived rate. Your broadband connection might be capped to what you pay for, and, assuming your last-mile medium can handle that speed, that only means that you will never actually go beyond your connection speed.

    Now as we know, the internet is a complicated network of interconnected systems. You are connected via your ISP's backbone to the other systems (ISPs, enterprises, content providers, etc.) via a number of internet peering points. These peering points have their own connection speed (typically 1 Gbit/s or 10 Gbit/s, although higher exist), and may or may not be utilised to their maximum extent at any point of time. This means that you may have your full data rate available to some destinations, while others may take a congested route.

    You mention testing, and your frustration is very reasonable. There are testing sites out there, but you never have any idea about how many else might be testing at the same time, or how much load there is on the server at the moment of the test. If you are unlucky, you might also be limited by your hardware, your operating system (TCP Window Size, receive buffers and similar might not be tuned properly), or your router.

    I would say your best choice would be to download as much as possible from as many sources as possible (bittorrent is excellent for this, but may be throttled by evil ISPs), and do this over a couple of days to get an average indication of how much your connection is capable of delivering.

    If you have a server on some remote location via the internet, you can use programs like iperf to make a bandwidth test, but such a test is not exactly precise when you have no idea how the intermediate networks are.

  10. Re:None by malakai · · Score: 4, Informative

    I like http://speedof.me/

    It's fast, works with HTML5, works on mobile, tablet, desktop. As far as I can tell, it's hosted in the Amazon Cloud.

    -frank

  11. Re:Ask yourselves these questions... apk by rjstanford · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Even being noisily right with an answer to a question that nobody's asking, in a conversation about something completely different, is annoying and should be discourages.

    --
    You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
  12. Re:None by gweilo8888 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why would an ISP bribe them, when all they need do is identify when a speed test is occurring and give that traffic priority over all else? They wouldn't, and your tinfoil hat is too tight if you think otherwise.

    Speed test sites are fundamentally flawed, but bribery has nothing to do with it.

  13. They're not necessarily trying to trick you by nine-times · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't trust the usual sites, the first ones I found via Google. I suspect (and found) that at least some of them are directly affiliated with ISPs, and I further suspect that traffic to those addresses is probably prioritized, so people will think they're getting a good deal.

    I just wanted to point out that they're not necessarily trying to trick you by running these speed tests. For one thing, if they wanted to trick you, they could always just compile a list of popular test sites and prioritize/uncap that traffic.

    But it's actually somewhat valid for ISPs to provide tests that, in a sense, are biased. Let's say you have a Verizon connection. Verizon may want to provide a testing mechanism to make sure you're getting the advertised connection to their network, to make sure things are operating properly. If you have a slow connection to Slashdot, for example, that might just mean that Slashdot is slow. It might mean that your route to Slashdot has been saturated somehow, and that might not be Verizon's fault. There are a lot of things that could possibly go wrong that could cause your connection to Slashdot to be bad, and Verizon can't rely on that as a good test.

    So what Verizon would want to do is provide a test that simply confirms that your connection to their network is running at advertised speeds, which would mean testing between your home computer and another machine on their network. If that is operating at advertised speeds, but your connection to some endpoint is slow, then the problem is probably between Verizon's network and the endpoint, and not between you and Verizon's network.