New install, disappointing speeds - could/should I expect better?

[#1]

@djbenson 

With speedtest cli I usually define a server to ensure the test are against a constant, as you are aware depending on location of the server speeds may vary. I use the cmd speedtest  --server-id=32950 (32950 is a London based server)

The new ONT are as small as you posted.

From a point of interest, with the UDM-SE how have you configured the WAN port, Auto Negotiate or fixed?

If Auto what has it negotiated to?

[#2]

Yep that's the one I have.

I'm using port 9 on the UDM-SE - that's a 1/2.5G port but I've set it to 1G for the purposes of testing - it had auto negotiated 1G anyway but just ruled out another potential bottleneck. 

Good tip about setting the server ID but it doesn't seem to work for me - I've selected a local server via the website (Lancashire County Council, ID 41075) but the tool returns "ERROR: No matched servers: 41075").

[#3]

These are the ones I'm used to seeing but they are much smaller now (no BBU but I already have a "router UPS" which is happily running the ONT).

[#4]

I've seen some years back with hard coded NIC connected to a Auto NIC causing a port mismatch, port might become Half-Duplex which isn't a good thing as collisions could occur, which will result in slower speeds

I would always recommend where both ends of the connection the port can not be HARD set,  to use Auto negotiate

EDIT: speedtest -L should list the servers which it thinks are closest

[#5]

It must think I'm near London 😉

50606) OCTAPLUS BROADBAND (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

26922) toob Ltd (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

55137) YouFibre (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

34931) Lightning Fibre Ltd (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

64278) Briant Broadband (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

37536) VeloxServ Communications (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

6151) Burstfire Networks Ltd (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

50466) Krystal Hosting (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

54438) Redactus (London, United Kingdom) [312.97 km]

32950) Box Broadband Ltd (London, United Kingdom) [313.18 km]

Even using one of those it throws the same error.

ERROR: No matched servers: 32950

[#6]

@djbenson 

My portal hasn't updated yet as it seems the contract hasn't updated to reflect switching from FTTC to FTTP but my static IP has switched over and I'm already seeing speeds in excess of FTTC so not sure this is relevant?

The static IP is associated with the account and is independent of what product is active. As you say though, if the product change hasnt fully completed you wouldnt expect speeds in excess of FTTC..

[#7]

I think what I'm seeing is PPPoE hammering the UDM-SE. Reading a few articles on Ubiquiti's website seems to suggest the UDM-Pro line has an issue with PPPoE on faster connections. I can see this in action if I run the speedtest-cli in one session and top in another, the CPU is hitting 70%.

[#8]

I'm on the same crash course experience, having had it enabled early May. Indeed turned out my own router didn't have the grunt to process PPPoE at full speed. Of course I was cocky enough that I opted not to have the Plusnet router delivered. I've had to bubble up a Opnsense VM for now to get closer to max speeds.

[#9]

I ventured into the UniFi Reddit and got torn a new one for suggesting the UDM-SE wasn't capable of processing PPPoE at full speed so I may have to pluck up the courage (and find the time) to factory reset mine just to rule out any misconfiguration. It has been through a fair few upgrades over the years (including moving from a UDM-Pro to the UDM-SE and various incarnations of the Network application in between).

[#10]

---

@djbenson wrote:

......When I connect my Windows laptop directly to the PN router which is connected to the ONT, I get higher speeds. I did three tests and got;

• 550
• 850
• 900

So it's a variant of PEBKAC - something like Problem Exists Between ONT and User?!

---

Taking a step back, I would question whether this is a PEBKAC.

I would expect a Hub 2 to consistently return a speed above 900Mbps despite the minimum speed guarantee. This makes me question whther there is a problem with the connection that is simply being handled better by the hub 2?

Have you tried a factory reset on the ONT? The reset hole is on the right hand side.

[#11]

Hey - I haven't tried that but I'll give it a go now.

[#12]

I've reset the ONT but it doesn't appear to have made much difference. I'm pretty sure whatever is going on is on my side.

I'm seeing speeds around 840Mbps now in the Speedtest app on one of my VMs and I was getting download speeds in the same ballpark last night so I'm inclined not to believe speedtest-cli too much.

[#13]

@djbenson 

I find speedtest cli more reliable than using the GUI version

If you are a linux user try this wget command

wget -4 --report-speed=bits -O /dev/null http://ipv4.download.thinkbroadband.com/1GB.zip

I see this download speed

/dev/null 100%[==========================================================>] 1024M 936Mb/s in 9.2s

2025-06-12 10:08:48 (933 Mb/s) - ‘/dev/null’

Speedtest -cli to a London server gives me  Download:   922.98 Mbps.

[#14]

Directly on the console, I get;

• 560Mbps for speedtest-cli
• 531Mbps for the file download

An UniFi's speed test;

I do not understand why running a test from the console itself is not returning exactly the same numbers that UniFi's speed test does - not even close.

[#15]

Do you get the same results when testing on a PC or something on your LAN? There is still a chance of a problem with connections to the router due to your findings on processing high speed connections.

You are using Auto negotiate ports settings or match hard coded ports both ends of an ethernet cable?

The problem you have is the quantum leap in broadband speed, where the higher speed has brought to focus possible local network issues, which you clearly understand.