Upload Speed not as Advertised.

[#1]

Hi I'm only getting 106-107mbit up with the occasional niggle up to 108, but that's rare.  I signed up for 115mbit. 

I've tried about 10 different servers on speedtest and fast.com (not at all accurate) puts me at 110up, but it also puts me at 1.1gig, and it put my virgin at 1.8gig so yeah, forgive me for not using Netflix's service as a good measure.

Is there some sort of 7 settling period for Full Fiber?  I was under the impression you'd get full speed from the get go from the Engineer.

Thanks.

[#2]

Worth noting RealSpeed is giving 110 as well, so I guess I'm getting only 5 less.

[#3]

If you have Full Fibre 900, 115Mb/sec upload is an estimated speed, not guaranteed. Your 106-110Mb/sec would seem to be near enough.

900Mb/sec download is also an estimate. The only guaranteed speed is 500Mb/sec minimum download.

There is no settling in period with full fibre.

[#4]

Estimated is a term coined with Copper to property broadband and no longer relevent.  It's most likely some T&C cop out just incase.

But as I said no longer an issue on Full Fibre, hence comment.   Any OpenReach Engineer will tell you the same if you don't trust me.

Virgin actually over-supplies to make sure advertised speeds are met and most of the time surpassed, just as a simply FYI.  Gig1 is sold as up to 1130, but I always got 1140-1155.  500 used to be something like 510+

[#5]

The speed advertised is the line speed not the achievable throughput.

Each packet of information sent over the internet has headers (like a letter has an envelope) which uses some of the line capacity. ~107Mbps for a 115Mps connection doesn't sound far off what I'd expect to see.

Maybe some other user with the same product as you could comment of what upload speed they see?

There is no settling in time for Full Fibre - you will be connected at 1Gbps, and then you will be throttled down to the speed for the product you are on.

(As you mentioned, some non-OR providers do provide services above the product's headline speed - my 600Mbps symmetric FTTP achieves over 670Mps in speed tests)

[#6]

@ItsAdam 

According to Plusnet:

Full Fibre 900

900Mb estimated download speed

500Mb minimum guaranteed speed

115Mb estimated upload speed

24 month contract

[corringham]

@Jones Yeah I read and responded to your first post,  stop spamming obvious stuff to get your post count up.

@corringham I specifically selected PlusNet because of their 115.  On a full fiber connection with minimal network speed degeneration, I would expect 114-115.

People posting "cry it's an estimate" by that logic I could expect faster then.  EE also advertises 115.

[#8]

Maybe some other user with the same product as you could comment of what upload speed they see?

I see 108-109 Mb using the Ookla speedtest. That's about what I would expect allowing for data overheads

[#9]

@ItsAdam  I'm with the general opinion that there's too many variables that could affect the speed between the two ends of the line.

If you'e looking for a more optimistic line test result try : https://www.fireprobe.net/ 

[#10]

---

@MisterW wrote:

I see 108-109 Mb using the Ookla speedtest. That's about what I would expect allowing for data overheads

---

Given that the download speed for a 1Gb connection tends to be 930-940Mbps the overhead is about 6-7%, making the achievable speed on a a 115Mbps connection about  108Mbps - exactly what is being seen.

[#11]

@corringham hahaaha, Sorry, no, the overhead is regarding the 1gigbit connection, that's why you get about 940mbit.  Since upload isn't 1gig there should be no overhead limiting it. That's why if your ONT is a 2.5GbE one and you connect with a 2.5GbE Router and port to your PC via cable you will get more than 940.

And even if there is some OpenReach sided cap that causes overhead then they should be over-providing to ensure advertised speeds are met.  Hence why they sell 900 when you get 930-940.  Unless this is a OpenReach attitude of no we don't care - which would kind of make sense with BT/OpenReach's attitude to full speed internet anyway as well as I don't know how they legally got away with selling copper connections as fibre.

This is a conversation I had at great length with Virgin until retentions finally sent me the new hub with a 2.5GbE port, then I was zooming at 1150.

As a side note, they did install a 2.5GbE ONT here, and they said that's all they are installing, thankfully.  But I don't know if that is just my area.

On a much more fun note, my pings have more than halved since switching, which is pretty funny, something I was aware of (Virgins pings are horrible), just amusing to see just how horrible they were.  LOL went from 40 ish to 16.

Never seen FireProbe before, RealSpeed and BufferBloat are my two more realiable sources.  My bufferbloat score now makes my Virgin one look laughable it was that bad in comparison.

Speed test by FIREPROBE ® - how fast is your Internet?

[#12]

Sorry, there is an overhead built into every packet sent over TCP/IP - that typically works out at about 6%, which is exactly what you are seeing.

[#13]

But should be over-provisioned for, Like 122 ish.

Overhead is actually around the 3-6% mark, it depends on how many packets are being sent, and how big they are.

UDP is very small but with lots of small data it can hit 20%.

Again, considering the connection is 1gig there should be very minimum overheads.

On a speed test you should be looking at the lower end 3-5% overheads anyway.

[#14]

Over-provisioning would be nice, and some ISPs do so - as I mentioned previously I achieve 670+Mbps up and down on my 600Mpbs FTTP.

I believe the problem has come from ADSL and FTTC where the sync speed was the headline speed that was advertised, and the achievable speed was always lower. The marketing guys have followed the same approach with FTTP - so the provisioned rate is the headline speed, and the achievable rate is a bit less.

Also I think 3-5% overheads on a speed test with consumer grade kit is rather optimistic.

[#15]

Yeah and PlusNet still advertises a settling in period for broadband which is irrelevent to Full Fibre.

This has been my entire issue with BT all along.  They also advertise a 500mbit minimum download speed on their 900 package on PlusNet which is again irrelevant because if it's full fibre then it should always been 900.      

It would be better to have a * and state in most circumstances.  Because I guess very rarely there are some issues with connectivity, especially in something like flats and such.  But it's very archaic.