49.95/month for 15Mbps/2Mbps

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » June 24, 2012, 5:13 am

miir wrote:Fear my upload speed!

I sense you have DSL:

This is a big improvement on my speed from the last place that was 5+ kilometres from the exchange...

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » November 21, 2012, 4:52 pm

When we first had the opportunity to see Google Fiber in person, we didn't get too much time with the interface itself. However, BTIG Research has just posted a video offering a brief preview of how the Google Fiber television service will work. The video (which is just a collection of stills) walks through both the Nexus 7 tablet remote control, as well as a bit of the interface on the television. Both heavily mirror each other, and the search feature pulls up results from over-the-top services (though only Netflix appears to be available for now) as well as upcoming showings on TV. Once you find a video to watch you can display it on either the TV or the Nexus 7 remote, whether it is from Netflix or broadcast.

The integration looks to be very seamless, and the interface is certainly very plain. That's not a bad thing at all, however, and the remote interface looks pleasing as well — far better than the decades of terrible remotes we've had to deal with. Oh, and in case you're wondering, the internet speeds are still there: the BTIG got 905.28 mbps down and 794.59 mbps up — not so far off from the promised gigabit speeds, and not bad for $70 per month.

Back in 2005 on this thread, 15Mbps/2Mbps was a big deal. I've been stuck at 50Mbps/2Mbps up for awhile now. Even my LTE phone has almost caught up at 40Mbps and way surpassed it on the upload side at about 15Mbps.

It's going to be a long long time before Google Fiber gets to most of the nation.

If this is the first you are hearing of Fiber, allow me to catch you up. Google is lining the streets of Kansas City with fiber optic cable, which for a price, is then wired to your house. Early adopters are receiving very good pricing, as for just $120/month on a two-year contract, Google gives you 1Gbps download/upload speeds, a TV box with full channel lineup, a network box, 1TB of Google Drive space, a DVR box, and a Nexus 7 tablet to control it all. From there, the plans get cheaper, but all still offer the 1Gbps Internet speeds.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 16, 2012, 4:44 pm

I've had LTE where I work since getting my iPhone 5 but it was just switched on where I live.

It's so damn fast. I'd kill for upload speeds like that on my desktop. So glad I'm grandfathered in with unlimited data on AT&T.

These two Cell Towers are visible from my home. Can't hurt to have them about 120 yards (~110 meters for the metric people) away and sort of disguised as palm trees!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 4, 2013, 9:38 pm

Gotta chuckle a bit. My Cox Bandwidth just got pumped up from 50Mbps to 65 Mbps. Not bad, but not mind blowing except for looking a back at the title of this thread which the speed bump I just received was the entire bandwidth that was impressive back then. I'll take what I can get!

Cox is preparing for larger downloads of 100 GB Blu Rays for the new console generation. Thanks Cox!

I'll have to test upload speeds later. That's still the big bottleneck with cable. I don't upload much but when I do want to upload something sizable for someone, it would be nice if it didn't take so long.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 4, 2013, 10:24 pm

Holy shit. Ignore last post.

My new speeds are 150Mbps Down 25-30Mbs Up

TODAY Today today...I consider myself the luckiest man in the WORLD World world

I just did a speed test and was getting 29Mbps up...finally a decent upload speed....so much better than what I had.

I'm not getting anywhere near the 150Mbps yet. best I've gotten is 80Mbps but there's a DNS issue right now.

Wow, from 50Mbps to 150Mbps and from some crappy 3.5-5Mbps u/l to 29Mbps. Sweeeeeeeeeet!

If I can manage to max out that 150GB on Giganews, that's more than a GB/min download speeds. 1TB every 16 hours.(still have 400GB/month limit through) Fairweather could get himself disconnected from his service in about 4 hours if limit is 250GB. Ignoring the piracy bliss implications, downloading legit games off the net will be super speedy as long as the bandwidth is available.

I know some of you euro asshats have really high upload speeds but this 150Mbps download is at least in the ballpark and extremely good for the U.S.

Reading the forums, it looks like even though I have a Motorola 6120 Docsis 3 modem, I may need to upgrade my modem to get the full 150Mbs...which I'll happily do.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » February 4, 2013, 11:07 pm

Unless you're downloading 24/7.. Does it really matter what your download speed is? Mine is still 12mbps. Good enough for me!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 4, 2013, 11:19 pm

Aslanna wrote:Unless you're downloading 24/7.. Does it really matter what your download speed is? Mine is still 12mbps. Good enough for me!

It matters to me!

Turns out my Motorola sb6120 modem can bond only 4 downstream channels while the newer modems can bond 8 downstream channels. I just bought a new sb6141 modem from Newegg for 99.99 which has the 8 downstream channels.

I was going to get one at Best Buy for the same price but all local best buys were out and as I refreshed my screen, even the Best Buys 20+ miles away went out of stock. I watched 4 of 8 remote best buys go out of stock within 15 minutes. Guess that's going to happen when the entire valley gets upgraded (at least the ultimate plan that's 150 and needs the modem).

Newegg had them in stock so I grabbed one there and will have it in two days for no tax and 99 cents shipping.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 6, 2013, 10:29 am

Newegg is awesome. I paid 99 cents three day shipping for my new modem and it will be here in 1 day (overnight) according to the estimated arrival time. Will see if it arrives later but usually that's pretty accurate.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » February 6, 2013, 8:34 pm

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 6, 2013, 11:28 pm

Grrr, not getting very good downstream. Upstream is awesome though. A little disappointed so far as with boost, people are posting 170-180Mb/s speeds with the new 150 plan. Will have a tech come out in a week or so if it doesn't improve.

Giganews hasn't gone above 90-92Mb/s and it looks like 80Mb/s is the average so far. I wonder if I reached the Giganews bandwidth cap at 80. When I was at 50Mb/s I'd completely max my connection with a solid line at 50. Now it's not a smooth line, like it pushes the cap and then gets governed to 80.

This is what someone else in AZ is getting so I'm a long ways from the high end.

Using the exact same server they used to test, I come up about 100 Mb/s short. Give me back my bagigahertzbites!

+/- 100 Mb/s not good!

That fast upstream makes remote connecting to my PC ridiculously fast and smooth. That and whoever happens to hit my connection while I'm using torrents will love me long time. If I can get my downstream consistently 120Mb/s + I'm going to claim victory over the internet.

-----

edit:

Interesting. It was suggested to use Verizon Fios as the speed test:

At least that looks a little more promising. According to the nerds, the test is more reliable than the Speedtest site.

http://speedtest.verizon.com/fios300/#

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 7, 2013, 2:36 am

Well what do you know...it was my piece of shit Netgear Gigabit Router that was holding things up. It says it has a Gigabit WAN port but obviously not a good one. Above is my bandwidth sans router.

Woo hoo!

That's more like it! Time to research the latest AC routers. This one appears to be the best now that the firmware has been sorted:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6833320115

Newsleecher/Giganews cruises along at 150Mb/s...order is restored to the universe.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 8, 2013, 12:32 am

Just to wrap this up, I ended up picking up an ASUS RT-AC66U Router from Fry's for 189.99 today.

Verizon's Fios results were also good, consistently 178 Mb/s down and 23-24 Mb/s up

The above tests were with the new Asus Router connected so it definitely was the router causing the initial slow speeds.

The ASUS router is outstanding. I have no 802.11 ac devices yet but this device had the best 802.11n benchmarks as well, along with great firmware (now that it's been updated).

Here's a good review of five 802.11 AC routers. The ASUS beats everything else. Hopefully it will last multiple years.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wi- ... ,3386.html

If you prefer video, here's a 14 minute Newegg overview of the router:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SsxbOQC ... f5fVZxH8vY

And discussion where you can see images of the firmware/setup:

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1718951

The firmware has been through major updates, improving it. Initial release had some issues. There's also a lot of homebrew support with customized firmware releases.

I'm getting much better signal to my various wireless devices as well with this router.

...going to go all Office Space on my old Netgear Router and smash it to pieces. Hate that thing.

Stonie · Post by **Stonie** » February 8, 2013, 6:16 pm

I have the predecessor to your router, Asus RT-N16. I bought it because the flash memory size allowed the full version of DD-WRT open source firmware. They are truly amazing once you put DD-WRT on them.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 29, 2013, 1:45 am

Winnow wrote:Just to wrap this up, I ended up picking up an ASUS RT-AC66U Router from Fry's for 189.99 today.

Verizon's Fios results were also good, consistently 178 Mb/s down and 23-24 Mb/s up

The above tests were with the new Asus Router connected so it definitely was the router causing the initial slow speeds.

The ASUS router is outstanding. I have no 802.11 ac devices yet but this device had the best 802.11n benchmarks as well, along with great firmware (now that it's been updated).

Here's a good review of five 802.11 AC routers. The ASUS beats everything else. Hopefully it will last multiple years.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wi- ... ,3386.html

If you prefer video, here's a 14 minute Newegg overview of the router:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SsxbOQC ... f5fVZxH8vY

And discussion where you can see images of the firmware/setup:

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1718951

The firmware has been through major updates, improving it. Initial release had some issues. There's also a lot of homebrew support with customized firmware releases.

I'm getting much better signal to my various wireless devices as well with this router.

...going to go all Office Space on my old Netgear Router and smash it to pieces. Hate that thing.

After almost two months, the best praise I can give to this router (ASUS RT-AC66U) is that I hadn't even thought about the router until I spotted the box it came in today. It's been rock solid (signal strength) and flawless. If anyone's in the market for a high end 802.11 b/ag/n/ac gigabit router that's future proof and handles higher than 50 Mbps (gigabit WAN as well as LAN), consider this one. The Motorola SB6141 modem is also still providing ridiculous bandwidth speeds.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » April 9, 2013, 5:34 pm

http://www.statesman.com/news/business/ ... ibe/nXG3g/

It’s official: Austin getting super-fast Google Fiber network

It’s official now: Google Fiber is coming to Austin.

Google Inc., the giant of Internet search, said this morning it will start offering customer service in Austin on its ultra-fast Internet access network around the middle of next year. The announcement followed days of intense Internet speculation about the project, which aims to satisfy some Internet users’ need for speed.

By fast network, Google means very fast. Its new Austin network will operate at 1 gigabit speeds, which about 150 times faster than current typical broadband Internet access speeds in this country.

Work on the project will start almost immediately, but the network will take time to complete.

Austin will be the second major market that Google Fiber serves, following Kansas City, where the first customers received service last November. Austin’s first service is still more than a year away, but local officials say the high-speed network could become a critical advantage for startup companies, creative companies such as film studios as well as schools and hospitals. In Kansas City, the construction for its first phase of service delivery will take a little more than a year and be completed by the end of this year.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » April 9, 2013, 7:05 pm

Austin, you've got high-speed options.

Just hours after Google announced that it was bringing its gigabit Google Fiber Internet and TV service to Austinites by mid 2014, AT&T said that it too will build a fast fiber-optic infrastructure for comparable high-speed access in the techie Texas city.

As an expansion to the company's Project VIP, AT&T will deliver Internet speeds of up to 1Gbps through the just-announced Austin infrastructure, the company said. AT&T did not reveal pricing or its rollout plans, which makes the reveal seem like an in-your-face move designed to steal attention away from a competitor.

Still, the announcement undoubtedly is a positive development for the people of Austin.

Competition is good.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » April 10, 2013, 2:37 am

There'd be a lot more competition if it weren't for the oligopoly.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » April 10, 2013, 10:04 am

Spang learned a new word in college today.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » May 18, 2013, 9:36 am

Comcast sent me another modem to swap out as I wasn't getting the max benefit of my plan. download use to be around 33-35 consistently, upload and ping hasn't changed

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 14, 2013, 9:15 pm

Gotta say, Cox Ultimate has been outstanding. It hasn't slowed down a bit and has probably even improved a little. It's speedy even using other speed test sources.

To put in useful terms, I download 1 GB of data a minute. With digital downloads being the rage with the new consoles, you can never have enough speed!

Post by **pyrella** » September 19, 2013, 3:59 pm

The shits and the giggles - I think a speedtest.net node must be in the same DC

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 19, 2013, 5:46 pm

you suuuuuuck!

Nice pipes!

what officially are you supposed to get with your service plan? I'm paying 99/month for the 150/20Mbps.

Are you still over in euroland? It doesn't count if your in Europe! : )

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » July 11, 2014, 9:57 pm

new free speed upgrade from 30/5

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 12, 2014, 3:43 am

I hate you people! Not bad for 350 miles away compared to your closer tests!

I expect another speed boost soon as Cox announced plans for gigabit:

Cox Communications is upping the ante in the battle for broadband supremacy, bringing 1 gigabit Internet speeds to Phoenix and going head to head with Google Inc.

The Atlanta-based company, which is the major cable and Internet provider in Phoenix, announced the plan this morning to put in the gigabit service for all new construction. Phoenix, along with Las Vegas and Omaha, also will see existing customers get the speed bump by the end of 2016.

Even if I can't get gigabit in my area, I should get a speed bump. 150Mb/s is pretty good though. 25-40GB of data in less than an hour is enough for any kind of 4K streaming or digital game downloads.

The biggest thing for me was getting that upload speed up over 20Mb/s+ as remote desktop and uploading files to the cloud work really well now.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » July 12, 2014, 10:00 am

Yeah, I think the only reason twc rolled out the free upgrades is due to google fiber being moved into the area

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » July 12, 2014, 11:57 am

Comcast with VPN enabled:

Comcast without VPN enabled:

My VPN costs $40 a year. I pay for Comcast's lowest tier.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 12, 2014, 4:02 pm

You probably want to use the same test location (you have New York for one, Detroit for the other) when comparing VPN.

I've promoted VPN (Astrill) for awhile on this board. I've renewed my 6 month subscription several times. Besides allowing you to access country restricted (or blocked) site, games, etc, it also opens up the pipes depending on the VPN location you choose. I use file hosting services to download new TV shows. Without VPN enabled, I get about 15Mb/s, with VPN on, it varies but it's between 25-80Mb/s on a single download. When your ISP doesn't know what data you're downloading, they can't limit it. This is also the case for Youtube where it can be much smoother using certain VPN locations than by not using VPN.

Astrill runs about $30-40 every six months for me and it's well worth it for it's UI and hella long country list. I watched the World Cup live by streaming it from the BBC. Played a MMO beta restricted to only the Phillipines, will once again subscribe the NFL Pass for $99 and get every NFL game streamed live (normally only available outside USA), saving me once again from DirecTV and their monopoly on NFL Ticket. You get content from all Netflix countries (Misfits is an example of a series that was UK only). On the rare occasion I torrent something, VPN will provide a buffer from any lame emails from entertainment companies. It helps all the time with ping in MMOs. You can switch VPN sites until you have the lowest ping to your preferred game server.

I have VPN activated 90% of the time when I'm home. If remote connecting to my PC, I leave it off. Astrill also has a great VPN testing where you can test the ping/speed of every VPN location they have. It changes from time to time. I use it to find the best VPN speeds from the UK for NFL Pass* and to assure my default U.S. VPN is the best for me.

*note, the UK has something along the lines of NFL "game of the week" and that game is blocked on NFL Pass. When that's the case, you switch VPN to a different country and it unblocks it...or, just use a country other than the UK that doesn't offer any NFL at all and you won't have to worry about it.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » July 12, 2014, 4:54 pm

Winnow wrote:You probably want to use the same test location (you have New York for one, Detroit for the other) when comparing VPN.

with VPN to Detroit

With VPN to NYC

Interesting. The results are still loads better, so it's still totally worth it. Plus I can DL torrents and drop Newsleecher. They're not as fast, but there is a lot more variety when hunting torrents.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » January 13, 2015, 1:32 pm

Upload is kinda slow, but I'm not sure when they increased my download speed. It used to be in the 55-60 range

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » April 18, 2015, 2:55 pm

I'm still getting great bandwidth with my current cox server 165/20 (200/30 burst) but I'm hoping cox gigablast arrives in my area soon.

Here's what people are getting with it:

Wow. Symmetrical 1000/1000 is huge. I upload a lot of larger size files and 20mbps sucks for that (although way better than in the past, no where near current download rates)

Here's what 1000 Mbps gives you:

1 GB transfer in 8.59 seconds.
7 GB / minute
425 GB / hour
1 TB / 2.5 hours
10 TB / day
300 TB / month (that stat is for Fairweather, you're going to need to spend a couple K a month on new HD servers to max your bandwidth)

Note: my current monthly cap is 400GB which would take less than an hour to use so I'm assuming that would go up.

Up or down

That makes the cloud very useful for entire drive backups, etc, at the very least, your OS drive. high speed symmetrical is a game changer for back ups, streaming games, etc. Streaming 4K will be no problem. Those 50 GB games take less than 10 minutes.

Sidenote:

Astrill (my VPN service) remains incredibly useful. VPN isn't just for anonymity, it's provided me with faster transfer speeds in practically everything I do. I typically choose a Phoenix based VPN location. (can pick anywhere in the U.S. or locations all over the world depending on what you're doing) Cox (and I bet this is the same with all ISPs) governs the shit out of everything.

Examples:

Sharing services (upload.to, rapidgator, etc). without VPN, each download stream is limited to 15 Mbps, using VPN I get 100 Mbps on a single download stream and max out my 165 Mpbs on multiple streams.

Youtube - constant pauses while the stream catches up. With VPN, smooth sailing on youtube.

Cox Cloud - my service provides me with 10 TB of cloud storage which I don't use because google drive is better. With Cox' OWN NETWORK I get about 10 Mbps uploading to Cox OWN SERVER. I turn on VPN and I get 14 Mbps, which is still crappier than max upload speeds to other cloud storage but wtf, Cox won't even max their bandwidth to their own servers. That's fucked up.

So basically, making your data stream anonymous doesn't allow Cox to govern speeds so I max out 165 Mbps on everything, (newsgroups, sharing, torrents, etc etc) I've noticed the slower speeds even when downloading online files from any source.

Cox provides solid bandwidth but you need to use VPN to take advantage of it. I think I pay around $40 every 6 months to renew Astrill. Whatever it is, it's worth it. Another nice thing is you don't always have to go full VPN, you can go "OpenWeb" which only affects your browsers while leaving your programs with your default IP. Some games are picky or lock on to your home IP and get all upset if you keep switching.

I've been "content" with download speeds of 150+ Mbps. 20+ Mbps upload isn't where it needs to be. Overall nice but 1000/1000 really is the "final solution" that pretty much ends the need to be looking for faster speeds for quite some time.

Thread started out impressed at 15/2 speeds and will end at 1000/1000! If anyone gets 1000/1000 before me, I'm pre-hating you right now.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » April 18, 2015, 3:07 pm

Google Fiber is being installed here in Austin, and I am in an area that is set to get it first. The only issue is that I am in an apartment complex that really doesn't care about having Google do their installs here. I still get decent speed with Time Warner's upgrade to 200M at the price I was paying for 30 before. This is part of their preparation to compete with the Google product. Uverse is supposed to have an upgraded product here, but I have yet to see it pop up on their website.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » April 18, 2015, 3:46 pm

'House Of Cards' In 4K Will Eat Broadband Caps Like Popcorn Shrimp

After years of pretending that broadband usage caps were necessary because of network congestion, the cable industry not all that long ago admitted that congestion had nothing to do with it. While the industry still pretends that usage caps on broadband networks are about their expression of "creativity" and "pricing innovation," most people realize caps were always designed to milk yet more money out of an already profitable network (and make no mistake, unlimited, flat-rate pricing is profitable), while allowing gatekeepers to simultaneously cash in on and inhibit Internet video. Carriers are relentlessly trying to expand usage caps under the banner of "fairness," and they're aided by an uncompetitive broadband market.

Despite claims that imposing caps is about altruism or even helping grandmothers, most consumers understand that ISPs want them to pay more money for the same product at a time when network hardware and bandwidth costs are falling. Generally, ISPs that do impose caps insist that these caps will be flexible as modern usage evolves. That claim is about to get tested more seriously as next-generation game console downloads and 4K video slowly come to market.

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings not that long ago stated the company's planned 4K streams will need at least 15 Mbps but optimally 50 Mbps. Streaming a 1080p 3D movie from Netflix at the moment eats around 4 to 5 GB per hour, a total that could jump to closer to 20 to 30 GB per hour with 4K video. Similarly, Sony is cooking up a 4K video download service that could involve downloads as high as 100 GB per title. It's a subject getting revisited with everybody binge-watching "House of Cards." Tacking 4K video on to existing bandwidth consumption begins to get very bandwidth intensive when you're talking about entire series at 4K resolution (how much modern compression codecs like Google's VP9 or H.265 will help are very rough estimates):

"Streaming in 1080p on Netflix takes up 4.7GB/hour. So a regular one-hour episode of something debiting less than 5GB from your allotment is no big deal. However, with 4K, you've got quadruple the pixel count, so you're burning through 18.8GB/hour. Even if you're streaming with the new h.265 codec—which cuts the bit rate by about half, but still hasn't found its way into many consumer products—you're still looking at 7GB/hour. But you're not watching just one episode, are you? Of course not! You're binging on House of Cards, watching the whole series if not in one weekend then certainly in one month. That's 639 minutes of top-quality TV, which in 4K tallies up to 75GB if you're using the latest and greatest codec, and nearly 200GB if not. That means, best case scenario, a quarter of your cap—a third, if you're a U-Verse customer with a 250GB cap—spent on one television show. Throw in a normal month's internet usage, and you're toast."

Gizmodo doesn't note that many people's bandwidth caps are even lower. CenturyLink, Suddenlink and AT&T lay claim to tens of millions of DSL users (which the companies don't intend to upgrade anytime soon) who face 150 GB monthly caps on top of a significant flat monthly fee -- plus sometimes the cost of a mandatory copper voice line and all the additional, annoying fees that entails. Those slower, 3-10 Mbps connections in reality cost very little to provision and provide, but there's the rub: these customers are being aggressively beaten about the head and neck on price because of limited nationwide competition. Innovation and creative pricing, indeed.

ISPs have long defended low bandwidth caps by claiming that the majority of today's users wouldn't be impacted by them, knowing full well that the majority of tomorrow's users would. That day is coming quicker than you'd think, and it's worth watching whether ISPs are flexible on allotments, or if they keep existing allotments firmly in place to intentionally clothesline Internet video customers -- especially those looking to cut the cord.

Boogahz wrote:Google Fiber is being installed here in Austin, and I am in an area that is set to get it first. The only issue is that I am in an apartment complex that really doesn't care about having Google do their installs here. I still get decent speed with Time Warner's upgrade to 200M at the price I was paying for 30 before. This is part of their preparation to compete with the Google product. Uverse is supposed to have an upgraded product here, but I have yet to see it pop up on their website.

I should also note that DOCSIS 3.1 is right around the corner (this year for some ISPs/areas. With existing cable, they will be able to get 2Gbps/1Gbps up/down.

Cox is already preparing for this so even if Google Fiber or (for me) Gigablast isn't available this year, I should be able to get DOCSIS 3.1 which is, for the moment, just as fast, but fiber can actually go up to 10/10 Gbps which are insano speeds.

Broadcom Unleashes Gigabit Speeds for Consumer Cable Modems

Backing up or downloading 400GB/hour seems reasonable for cloud storage with an encrypted OS drive. It will make crashes much easier to handle as well as installing onto new hardware, etc. 4K video is going to clog the internet at ~450 GB per movie. That would stream at around 500 Mbps. I'm sure compression will be involved but still. Big. I think Sony has said 4K movies will be 100GB in size. That sounds about right.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 14, 2015, 9:25 pm

Winnow wrote:Cox is already preparing for this so even if Google Fiber or (for me) Gigablast isn't available this year, I should be able to get DOCSIS 3.1 which is, for the moment, just as fast, but fiber can actually go up to 10/10 Gbps which are insano speeds.

Just in time for data caps. Better start saving your pennies for when they roll it out everywhere. Guess that gravy train will be coming to an end soon!

DSLReports has received information confirming that Cox Communications will be testing overage fees this summer ahead of a potential nationwide deployment. A Cox insider familiar with the cable operator's network management practices says that customers in the company's Cleveland, Ohio market will be informed on May 19 that they'll soon be facing overage fees of $10 for every 50 GB over their usage cap they travel.

From June to September, Cox customers in Cleveland will have their "overage" usage tallied on their bills, but users initially won't be charged. Instead, they'll see the estimated overage fee and an accompanying credit. They'll face the real charges starting in October, according to the insider.

A draft customer support script obtained exclusively by DSLReports states that this lead-in period will "give customers the opportunity to familiarize themselves with their typical data usage and take action, such as secure their WiFi network or change service plans, if they exceed their limit."

Insiders say Cox is planning to move forward with usage charges for all of the company's markets depending on the success of (read: customer response to) this initial trial

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » May 15, 2015, 1:41 pm

Interesting. Being on the "ultimate" plan gives me 150Mbps 400GB/month right now but that would suck pretty back I you didn't already pay $99 for what I have. I suppose if I had the 50 Mbps plan for $50 which gives you 200GB I think, paying the extra $50 I do would get you to 450GB minus 100Mbps speed. (see notes below)

NICE!

I just checked my bandwidth cap usage/meter. Its been 400GB for a couple years. This month it's 2,000GB (2TB). I guess this is a non issue for me as I've pushed 400GB each month recently but I've come nowhere remotely close to 1 TB much less 2 TB. I think 600GB one month was the most. If the lower plan caps have also been upped, this won't be a serious issue for at least the next couple years. I know 4K will take assloads of bandwidth when TV shows start coming out in that format and I have a 4K monitor/TV to watch them on.

Thanks for the post. Made me check my cap to see that it's been quadrupled to 2TB.

I checked out dslreports (best forums for ISP network info) Here are the Cox cap increases:

Starter from 50 GB to 150 GB
Essential form 100 GB to 250 GB
Preferred from 250 GB to 350 GB
Premier from 300 GB to 700 GB
Ultimate from 400 GB to 2 TB

So looks like they seriously increased caps before attempting the over usage fees.

On another note, I paid 50.00 for 1 TB of usenet data with Astra many many months ago and still haven't run out of data. Best move I ever made going from unlimited Giganews to paying for a set amount of data. Probably will save me $500/year. (especially since most of my downloads come from services like upload.to, etc. way more convenient for TV shows, movies, etc.) I still use usenet quite often but just not for mega bandwidth stuff. More like comics .cbr, and occasional older episodes of shows I missed or became interested in after the new episodes were released.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » May 15, 2015, 1:49 pm

I hadn't even given caps a second thought until my sister got her connection shut off last month for meeting hers.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » May 15, 2015, 1:58 pm

Shut off! That seems a bit extreme. Why wouldn't they just bill her more? Seems like a shady outfit!

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » May 15, 2015, 4:43 pm

They are! There is VERY little choice in her neighborhood for now, and she went with Suddenlink. She had actually tried to break away from them for cable tv, and they raised her package price (phone/internet) by $50/mo. Then they raised her total package price, with cable, by over $100/mo when she told them she just wouldn't cancel the television service. They've lost about 20% of their channel lineup due to disputes with the various networks, and those channels have been gone for up to 6 mos. with no change in price to compensate. I figured they would've just charged her for the overage when she somehow went over it (still not convinced she did), but they cut all access until she called in and paid for more bandwidth.

It is sad that she can't wait for Time Warner Cable to be available in the next month or so....for an UPGRADE!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » July 6, 2015, 2:52 am

Cox Bumping $99 Ultimate Tier From 150 to 300 Mbps

by Karl Bode 09:04AM Tuesday Jun 30 2015

Cox Communications says the company is deploying a speed upgrade in Arizona that will double the downstream speed of its "Ultimate" Internet tier from 150 Mbps to 300 Mbps, while also bumping its upstream speed from 20 Mbps to 30 Mbps. According to the company announcement, users in the Arizona market should begin noticing the boost starting in September.

Weeee

Over the years I think I've gone from 15Mbps to 30Mbps to 50Mbps to 150Mbps and now 300Mbps with Cox.

Combined with the 2 TB monthly cap, things are looking good. 30Mbps Up isn't the best but it's manageable for sure.

I noticed my download hitting 200Mbps tonight on a single thread download so thought I'd check dslrepors forums and found the article above.

300Mbps = 132 GB downloaded an hour or 1 GB every 28 seconds. No worries about 4K Netflix I guess.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » July 27, 2015, 12:11 pm

Still getting around 126 down 12 up, 10-12 ms.

Comcast has a 250GB data cap according to their site but "enforcement of the 250GB data consumption threshold is currently suspended". It's been that way for a couple of years now.

Cost isn't a concern though, Comcast bought out my wife's company a bit ago so we get the Comcast triple play as well as home security for ~$80 a month.

Kluden · Post by **Kluden** » July 28, 2015, 9:37 am

If only you could hook the rest of us up...

My comcast connection is shit. 15mb/s if I'm lucky. DVR/on demand cuts in and out. They are joke and won't come out and inspect lines to the house or nothing.

I'm thinking of moving to Fios, but I know they will have to tear up the lawn and run their cabling into the house...not sure I'm a fan of that at the moment, getting everything rewired, and putting that stupid big box of theirs somewhere.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » August 30, 2015, 10:44 am

Just bumped me up again. Just needed to reboot my modem

http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/4622607370

180 Down still 12 up

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 11, 2015, 3:03 am

My new updated speeds.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » March 14, 2016, 11:32 pm

Not fancy speedy like most here but it's fine for me. I like that the ping is low. With U-Verse where I was it was always in the 110 range.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » January 24, 2017, 11:16 pm

Winnow wrote:Over the years I think I've gone from 15Mbps to 30Mbps to 50Mbps to 150Mbps and now 300Mbps with Cox.

Combined with the 2 TB monthly cap, things are looking good. 30Mbps Up isn't the best but it's manageable for sure.

They just implemented a 1TB cap in a few places. Expect it to make it your way eventually. The gravy train is about to derail! The "Gigablast" (barf) is 2TB though guess you better upgrade to that if not already there.

That's why I don't know why everyone cares about speed that fast. Just means you hit your cap sooner.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 25, 2017, 10:26 am

Aslanna wrote:
That's why I don't know why everyone cares about speed that fast. Just means you hit your cap sooner.

It depends on what you're doing. If you're downloading a game digitally or movie, etc, high speed matters a lot. I think I do more than my share of downloading than the average Joe and still don't approach 1TB. That includes streaming HS TV/Movies over Kodi/Exodus as well. The data usage meter hasn't worked for many months on Cox. They'll need to fix that to enforce anything.

For what it's worth, the people that are downloading even 5 TB of data/month aren't getting cut off from Cox. As long as you are on the highest tier available in your area, you're pretty much left alone. Of course, internet rates are going up. Gigablast just went up over 100 while my 300Mbs remained the same at $99.

I was a super early "cord cutter" for my land phone line. I think in 1996. Same for cable/DirecTV) in early 2000s. Things were great for a long time but now that everyone has jumped on the bandwagon, the cable companies are shifting profits to internet fees.

Gigabit low earth orbit satellite internet providers are a few years down the road (low earth meaning low latency so OK for gaming, (~20-25ms). Elon Musk (Tesla electric car guy), among others have systems in the works. I don't know that it will help with price/bandwidth but there will be more options.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 8, 2021, 9:32 pm

Winnow wrote: ↑January 25, 2017, 10:26 am It depends on what you're doing. If you're downloading a game digitally or movie, etc, high speed matters a lot. I think I do more than my share of downloading than the average Joe and still don't approach 1TB. That includes streaming HS TV/Movies over Kodi/Exodus as well. The data usage meter hasn't worked for many months on Cox. They'll need to fix that to enforce anything.

Well so much for that!

I've become pretty picky on movies/TV shows I download. I'll still download the occasional 1080P but mostly I grab them in 2160/4K. That said, I had to up my cap with Cox. 1,280 GB wasn't cutting it. I had 2,600 GB one month, thankfully max overchage is $100, $10 per 50GB over the cap but max of $100 so once you go over 500gb, you can download as much as you want without additional charges. I added 500GB/month (1,780 GB total) and will see how that goes. At this point it's only $20 more a month for unlimited so that may be the next stop. ($29/month for extra 500GB or $49/month for unlimited, on top of the $119/month for the gigabit connection.

kkid.jpg

craziness! Lots of gb for 1 movie. BTW never download anything that says "Dolby Vision" unless your monitor supports it, otherwise all you end up with is a purple picture. Same thing with HDR, it's not completely unwatchable like the purple Dolby Vision but looks like crap if you don't have/use HDR. Most video players don't support HDR. I use Potplayer for most things but have to use some video player called MPV for HDR so I generally don't grab HDR versions. Note: the "4K" you watch on Netflix etc streaming, is not high quality 4K, much lower bit rates.

For awhile I thought it wasn't really worth going more than 500mpbs plan but the VPNs I use now regularly go over 500+mbps so the speed is worth it. Most VPNs are crap for speed.

speedytest.jpg

Just because it's fun to look back at this thread and see the history/progression of speed on the internet! Fiber isn't available in my area yet, otherwise the upload would also be 900mpbs+.

I remember we made fun of Fair on VV for downloading 1 TB in a month! But man, with a gigabit connection you can download 1TB in a day.

Aslanna wrote: ↑April 14, 2005, 7:46 pm Not bad. I'm paying $45 for 6Mbp/680k (or thereabouts).

WTH? You need to upgrade! : )

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » December 28, 2021, 4:16 pm

Winnow wrote: ↑December 8, 2021, 9:32 pm I added 500GB/month (1,780 GB total) and will see how that goes. At this point it's only $20 more a month for unlimited so that may be the next stop.

Well that didn't even last a month. Upgraded to the unlimited data plan. Bring on the 8K monitor and 8K videos! Unfortunately I don't think that's going to matter as much for me. My eyes seem to be on the decline a bit so 4K is probably adequate but not for VR, that can still improve with higher resolutions and those require high res on separate displays for both eyes.

I don't think I'd ever go nuts and download crazy amounts over 2TB /month unless I have a HD failure or something but will be interesting to see what "acceptable use" ends up being for Cox. From some postings I've seen, it looks like you can use up to around 5TB/month before they start taking notice.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » January 2, 2022, 9:39 pm

1080 x265 is good enough for me. Unless maybe it will be a movie you will be watching multiple times. 4k is pushing it.. 8k is just stupid.

I am still with my (relatively) slow Spectrum. I think it's 200Mbps down and 10 up. Or something. Cincinnati Bell has "Fioptics" which could get me to 1 Gbps but I haven't cared enough to look into it. I really don't download that much these days. I'd be surprised if I hit 150 GB in a month.

The only good thing about Spectrum is I don't think they have a DL limit. But maybe it you're closing in on 2TB a month they might make an exception.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » January 4, 2022, 2:15 pm

I still only have a 1080p TV... I'll get a 4k TV eventually, but in the meantime I don't feel like I'm missing out that much. I've been able to notice a big difference in visuals with the PS5 even without 4k, so I'm happy.

I have fiber through a local company, leaving Comcast was a huge win. I pay 60/month and the speeds are generally 250-300 down and 200-250 up. They also have a good net neutrality policy, and I've had zero outages or problems with them in the couple of years I've had it now. I'm not sure about data caps, but honestly I don't download much these days so I'm not really concerned about that.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » January 4, 2022, 9:41 pm

Funkmasterr wrote: ↑January 4, 2022, 2:15 pm I still only have a 1080p TV... I'll get a 4k TV eventually, but in the meantime I don't feel like I'm missing out that much. I've been able to notice a big difference in visuals with the PS5 even without 4k, so I'm happy.

Oh there's a difference for sure. 4K looks amazing. It all depends on the mbps. something saying it's "4K" doesnt really mean anything. you can upscale a 1080p to 2160p and call it 4K because it's encoded at that resolution. Now that I don't have to care about file size, even 1080p high mbps videos look noticeably better than the usual 1080 stuff you see streaming on Netflix etc. you can have a 1080p movie that's 2GB in size or 10GB in size for example. Same movie, same resolution but the stream rate makes a big difference in quality of the picture.

8K I'm no so sure about (maybe for porn) but going from 1080P to 2160/4K is impactful. Also, since I watch VR videos, when movies are encoded at 59/60 fps it makes a difference compared to the usual 30fps you normally see. 30fps is almost unwatchable in VR.

It's not the end of the world or horrible to watch 1080P but if you have a decent 4K TV and quality 4K source, it most certainly makes a difference.

As for games, I can notice how much better faster fps and resolutions are easy using Android emulators to play games. You can quickly flip between resolutions and framerates and once you pump it to the higher levels you notice it if it somehow changes back.

Another thing most people don't care about is the quality of their TV. I have a very nice Samsung and lessor 55" inch TVs on each side. I can drag full screen 4K videos from screen to screen and/or play them on both screens at the same time and the highest quality TV has a much better picture...but if you only had the lower tech TV, you wouldn't care as it would seem fine to you.

So I can see both sides. If you don't have the nicer tech/higher res stuff, there's no reason it would bother most people as a standard TV looks fine when sitting by itself...but when you get those super high quality products like The Foundation TV series on Apple TV that has high use of color as well as deep darks etc, you see that there's actually a whole bunch of detail you don't even see unless you have a TV that can handle it not to mention the colors in general. I mean most people keep motion blur turned on because they don't know any better and get to enjoy that soap opera effect.

It's definitely a "1st world" thing because it's not going to bother anyone watching 1080p on any decent TV. "ignorance is bliss". I watch Youtube all the time and those are mostly crap quality but I don't care because that's all there is available but if I have access to a better source, I'll choose it.

tldr: high quality 4K sources/TV are most definitely better but I can see why it wouldn't really matter to most viewers because you don't miss what you don't see. You don't realize the missing detail in the shadows, the better colors/flesh tones etc unless you see it side by side so what you do see seems perfectly fine.