Virgin media 50mb real time upload speed?

[consoles]

Hi guys,

Got 50mb virgin which they say is 2mb up but when uploading to youtube max im seeing is 400Kbs
is this right ?
when I run a speedtest on speedtest.net its showing just over 2mb

[Mickey]

try another speed test service or don't use a close by server on speedtest

[pickie]

could be that youtube servers are busy hence the slow upload, try again at a later time of the day and see if its any better

[pickie]

uploading seems ok to me just uploaded a 7mb file and it took 1 second

[dpSparhawk]

Hi guys,

Got 50mb virgin which they say is 2mb up but when uploading to youtube max im seeing is 400Kbs
is this right ?
when I run a speedtest on speedtest.net its showing just over 2mb

Assuming we're using the older 1024/8 conversions (as opposed to the 1000 data units standard) and we have absolutely no error checking or other network overheads.

If your upload speed is 2Mb (2 Megabits/sec), then your actual transfer rate should be 256 KiloBytes per second. Or, are you defintely stating that you're only seeing 400 Kilobits upstream which equates to 50 KiloBytes/sec? In which case, yes transfer rate is very much under what it should be. Youtube isn't a reliable method of checking speed as it depends on available upstream bandwidth at the time or other issues to or on their network that we wouldn't see.

uploading seems ok to me just uploaded a 7mb file and it took 1 second

Are you uploading a 7 MegaByte file, or a 7 Megabit file?, and are you on a service with 2 Megabit upstream?

If it's a 7 Megabit file, which is 896 KiloBytes, then I would expect to see a transfer time of 3.5 seconds on a 2 Megabit upstream. If it is a 7 MegaByte file which is 7168 KiloBytes, then I would expect to see the transfer take 28 seconds. If you were on a service capable of transferring a 7 MegaByte file in 1 second, that would mean you have to be on a service with 56 Megabits upstream. Not available on any regular ISP that I know of.

This is based on

A: Assuming no error checking and that other network overheads are non-existent.
B. You're on a service with 2Mbit upload. In real life the transfer rates will be slower due to A.
C. I've not just gone and made an utter cockwomble of myself with outrageous calculation errors and that we're clear on Megabits, Kilobits, MegaBytes, KiloBytes, BurgerBites etc.

[pickie]

gosh lol, it was a 7 megabyte file, and ok yes it was prob more than 1 sec around 3 ish , it was more a figure of speech to say uploading files to youtube was nice and quick for me so id assume it was a problem with his end, or the servers were much freeier when I did a test

heres my speed test results

[consoles]

ok problem solved, upgraded to 200mb for extra £8 a month lol

[Over Carl]

try another speed test service or don't use a close by server on speedtest

The "fun" thing is the internet isn't all under the control of our ISP's. By using a speedtest server further away, it would be unlikely to see a quicker connection, and more likely to see a slower connection. However if we see a slower connection, that still doesn't show us whether the problem is anything to do with your ISP's network.

Assuming we're using the older 1024/8 conversions (as opposed to the 1000 data units standard) and we have absolutely no error checking or other network overheads.

Afaik, the only people to use the "new convention" based on decimal rather than base 2 are storage device manufacturers who realised they could sell 931Gb hard drives as 1Tb hard drives. Instead of paying out billions for false advertising, failure to supply items meeting advertised specifications, etc, it would be easy to just push out a new definition and act as if things had been like that all the way along. As evidenced, they were clever to do so, as the only people who noticed and cared were a bunch of uber geeks who probably were too timid to stand their ground and instead redefined units that have been standardised for many years (and even taught, printed in textbooks, etc) to suit the demands of the scamming drive manufacturers. If anything the base 10 derived system should have been given the new names. They can fuck off if they think I'm gonna start talking about Gibibytes, and I'm gonna be annoyed if a Gigabyte is anything but a base 2 derived measurement. This scam will only become more interesting as we move over to SSD's where a base 2 derived measurement will be more suitable it will become very obvious that hard drive manufacturers totally fucked with the most basic of standards and caused many years of massive confusion, only to sell drives that were probably going to sell without this stupidness in the first place.

Anyway back to the topic at hand, the only people I have seen making distinctions between the new system and the real system are storage manufacturers, and people who need to be very specific to avoid any confusion as I agree you have been so sorry for my rant.