The point is I don't need 80 Meg. 20 Meg would do. I'll settle for 40 Meg. What I do want is an increase in upload but in addition, I don't download more than 50-75GB per month. So what I'm after is a connection more tailored to me, and one which will not eat up all the bandwidth. I'm on 12 / 1 and I want a little bit more download speed, but a decent increase in upload speed. So for me 20 / 5 would be more than enough in both directions. 40 / 10 would be wonderful, but overkill. 40 / 2 is too much one way and not enough the other way.

I can't understand why upload is always so guarded, and especially nowadays.

In reply to a post by camieabz:

I can't understand why upload is always so guarded, and especially nowadays.

This is baffling me too... Broadband doesn't seem to be making any useful advances any more!

I can't understand why upload is always so guarded, and especially nowadays. Because the industry is driven by marketing, and high download speeds sell. Most customers don't yet realize they need (or soon will need) higher upload.

In reply to a post by camieabz:

I can't understand why upload is always so guarded, and especially nowadays.

I assumed it was expectations management. Upload is always harder as the CPE in our homes is a different level of price/quality than the DSLAM.

e.g. I pay for 80/20 with Plusnet but sync at 59618kbps down, 9035kbps up. I was getting over 10000 up with G.INP on the upload. I think this has now gone. Real world throughput is 53 Mbps down, 8.2 Mbps upload. I did try 40/10 but that gave a throughput of 37Mbps down, and I often download large files (IT self training) and the delta in price was not much.

I would prefer 50 with 20 upload though - but unless G.FAST or similar appears, no hope.

Cable is in town, but equally useless. 50mbps download, with 2mbps upload. :-/

I can understand PN dropping the 40/20 product, for many (longer lines) there was no point in paying the extra for 80/20 and it cost PN the same.

The only reason I can see for them going for 40/2 rather than 40/10 is to encourage people to go for 80/20 even if they can only achieve 30 on the downstream, just to get a bit more up.

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

The only reason I can see for them going for 40/2 rather than 40/10 is to encourage people to go for 80/20 even if they can only achieve 30 on the downstream, just to get a bit more up.

I suspect that 40/20 attracts a certain kind of user (i.e. someone who uses their connection!) - whereas 40/2 probably appeals to a different kind of customer; the low use kind.

Since there are usually "capacity" style threads floating around, I wonder if this is to combat the issue?

On a more technical note, does anyone know if 40/2 changes SNRM or anything like that?

e.g. If I swtiched from my 80/20 (which is 50/10 in reality) down to 40/2 would my error rate change, would less power be required, what would happen to attenuation, crosstalk etc?

Genuinely interested if anyone knows anything. I'm wondering if this could help with line stability for the masses (rather than the enthusiasts that inhabit forums), and therefore help with support costs.

Lower sync (applies to down and / or up) = higher SNR margin = less errors generally

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

The only reason I can see for them going for 40/2 rather than 40/10 is to encourage people to go for 80/20 even if they can only achieve 30 on the downstream, just to get a bit more up.

Except Plusnet are usually very reluctant to provision 80/20 on lines with a (lower) BTw DS estimate of less than 40.

In reply to a post by Al1264:

Except Plusnet are usually very reluctant to provision 80/20 on lines with a (lower) BTw DS estimate of less than 40.

I wonder if that will change now that they are only offering 40/2 as an alternative. It shouldn't matter to them now anyway as both options are unlimited and the customer pays £5/month more for 80/20, so they might as well provision it.

Edited by kasg (Fri 26-Jun-15 13:21:34)

Your attenuation would almost certainly stay the same, as it is based on the line characteristics between the modem you have and the one in the cabinet. Independent of the product. That negotiation doesn't have a clue what ISP product, or even ISP, you are using. It's only when you log in that is determined, by which time the connection to the cabinet has been long-established. It does of course know which Openreach product has been ordered by the ISP.

I believe your noise margin will be around 6dB, set by Openreach according to the product ordered for the line. It's a complex subject and I don't recall seeing any stats. (Thinks - maybe I have some of my own, I was once on 40/2 .... No time to look now).

Although the line would still be able to sync at 50Mbps or so, (it's unclear whether you 50/10 is sync or throughput), it will be capped at 40Mbps by Openreach.

Because your sync is lower, than now your error rate will fall. On both downstream and upstream.

The big difference between the 40/20, which is sync'ing as if it were 70/20, is that it was Plusnet limited the throughput, probably via the Current line speed, to 40Mbps.

Edited by RobertoS (Fri 26-Jun-15 15:30:34)