the peak time congestion and increased ping jitters are not a good selling point to gamers , no matter what the TV adverts say . And as said the extra upload only helpful if hosting games and is completely unessential if not running a server .

More does not always mean better , i have a friend near the top of the MLG still playing very successfully on a 1mb/256kbs legacy connection .

Or two friends that share a house and a 448kbs upload and both game at the same time , again with out issue and yes that is with voice chat .
Admittedly neither are going to be good hosts .

Sky are not the greatest and best ping's due to them not allowing fast path , but they are stable and consistent ping's , something that FTTC is struggling with IMHO .

So again i say if your syncing at the top reaches of ADSL2+, FTTC is a pointless move as FTTC connection is unlikely to out perform regularly a Sky LLU ADSL2+ connection at peak times .

But admit that the extra upload would be the biggest selling point to move from a ADSL2+ 20mb connection to FTTC .

And i still say the best gaming ISP is BE* and have seen it constantly giving better ping's than FTTC .

So its very nice having a 40mb/10mb connection but do you actually need it and the extra cost involved ? the answer for most on a 20mb Sky LLU ADSL2+ connection , is " no i don't " Or " i need bragging rights , my cat is blacker than yours " ( but is it really ? )

Interesting about the jitter, its not something I've observed on pingtest.net. So your saying that as a technology VDSL is more jittery then ADSL2+? Or is it purely a back-haul problem with the ISP's in question?

As for pings typlically for an interleaved line your looking about 35ms on pingtest, 27ms on fastpath and Infinity around 15ms.

Being the host on any games ensures no shenanigans go on with people unplugging their ethernet cable from the router...

Edited by deleted (Mon 06-Jun-11 12:38:24)

On standard ADSL i had my fastest ping to London 8 to 10 ms on the now gone UKonline , i had a Fastpath connection that gave a 12 to 14ms pings over sky LLU network , on my murphX connection i have the same ping's as on UKonline but this is down to how you are routed .

BT 21CN has some very strange routing where as a example , some people in the southern areas are routed over the Birmingham node and not giving impressive ping's

And yes there is clear evidence of back haul slow down at peak times on BT 21CN that will increase jitters and does by my observation of the many TBB quality monitor test results that have been posted by FTTC users , on this forum , that are allot more accurate than Speedtest.net .

But again this is down to what node you are connected to , with some nodes performing allot better than others .

Its simply not a black or white decision when you have already got a 20mb sync on a uncongested LLU network at a very competitive price .

As said the extra Upload being the biggest reason for moving to FTTC whilst having a 20mb sync on Sky but the extra upload is not needed by the majority of users unless hosting a server or needing to make large uploads , so rather than jumping on the bandwagon for faster , its worth pointing out faster does not always mean better .

As take up of FTTC increases my points might become very valid and those that have moved from a very good LLU connection to FTTC might wish they had stayed put .
I fear this will be especially true of those that have gone with BT , who seem to be offering this technology at a price point , other ISP don't want to match .

I have been here before and this is in my opinion , but after my many years here on TBB its become easy to spot potential problems , the last time i popped my head up above the parapet was for O2 Access ( and how right was i about that ) and i got shot down that time .

Put simply , how much capacity will ISP be prepared to supply so people can pump the FTTC connections and will it be as much as ISP that have LLU networks ?

Pingtest.

tbb BQM in sig.