G.Fast Estimated Speed by BTw Checker Live

Here is live g.fast estmated by BT Checker:

50 to 100m away from the cabinet:
https://s30.postimg.org/ojhw2p0fl/G.Fast_50m_to_100m...

100 to 150m away from the cabinet:
https://s30.postimg.org/kxc2q1u29/G.Fast_100_to_150m...

150 to 200m away from the cabinet:
https://s30.postimg.org/e85ja18q9/G.Fast_150_to_200m...

Edited by adslmax (Mon 21-Aug-17 13:18:24)

no wonder they want to enable vdsl2 range for g.fast those figures look painful, the 50m line not even getting estimated max speed for upstream or downstream, and at 150m upstream slower than vdsl2.

Is this after BT had their way with the amendments to g.fast spec?

Vectored vdsl2 30mhz, is not far away at over 100m and would have benefited everyone on a cabinet not just those next door to it. So g.fast at this stage simply seems to be about marketing gains as its peak speed allows them to keep up with VM.

It's been on there for months but thanks, I guess.

Yeah, it's pretty disappointing. Only those fairly close to the cabinet will benefit greatly from this, hopefully in the not too far distant future there will be more premises further away who can benefit from this. Unless of course it's like ECI DSLAM's all over again (no G.INP *yet, if ever*, no vectoring, little hope of improvement).

In reply to a post by Ixel:

Yeah, it's pretty disappointing. Only those fairly close to the cabinet will benefit greatly from this, hopefully in the not too far distant future there will be more premises further away who can benefit from this. Unless of course it's like ECI DSLAM's all over again (no G.INP *yet, if ever*, no vectoring, little hope of improvement).

So given vectoring and retransmission are required for G.fast, and G.INP will reappear on ECI in the not too distant, there's definitely some future prospects for G.fast as the standard evolves.

If BT would be allowed to use pair bonding that would help a ton.

Just thinking aloud about ECI and Huawei cabs: You're fundamentally very correct of course; but as time goes by the ECI cabinets will fill up possibly even if they get an extension pod, and as they don't install ECI cabs any more OR will plonk a Huawei one next to it for you to be connected up to. I suppose that even when one cab fills up and another is installed because of continued demand, there would still be no absolute guarantee that you'd get connected to the newer cabinet; i.e., you may be really unlucky if a few people move house and/or cancel their service, leaving spaces on the old ECI one.

Speculation, there.

It's a shame Huawei's 288+ cabinets have to be about twice the size of ECI's 128/256 (they're externally identical) cabinets. If Huawei's 96-line cabinets support vectoring and G.INP then it's nothing to do with requiring more space (not that I thought that anyway, I think the Huawei 288+ cabinets are comically large to be honest). And it's simply because ECI have shown that it can be done in a much more compact way, unfortunately in an inferior manner. I wouldn't really care, but massive green cabinets everywhere might lead to more complaints than small(er) ones.

Edited by deleted (Mon 21-Aug-17 23:08:00)

My exact situation. Was connected to ECI cab for over a year. The cab filled, had a waiting list, and they installed a 288 Huawei. I ceased my line on the ECI cab before the Huawei went live to allow the port to get taken. I ordered a new line the day the Huawei started taking orders and was connected a week later.

On the same D-Side the syncs were 55/6.8 on the ECI and 55/10.5 on the Huawei. Crosstalk has since knocked me down to 40/8. DLM has still not applied G.INP, no vectoring on my cab. The Huawei DSLAM have me considerably better upload sync though.

And it's simply because ECI have shown that it can be done in a much more compact way, unfortunately in an inferior manner

At thst is a problem as ECI are knoen to be significantly more troublesome particularly when it comes to cooling

Are these estimates based on the old (amendment 1) hardware, or the new (amendment 2) hardware?

The newer hardware should have the higher power rating, and the higher number of bits-per-tone. Those give higher speeds and/or higher range, so it is important to know.

No idea if it come with new or old hardware. How to tell it?