Is my ping higher than it should be?

I am with talktalk on the 36mb fibre package (FTTC). I am about 100 meters from my green cabinet and use wired connection, I have tested at different times when I am the only one using the internet and get 25 ping. I know this isn't bad but I feel like it should be under 20 comparing to other peoples speed test results and how close I am to the cabinet. My speeds are also fine. I live in cumbria so a bit out of the way, would that make a difference?

Could moving to a different ISP improve my ping?

Any input or advice I would really appreciate, thanks for reading.

Edited by deleted (Tue 01-Jan-19 21:06:37)

Distance to the cabinet is not the factor that matters here.

I live in cumbria so a bit out of the way, would that make a difference?

Yes, it's the main factor.

Those in London tend to have sub 10ms latency, those above the Scottish central belt over 20ms. North half of England tends to be anywhere inbetween, 10-20ms.

Most things you ping go to London and back.

Low interleaving adds 8ms on to the line automatically.
So if you are interleaved and managed to remove interleaving you would improve from 25ms to 17ms immediately.

FTTP can be a couple ms better than FTTC but the difference isn't huge.

My guess is you are interleaved.
17ms would be about right for your part of the country.

edit : typos

Edited by j0hn83 (Tue 01-Jan-19 21:08:06)

In N.Ireland on FTTC i got 18-20ms on Cable i get 23-25ms

I am on FTTP with BT and like already said FTTP should have a better latency / ping than FTTC from the same location, I am located in London about 4 to 5 miles by road from Telehouse London Data Centre and I get the following:

[BBC Site]
ping -4 bbc.co.uk

Pinging bbc.co.uk [151.101.64.81] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=58
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=58
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=58
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=58

Ping statistics for 151.101.64.81:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 3ms, Maximum = 3ms, Average = 3ms

[Google]
ping -4 google.com

Pinging google.com [216.58.204.78] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 216.58.204.78: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.58.204.78: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.58.204.78: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=54
Reply from 216.58.204.78: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 216.58.204.78:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 4ms, Maximum = 4ms, Average = 4ms

[One of TBB Speed Test addresses]
ping -4 speedtest8.thinkbroadband.com

Pinging speedtest8.thinkbroadband.com [80.249.99.73] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 80.249.99.73:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 3ms, Average = 2ms

When I log into World of Warcraft EU Servers I get about 8 to 10ms, I think they are located in either France or Germany, and about 95 to 140ms on the US Servers (have no clue where these are located).

TBH I don't think the 25ms Ping that you are getting is that bad.

Paul

I am also on the talktalk 36mb fibre package (FTTC) I also live in South Cumbria and these are my results -



Pinging bbc.co.uk

Reply from 151.101.192.81: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56
Reply from 151.101.192.81: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56
Reply from 151.101.192.81: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56
Reply from 151.101.192.81: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56



Pinging google.com

Reply from 216.58.213.68: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=55
Reply from 216.58.213.68: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=55
Reply from 216.58.213.68: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=55
Reply from 216.58.213.68: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=55



Pinging speedtest8.thinkbroadband.com

Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56
Reply from 80.249.99.73: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=56

Hi thanks for your reply, I checked my broadband stats and it says im not interleaved.

DSL synchronization status:
Up
Connection status:
Showtime
Upstream line rate (kbit/s):
9995
Downstream line rate (kbit/s):
39994
Maximum upstream rate (kbit/s):
26672
Maximum downstream rate (kbit/s):
76124
Upstream noise safety coefficient (dB):
16.3
Downstream noise safety coefficient (dB):
12.9
Upstream interleave depth:
0
Downstream interleave depth:
0
Line standard:
VDSL
Upstream line attenuation (dB):
0
Downstream line attenuation (dB):
0
Upstream output power (dBm):
-5.3
Downstream output power (dBm):
-5.3
Channel type:
None
DSL up-time:
3 days 15 hours 32 minutes 40 seconds

I have tried the test socket and same results. 25 ping is definitely ok but lower would be nice of course. Thanks again

Hi thanks for replying, nice to compare with someone close to me (I am in Barrow), these are my results. Are you on the fast channel type or also none like me?

Pinging bbc.co.uk [151.101.64.81] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=55
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=55
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=55
Reply from 151.101.64.81: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=55

Pinging google.com [216.58.206.110] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 216.58.206.110: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=53
Reply from 216.58.206.110: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=53
Reply from 216.58.206.110: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=53
Reply from 216.58.206.110: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=53

Pinging speedtest8.thinkbroadband.com [80.249.101.60] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 80.249.101.60: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=55
Reply from 80.249.101.60: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=55
Reply from 80.249.101.60: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=55
Reply from 80.249.101.60: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=55

Things like using the test socket make no difference.

It's not the very short run of copper that make the difference it's the hundreds of miles of fibre and all the equipment inbetween.

I get the same 16ms being around 1000m from my cabinet as my friend who is 50m from the same cabinet.
I'm in central Scotland, which is great for where I am.

It does sound high for where in the country you are though.
As you can see the Chippy_Tea gets 15ms from the same ISP in the same general area.
Changing 1 meter of copper cable will make no difference though.
A better router might, but unlikely.

You're either on fastpath or G.INP with no added latency, or interleaving with minimum 8ms added latency.

There is no none, just the Talktalk kit doesn't specify.

Edited by j0hn83 (Wed 02-Jan-19 13:27:43)

In reply to a post by LyndonLauder:

Hi thanks for replying, nice to compare with someone close to me (I am in Barrow), these are my results. Are you on the fast channel type or also none like me?

I am in Ulverston so only 8 miles away (for those not familiar with the area) i cannot find interleaving in the modem stats so cannot help i did find when i switched from the TT HG633 which was awful to the D-Link 3782 things got a lot better but i cannot remember if my ping improved.

Interesting "Interleave depth". In both directions. The value cannot be zero, as it is the number of packets that a single original data packet is spread across for error correction purposes, being re-constituted in your modem/router before output to your devices..

A value of 1 shows Fast Path. Anything higher shows that level of interleaving. Even on downstream G.INP there is a small amount of interleaving, the most common value in that case being 8. Without G.INP downstream interleaving would be in the hundreds or thousands.

As j0hn83 says, we cannot tell from those stats. It appears the modem/router is simply not reporting those figures. If you look, it isn't reporting the attenuations either.

Well, there's another option which might show some sites with a lower ping, and that's where Talktalk have a peering link at IX Manchester.

Try pinging 1.1.1.1, and see what your ping is to them. That's Cloudflare, they have datacentres nearby in Manchester, London and Dublin (out of 160+ worldwide)

Sites hosted on them, such as the main thinkbroadband site (not these forums) have a neat trick, where you can interrogate the cdn-cgi pages to see which datacentre your traffic went to. So, try:

https://www.thinkbroadband.com/cdn-cgi/trace
https://www.theregister.co.uk/cdn-cgi/trace
https://1.1.1.1/cdn-cgi/trace

Look for the "colo" section, it'll show the IATA code for the nearest airport to the datacentre. LHR for Heathrow, MAN for Manchester, AMS for Amsterdam, DUB for Dublin and so on.


Crucially though, a traceroute to 1.1.1.1 might go Barrow -> Manchester -> Server, and not Barrow -> London -> Server, or worst case Barrow -> London -> Manchester -> Server. Only one way to check, though!

Edited by deleted (Wed 02-Jan-19 15:27:29)

Mine shows - colo=MAN

My ping is lower -

Pinging 1.1.1.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=57
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=57
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=57
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=57

I get a lot lower to 1.1.1.1 - 18ms was lowest (using wifi and homeplug)

Colo showing MAN

Edited by BuckleZ (Thu 03-Jan-19 00:09:23)

My pings are around just under 13ms consistently to bbc.co.uk and 1.1.1.1; and just under 20ms to the google servers.

My Colo is LHR despite the fact that I am only just over 10 miles away from Manchester Airport. Must be the vagaries of IDNet's routing using BTw backhaul.

Thanks for replying my colo = MAN

Pinging 1.1.1.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=56
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=56
Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=56

I think I must be interleaved, is there a way to get fastpath? My connection is good and doesn't disconnect. I know you can't ask your ISP to do it but i'm not sure how the outreach DLM system works.

I am currently using the Huawei hg635 but have a Huawei hg633, is it worth switching them?

Edited by deleted (Thu 03-Jan-19 11:47:57)

In reply to a post by LyndonLauder:

I am currently using the Huawei hg635 but have a Huawei hg633, is it worth switching them?

The 635 was far superior to the 633 and when they discontinued it many TT users were not happy and still say it was the best TT have given customers, i doubt you would see any difference in ping and probably a drop in speed using the 633, is a loss of 9 ms compared to others who have posted here worth the heartache? why are you after the lowest ping you can get?

Just for fps games, I will stick with what I have, thanks for all your replies this community is really great.

I believe both the HG635 and HG633 can be tweaked to enable telnet.

This would provide full stats allowing you to see if the line is interleaved.

It's not the easiest process for those less technical.

https://forum.kitz.co.uk/index.php/topic,15574.msg28...

In reply to a post by LyndonLauder:

Just for fps games, I will stick with what I have, thanks for all your replies this community is really great.