The package is supposed to be "guaranteed at least 75Mbps".

Maybe traffic management is limiting you?

Maybe, I thought about that but, why it it only affecting the TBB HTTP tests and nothing else?

In the speedtest.net results it seems to activate but only down to around 120Mbps as it starts way higher. The first day I had fibre it was was 260Mbps solid.

I would say that 6 times 260Mbps would require 1.5Gbps bandwidth. Perhaps it's just not available?

Six threaded test on a 260 Mbps connection DOES NOT REQUIRE the server to have 1.5 Gbps of bandwidth available

Plus server has 10 Gbps of bandwidth to it and if got close to that alarms would go off, as 10 Gbps of traffic is pretty expensive

Its something odd with the connection, if the package purchased has a 75 Mbps guarantee with burst above then it all depends on how the bursting is detected by the ISP.

Our test and speediest.net both appear to be being impacted, e.g. one of your speediest.net graphs shows high start and then a drop away. The difference in the end figures is easily explained.

Our average is a median figure for the test.
Speedtest.net rejects 20% slowest, and 10% fastest and then picks an average (not sure if its mean or median), this often gives slightly higher figures when a test does not get a flat line.

Still not convinced.

In real world use I get around ~100Mbps (around ~13MB/s) which I am very happy with so can disregard the speed testers saying I am getting much over that.

Still does not explain the relatively low HTTP result on TBB imo. Maybe the warning is the disparity between the 200Mbps peak which is not real. Comparing ~100Mbps to ~70Mbps I get on the TBB HTTPx6 test is not a massive difference. Just odd.

The non-flash test seems a bit closer to real world on the average.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/button/14040...

Edited by deleted (Sun 29-Jun-14 18:07:21)

The warning is the disparity between httpx6 and the tbbx1 test, will have to pull all the offer fast KC tests and see if there is a similar pattern. If it is possible some form of traffic/burst management is the cause. Alas 200 miles away from any KC connections so difficult to sit down and debug when a provider looks to be doing something unusual

Lots of testers do not show any throughput graphs do people are none the wiser to odd/unusual behaviour. If this is normal behaviour for the faster KC lines then we can re-code and adjust the warnings accordingly.

Yeh I have asked some people with the same connections as me to run some of these tests. One guy with FTTC (Mine is FTTH) gets a graph which is more what I would expect on his 75Mbps connection.

VDSL on KC;

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/button/14040...

I think it is the rate limiting used to cap your speed at KC that is the issue, and somehow the single thread tbbx1 is not being throttled back, or might be if you continued on for longer.