In reply to a post by Spud2003:

I tried 1Gb/s for fun but never really needed that speed ... soon downgraded to 450Mb/s.

I will downgrade to 150Mb/s once my contract is up, I have no need for 500Mb/s, if they offered an even slower speed for less money I would half that and that would be more than enough.

For me, 300/50 is the sweet spot.

If I halve the speed to 160/30 I only save £3 per month. But to increase speed by ~50% to 500/75 costs an extra £5 per month.

300M is also what commodity wifi can handle comfortably.

You'd need a custom solution for that to work in a home plus a pcie x4 or x8 slot (depending on pcie version) and you'd have to go with a custom wifi solution as you'd use a pc for routing..

not for the fainthearted.

AI is the only thing now that will saturate multigig connections, gaming won't, downloading won't (most servers are 1gbit minus cdn's ) When i mean ai, as in it creating large datasets and moving those around and or downloading large datasets - in real time.

Anyways, for me, i need 500mbits to 1gbit down and 500mbits up ideally .......

My provider's packages were priced to steer you towards 450/100 for maximum value for money - that's why I have that speed.

It's fascinating how stories like this consistently trigger a wave of opinions claiming that no one really needs internet speeds beyond a certain point. However, progress is driven by challenging the status quo and embracing early adoption. I'm on CFs 3Gb package, and the capabilities of fast internet are astounding.

In my line of work, dealing with extremely large files, I can transfer them across cloud storage as if they were local. Downloading games from Steam takes just a few minutes. The possibilities are limitless.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

For me, 300/50 is the sweet spot.

If I halve the speed to 160/30 I only save £3 per month. But to increase speed by ~50% to 500/75 costs an extra £5 per month.

300M is also what commodity wifi can handle comfortably.

My Gfast was a sweet spot for 8 days. Happy with 241/41. No complaint at all.

Stats recorded 20 Dec 2023 16:57:51

DSLAM type / SW version: BDCM:0xc190 (193.144) / v0xc190
Modem/router firmware: AnnexA version - A2pvfbH043q.d26u
DSL mode: G
Status: Showtime
Uptime: 8 days 15 hours 44 min 4 sec
Resyncs: 0 (since 12 Dec 2023 01:12:45)

Downstream Upstream
Line attenuation (dB): 37.0 0.0
Signal attenuation (dB): 37.0 0.0
Connection speed (kbps): 241671 41900
SNR margin (dB): 3.1 3.1
Power (dBm): 0.0 4.0
Interleave depth:
INP: 551.00 535.00
G.INP: Not enabled Not enabled
Vectoring status: Unknown

RSCorr/RS (%): 0.4930 0.7735
RSUnCorr/RS (%): 0.0000 0.0000
ES/hour: 0 0

In reply to a post by Taras:

You'd need a custom solution for that to work in a home plus a pcie x4 or x8 slot (depending on pcie version) and you'd have to go with a custom wifi solution as you'd use a pc for routing..

You can certainly buy routers in a single RU form factor that'll handle it and WiFi is a case of getting a router that has an access point mode which even commodity Asus and Netgear kit does.

I imagine people willing to spend that money on an Internet connection won't be phased by a router VM or buying a Mikrotik 2216. They'll have SFP28 switches anyway.

In reply to a post by jon999:

It's fascinating how stories like this consistently trigger a wave of opinions claiming that no one really needs internet speeds beyond a certain point. However, progress is driven by challenging the status quo and embracing early adoption. I'm on CFs 3Gb package, and the capabilities of fast internet are astounding.

In my line of work, dealing with extremely large files, I can transfer them across cloud storage as if they were local. Downloading games from Steam takes just a few minutes. The possibilities are limitless.

Speaking as a person with 8 Gbit at home, yes, the speed is great as I said, but doing things faster isn't needing the extra performance for an application. We're still waiting for the killer gigabit and multigig app to arrive. At the moment it's the same things faster and doing the same things as slower connections on multiple devices concurrently.

We've reached a plateau. The Register recently made a similar point, but for computing in general:
https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/19/windows_nt_30...

The change from dial-up to ADSL was transformational in terms of what you could do with the Internet. The transition to fibre, much less so. It's just more of the same, but a bit faster.

Being able to stream Netflix on demand is transformational. Being able to stream Netflix in UHD is not.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

The change from dial-up to ADSL was transformational in terms of what you could do with the Internet. The transition to fibre, much less so. It's just more of the same, but a bit faster.

agreed on dial up to ADSL, but for many people that was less than 5 Mbit, the benefit was always on. The move to FTTC/VDSL was for a lot of people much more transformational as 30 to 40 Mbps was common, and quite a few people got faster. The modern web (with all the advertising/scripting junk) is unusable on dialup, people now use mobile data which can get 20-30 Mbps generally in most places.

The cable coax, or FTTP services with 100 Mbps or faster are as you say not yet transformational. They speed up downloads or patching/updating of computers and mobile devices, and those whom play the extensive games that download to a console appreciate the quicker download of 300GB of data.... but those are still not insane-mass-market that the always on ADSL provided.

The front page stories about 185,000 homes passed, and 20,000 take up, I suspect is quite typical.