why is my actual line speed different than the router's

my router is a huawei echolife hg521
here are the stats:
Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 448
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 16693
Line standard ADSL2+
Channel type Interleaved
Upstream SNR (dB) 28.8
Downstream SNR (dB) 12.2
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 9.5
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 15.5
Upstream output power (dBmV) 9.9
Downstream output power (dBmV) 13.7
Upstream CRC 0
Downstream CRC 199
Upstream FEC 0
Downstream FEC 5384
my provider is aol but they use talk talk for some reason
i live in abergavenny south east wales
my problem is that my line isn't anywhere near the 16693 in the stats more like 9-10 mmaxing at 11 thousand (speedtest.net) on average and now staying somewhere near 8 thousand witth 350 up, the max speed adsl checker says even that's slow saying something like 22000
i'm wired into the router by a cable that says t568b on it our package is unlimited but i can't remember what speed
why is my connection so slow and how can i speed it up, thanks

Are you the only person using this link ?
What do those stats look like if you connect the router directly in to the 'hidden' test jack on the main BT socket ?

same and no, no one else is using the line (as far as i know, the wireless does have a 5o something character password)
ohh by the way my name is Dylan

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

...my provider is aol but they use talk talk for some reason...

AOL are TalkTalk
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/isp/aol.html

So maybe we are looking at ISP congestion ?? There is an ISP specific forum further down the page, worth getting a username and asking fellow users of the same ISP.

also to clarify my exchange only upgraded quite recently to ADsl2+ (within the last month)

hope it's not the isp because i can't change it ( mother locked into contract) any other suggestions

also i just refreshed the page and all the figures are different but is still registering same high download
DSL synchronization status Up
DSL up time 00:03:24
Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 448
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 16666
Line standard ADSL2+
Channel type Interleaved
Upstream SNR (dB) 29.1
Downstream SNR (dB) 12.4
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 9.5
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 15.5
Upstream output power (dBmV) 9.7
Downstream output power (dBmV) 13.8
Upstream CRC 0
Downstream CRC 3
Upstream FEC 0
Downstream FEC 118

network reset due to removing face plate so i don't think it can be network crouding as it should show up in the settings, shouldn't it?

Please see if this BT speed tester runs for you, and if it does copy and paste the results as far down as the end of the upstream figures .

If it runs, you will see an IP Profile on the results page, about 88.3% of the connection speed. The IP Profile is the most you can get actual download .

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Please see if this BT speed tester runs for you, and if it does copy and paste the results as far down as the end of the upstream figures .

If it runs, you will see an IP Profile on the results page, about 88.3% of the connection speed. The IP Profile is the most you can get actual download .

i just get an error says my phone number is wrong for some reason

aaah it says it doesn't work if you have llu

apparently it's not applicable because llu doesn't use it

That's why I said "If it runs". We recently had someone on AOL who was not on LLU and that's the easiest way to check. There was a possibility that with the exchange only recently getting upgraded to ADSL2+ that all the LLU capacity was used up and your line wasn't on it.

But as you are apparently on LLU then the upgrade of the exchange to ADSL2+/WBC will not have affected you at all. A red herring, as LLU doesn't use the BT Wholesale kit that has just been installed.

It looks a bit as though it is just AOL that is the problem. Particular things I don't like about the stats are the Downstream SNR(M) of 12.2dB, where I would expect 6dB or 9dB, and the low downstream power of 13.7dBmV where the norm is around 18dBmV.

Re "max speed adsl checker says even that's slow saying something like 22000", that is still below what I would expect. On 15.5dB downstream attenuation I think even more than that should be possible, though I think the standard AOL/TT sync-time margin is 9dB which would take over 1Mbps away.

Starting with the actual download compared to the line rate, the best you can expect on LLU is about 84%, but 80% wouldn't be at all bad. So four fifths of line rate is fairly good. Below that it could be AOL, or it could be your end.

In particular, if you are testing wirelessly, that is usually lower than wired, so a wired test could be better.

Then the line rate. That can be affected by things like the ring/bell wire, and also if you are connected to a phone extension cable - either a wired one or a plug-in one.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

But as you are apparently on LLU then the upgrade of the exchange to ADSL2+/WBC will not have affected you at all. A red herring, as LLU doesn't use the BT Wholesale kit that has just been installed.
but the stats say that it is an ads;2+ lineIt looks a bit as though it is just AOL that is the problem. Particular things I don't like about the stats are the Downstream SNR(M) of 12.2dB, where I would expect 6dB or 9dB, and the low downstream power of 13.7dBmV where the norm is around 18dBmV.
but isn't higher better with snr interesting point about the power though why would that be lower
Re "max speed adsl checker says even that's slow saying something like 22000", that is still below what I would expect. On 15.5dB downstream attenuation I think even more than that should be possible, though I think the standard AOL/TT sync-time margin is 9dB which would take over 1Mbps away.
but that would still be higher than i'm getting now
Starting with the actual download compared to the line rate, the best you can expect on LLU is about 84%, but 80% wouldn't be at all bad. So four fifths of line rate is fairly good. Below that it could be AOL, or it could be your end.
way lower more like 50-60%In particular, if you are testing wirelessly, that is usually lower than wired, so a wired test could be better.
nope ethernetThen the line rate. That can be affected by things like the ring/bell wire, and also if you are connected to a phone extension cable - either a wired one or a plug-in one.
nope only one socket in house have connected cord directly to

so what could i do to fix it ?

Well I mentioned the ring wire, with a link to dealing with it, and I mentioned connecting through extensions which you haven't said whether or not you do .

Re the high noise margin, re-connect during daylight and take the stats again immediately afterwards, and lets see those . That will give us sync-time data, which is important to know.

Once we see that set of stats we will know what you have to try to get across to AOL/TT. Contacting them may be best done through these forums, but lets see that new set of stats so we know where you stand.

And extensions?

Edit - just realised you hade insered some answers into the quote . That's not a good idea. I'll answer those in another reply.

Edited by RobertoS (Sat 31-Dec-11 21:31:59)

AOL/TT LLU is usually ADSL2+. The fact that the exchange was not ADSL2+ enabled for non-LLU is irrelevant. I explained that was why I wanted to check you were on LLU, as demand for it would be high on an exchange that wasn't ADSL2+ enabled by BT Wholesale, so the LLU may have been full up when your Mum signed up.

Re SNRM, (SNR is the router with an incorrect label for it ), see this explanation.

Low downstream power levels is either an incorrect setting on the exchange equipment or a fault there.

Your not getting "that now" for the reasons I explained in the post. High SNRM and low power, plus perhaps a poor wiring setup at your end.

50-60% - as you are wired then it is AOL. If you had been wireless it would probably have been you.

there are no wires attached to any of the terminals bell or otherwise on the faceplate that is
the first figures are from daylight i started that connection before five
even still shouldn't a high snrm be better the noise has to rise less before it cuts out or are you trying to say my connection isn't optimised
or are you saying that the noise on my line is fluctuating highly and the connection has switched to a more stable but slower setting

just realised that sunset was at 4 (damn winter) i will post updated figures tommorow but i have tested during daytime before and only got 11ish ( that is partially what prompted me to look this up my speed had fallen to the about 8-9 i said in my previous post )

You haven't read the page I linked to explaining SNRM. Which is the figure your router is reporting even though it incorrectly calls it SNR.

In the UK most lines run satisfactorily with a sync-time noise margin of 6dB. It is possible yours is 12dB, which we will see with new stats after a reconnection tomorrow. It is unusual for the noise margin to fall enough from 6dB for it to lose connection, and very unusual, unless there is a fault, for it to fall enough from 9dB to lose connection.

On ADSL2+ each rise of 3dB in your sync-time noise margin costs you 750kbps to 1200kbps of line rate.

right i have finally had time to check my stats during the day
Connection Status Help



DSL synchronization status Up
DSL up time 03:01:39



Line Status Help



Upstream line rate (kbit/s) 448
Downstream line rate (kbit/s) 16517
Line standard ADSL2+
Channel type Interleaved
Upstream SNR (dB) 29.2
Downstream SNR (dB) 12.3
Upstream line attenuation (dB) 9.5
Downstream line attenuation (dB) 15.5
Upstream output power (dBmV) 9.7
Downstream output power (dBmV) 13.8
Upstream CRC 0
Downstream CRC 36
Upstream FEC 0
Downstream FEC 980

speedtest http://www.speedtest.net/result/1679934249.png
it seems roughly the same
dylan

The issue isn't with your router stats at all altho' they are on the low side.

It is that your are suffering congestion somewhere in the network and there is nothing you can do about it at your end, other than making a phone call to your ISP.

Edited by XRaySpeX (Sun 01-Jan-12 13:45:55)

It is that your are suffering congestion somewhere in the network and there is nothing you can do about it at your end, other than making a phone call to your ISP.

You are right, but can you really see the OP getting anywhere by ringing AOL and telling them there is congestion on their network ?

They will blame every one but themselves, might even send an SFI engineer, then passes the charges on when it comes back RWT.

The best bet for the OP would be to vote with their feet and migrate to an ISP not in the 'pile it high, and sell it cheap' brigade.

Ideally you would have read the stats straight after the reconnection, as I asked, but it is probably safe to take the sync-time margin as 12dB from those.

There is definitely an issue somewhere with that, but that is less serious than the low throughput of under 10Mbps from the 16Mbps line rate.

As the others have said, almost certainly AOL congestion.

One last remote possibility could be the MTU and RWIN settings at your end, but I don't hold out much hope of it being that. What version of Windows are you using, or is it a Mac?

windows xp
mtu is 1450 in the router
any ideas for the sync time margin thingy?
what's rwin
also some people have been saying that the line sync is slower than it should be anyway
anyway to fix that?

line rate. sorry
also can't switch cause into contract

Download TCPOptimizer and let it do its thing automatically. May be a good idea to take the option to Save original settings just in case - I always used to.

MTU needs to be compatible all over the place as otherwise packets can end up getting split up and generally causing throughput chaos, and RWIN is a buffer in Windows on your computer that downloads go through. If it is too small the transmission has to stop while it gets emptied by Windows processing it.

just thought i'd supply some information
supplied a few of each
pingtests
[IMG]http://www.pingtest.net/result/53572899.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.pingtest.net/result/53572925.png[/IMG]
[IMG]http://www.pingtest.net/result/53572969.png[/IMG]
here's my profile for speed test only recently made
http://www.speedtest.net/results.php?sh=8672e053ee8f...
is it just me or does it seem to fluctuate quite a lot
and onother thing, the tests seemed to fluctuate rapidly themselves either as a sort of jaged collection of peaks or an almost smooth surface brocken by needle thin jerks downward then upward ( i'm sorry but i don't know how to show you the graph for a single test) also this strange thing happend sometimes the test were constantly above 10 for the vast majority of the tests but then suddenly in the last half second the graph would stop being created useually accompniedied by a steady drop of the figure at a rate of a few 0.01s of mbps per second for about five seconds then it would jerk down suddenly and I would get a ridiculously low reading like 3 ( this is not hte cause of all the low reading only a few) also i noticed my upoad speeds are almost constant. one thing i noticed about both is that they tended to increase as the test went along baring the last half second. also in one of the test i notice a period of about a second where the connection speed shot up to over 17 ( one of the shoot down at the end ones)

also i read cnet online and it said that tcp optimizer shouldn't be used by a novice as it could crash your computer - i consider myself a novice so unless you can provide a clear list of instructions-i'm out i'm afraid

i looked online and found a command prompt thing it i tried it and it did indeed say 1450 was my optimal mtu

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

also i read cnet online and it said that tcp optimizer shouldn't be used by a novice as it could crash your computer - i consider myself a novice so unless you can provide a clear list of instructions-i'm out i'm afraid

Rot!

If you start doing your own settings based on what it says, maybe so, but I used it several times on different computers and no problem, and many people on these forums have used it - mainly for wireless problems which yours isn't - but still let it do its own thing.

As I advised, take the option to save the existing settings just in case. Apart from that there aren't any real instructions needed - it's an automatic adjustment, like many things that tune your system like a disc defrag or a registry checker.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

i found a command prompt thing it i tried it and it did indeed say 1450 was my optimal mtu

Did you 1st raise it to 1500 everywhere? Otherwise it just hits the buffers at its current value.

This is the problem with what he did. TCPOptimizer will work it all out by itself. Twiddling with it by oneself isn't easy - even DrTCP scares me silly.

In any case I reckon just as important here is his RWIN. XP sets it very low.

i just did the optimal settings thing in tcp optimizer - it didn't work
any more on why my connection is bad
and how it's possible to get over the line speed
also the changes seem to be happening to quickly to be caused by usage the speed could drop from 14 to 5 in less than a second

i think i know why i a sometimes getting such low readings with speedtest like th 3-5mb ones where the graph seems to freeze and i don't se anything less than 10 maybe my connection is rapidly droping off to nearly 0 so slow that the graphic doesn't register the slow speeds and then the speed rises just as rapidly back to a normal value but that time down low slows the average down a ton
plus about voting with my feet, the only providers at my exchange are bt talk talk o2 and sky/easynet only bt and talk talk are confirmed adsl2+ which would you suggest?
dylan

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

i just did the optimal settings thing in tcp optimizer

I thought you said some "command prompt thing"! Anyway, TCPOptimizer tells you to set MTU to 1500 in order to find right one.

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

i just did the optimal settings thing in tcp optimizer

I thought you said some "command prompt thing"! Anyway, TCPOptimizer tells you to set MTU to 1500 in order to find right one.

i did the command prompt thingy then at your recomendation i downloaded tcp optimizer and clicked optimal settiing. it didn't work

What value did it say your RWIN was set at?

what anti virus software are you using (if any)?

When you say ONLY what you mean is that almost every provider is available

When it says BT it means BT Wholesale, and they sell services at various quality of service levels to 100's of providers.

TalkTalk own AOL in UK, and run the service as a subnet of their service, go read on what other AOL users are saying. If they are talking of speeds up and down a lot, then perhaps it is nothing to do with the line or computer.

Which would people suggest, what do you want it to do, you need to provide some information on what you want from the service and the budget.

rwin is 65535
mcafee antivirus subscription

When you say ONLY what you mean is that almost every provider is available

sort of as all the others are bying it wholesale it will be essentially the same won't it?
so which one would you recommend

sorry i mean could you give details of which would be best for different types of people

What is your average monthly usage, and what is it mostly used for ? Do you have a budget in mind ?

Visit http://www.dslreports.com/tweaks and paste its RWIN results. The Window Scaling figure is also needed.

The connection from home to exchange is the same with all the BT Wholesale links, and then things start to vary, so you are incorrect in assuming that the performance of say BT Total Broadband is the same as Zen, IDnet, Plusnet and many other providers on that exchange.

Unlimited and low price, Sky at present.
If you have o2 mobile, consider o2 if the traffic management is ok with you
If you want cheap and not Sky then consider Plusnet but if your usage is high then
Consider TalkTalk - support over phone is not good, but online support ok and service usually ok, better than AOL.

To be honest a decent answer is a few thousand words long on that question. Even BT Total is probably going to be better than AOL is the BT WBC ADSL2+ service is available on the exchange.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

rwin is 65535

That is the low figure I said XP sets. It is far too low. See MrSaffron's post.

I'm sure TCPOptimizer would have increased it a lot. Didn't it suggest a figure?

When you say ONLY what you mean is that almost every provider is available

sort of as all the others are bying it wholesale it will be essentially the same won't it?

As has been posted already, no it won't. The ISP pays for at least five things separately.

(1) The connection from you to a handover point to them. That will be the same for all ISPs, yes, but is rarely a problem.

(2) The capacity of the handover itself, where they buy however many Gbps they decide to cover all the customers they have. They work out how much on a basis of under 100kbps to a few hundred kbps and multiply that by the number of customers. So if everyone hits that handover at the same time they all get a very slow speed. In practice, a few hundred is OK because it only happens during things like the Olympics that there is such a high demand every second.

(3) The backhaul from the handover point to their routers/servers.

(4) The throughput capacity of their routers and servers.

(5) The throughput capacity of their links out into the rest of the internet. Again calculated on a small amount per customer multiplied by the number of them.

So an ISP that only allows for a simultaneous throughput per customer of 100kbps can sell the service nice and cheap, but with one or all of the following - low allowance, possible traffic management, and even then a poor performance at busy times of day.

One that allows for several hundred kbps instead of 100kbps will have hugely better performance most of the time, but will have to charge more.

so which one would you recommend

Already dealt with by others. But as it is unlikely your mother will allow a migration until out of contract there isn't a lot of point thinking about it yet. Lots could change by then. When is the end of the contract?

260 thousand and something
didn't do a noticeable difference so i switched back cause it said that all computers on the line have to be the same and i'm not going to be able to convince my brother unless it's substantial
contract just started a week ago