Yes around 10% for a 2Mbps profile.
1 Byte is 8 bits.

The variation in speed due to congestion as the time of day varies is probably a lot more noticeable

In reply to a post by phantom66uk:

In reply to a post by cjbell68:

200-300 Kbps will probably be very noticeable to most people on the exchange, apart from those who live in/near the centre of Etwall perhaps!

You're getting Kilobits and KiloBytes confused?... *edit* notice the change in capitalisation - (b) = Bits and (B) = Bytes

200 Kilobits is only equal to around 25 KBytes/s (without overheads)

So it's not noticable at all in regards to throughput.

It's very noticeable when the 200-300Kbps gets shaved off your sync, resulting in a BRAS profile drop costing 50KB a second in throughput!

Ah the benfits of being with a supplier that uses no BRAS profiles!

Seriously, I do agree that it would be a pain if you only needed that 200 / 300 kilobits to jump up a profile step. This is why the profile system is so seriously flawed and why I ended up moving away to my current supplier.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

As more people in an area get DSL based broadband you can experience more cross talk, the end result is that speeds may slow down, generally only a little, but 200-300Kbps will be noticeable if you are looking for it.

Will this also be the case where more people migrate to ADSL2/ADSL2+ connections like for example with my exchange which has already been unbundled by a few LLU operators, some of which offer ADSL2/ADSL2+ services?

ASDL2+ uses the same frequencies then an extra 1.1Mhz so yes.

ADSL2+ does have extra power save modes that can be used to reduce power consumption and crosstalk on otherwise idle lines though, which is a possible benefit.

it will be interesting to see if the low power modes get utilised en masse. They can potentially wipe out the vast majority of crosstalk if adsl2 becomes the new default modulation and utilises the low power modes.

Unfortenatly isp's are looking at keeping adsl1 the default modulation or using adsl2+, adsl2+ is bad for long lines so they are likely to be pushed back onto adsl1 rather than using adsl2 which is the best out of the 3 for long lines.

Personally on my line crosstalk loses me over a meg synch, every year at christmas I can go from around a 6000kbit synch upto nearly 7.5mbit when all the offices turn off their adsl.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 11-Feb-09 08:37:39)

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

ADSL2+ does have extra power save modes that can be used to reduce power consumption and crosstalk on otherwise idle lines though, which is a possible benefit.

I assume that ADSL2 also has this power save mode to reduce crosstalk?

Some people with long lines (like myself) prefer ADSL2 as there is no benefit using ADSL2+ with attenuated lines that are over 50 dB.

Edited by deleted (Tue 10-Mar-09 08:52:00)

I believe so

ADSL2 added all the clever bits, and then ADSL2+ added the extra 1.1MHz

VDSL2 will see frequencies up to 30Mhz down the telephone line

VDSL2 will see frequencies up to 30Mhz down the telephone line

Andrew, a few posts recently you have mentioned VDSL2, but not long ago I think you were saying BT FTTC would be VDSL2+.

Have things changed, or are you just being lazy?