We need to wait for the answer to MHC's question .

I also formed the view when I was messing about with these settings on a fairly stable ~50dB ADSL2+ O2 LLU connection that ADSL was the slowest of the three, ADSL2 the fastest.

Playing with a similarly stable 63dB attenuation line lead me so the conclusion that there was no difference between ADSL2 and ADSL2+ and both were faster than ADSL1.

That's not to say your experience is invalid at all but it's probably very dependent on exact circumstances, so I suspect it's worth the OP trying all three.

I'm not sure why ADSL2+ should be less stable though - at that attenuation I doubt that the full ADSL1/2 spectrum is available so the fact that ADSL2+ could use higher frequencies should be moot.

We need to wait for the answer to MHC's question

Agreed, though anything that can get > 1Mbs^-1 on a 70dB line is probably already going to be one of the "known good" ones.

In reply to a post by mr_bean:

there was no difference between ADSL2 and ADSL2+

It attenuates lower, by approx. 3dB.

The 3dB difference in attenuation is an artefact caused by the way the measurement is done, it doesn't mean ADSL2+ gets better speeds than ADSL2

Edited by mr_bean (Mon 21-Nov-11 19:00:41)

In reply to a post by mr_bean:

it doesn't mean ADSL2+ gets better speeds than ADSL2

You mean "it doesn't mean ADSL2 gets better speeds than ADSL2+"? That's what I wonder but can't confirm/deny it on my >> 12 Meg line

"it doesn't mean ADSL2 gets better speeds than ADSL2+"

Indeed!

Thankfully there isn't an offence of "posting without due care and attention" or my licence would be getting docked a few points this evening :-/

No offence taken! Just clarifying what you mean.