We have 10Gbps of capacity and have plenty of people testing at 18 to 19 Mbps upload, and those with leased lines and FTTH/B going a lot higher

In reply to a post by bookey:

I just got sky fibre installed 4 days ago and I sync at the same rates (cab is 12 houses away!) but I can not peak the download higher than 22Mbit... Upload seems to top out at 8Mbit.

Your line data shows that wholesale/openreach believe you should get close to 80megabit download and 20megabit upload sync at your location. Since you've purchased Sky Fibre, and not Sky Fibre Pro, you are limited to 40megabit / 10megabit speeds.

However you should get those easily, your router claims the fibre is synced at those speeds:

Broadband Link Downstream Upstream
Connection Speed 39998 kbps 9995 kbps
Line Attenuation 19.9 dB 0.0 dB
Noise Margin 19.6 dB 11.11 dB

What speed testing sites are you using, cable or WiFi to the sky Hub, and many security products can slow down the connection. 8megabit on a speed test site might be all you can get with a 9.9megabit sync due to overheads. You should get closer to 36 or 37 on the download however. (And you could go faster for an extra £10/month).

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

We have 10Gbps of capacity and have plenty of people testing at 18 to 19 Mbps upload, and those with leased lines and FTTH/B going a lot higher

Confirmed - I saw 90meg download and 90meg upload on our leased line at work from TBB tester. (I'll try again on monday and get a screenshot).

Sorry. I didn't mean you don't have the capacity. It's just the upload test comes back low as it doesn't seem to start when it should so average is low.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/results.html...

Something wrong with my PC?

I have notice that speedtest.net finally removed the hosts that were seriously under performing, i.e. Canterbury.

Hmm it seems to be an issue with doing the test in Google Chrome.

Test in IE is better:- http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/results.html...

The joy of different flash implementations. We could ignore the first few seconds and make test longer, but that would hide other bits of information

In reply to a post by 5km:

Hmm it seems to be an issue with doing the test in Google Chrome.

Chrome runs its own version of Flash, IE and Firefox use the system flash player.

We really need a decent HTML5 speed tester - http://speedof.me/ - is interesting.

How are people finding the wireless performance of this beast?

Getting a number of complaints from people in the local area here about it being, well, garbage.

Wet string is better...

I've not found it too bad but then again I can't put it to the test with only one user in a small flat...