please consider causality when you share these anecdotes.

A router syncing at a lower snr will always give you more speed. The SAME router syncing at lower snr will give you more speed.

As to the other anecdotes, it seems that just moving away from broadcom chipsets increases sync speed, but was this due to a drop in snr?

The only conclusion so far is that broadcom chipsets aim for a higher SNR.

edit: frogmellas data supports the non-broadcom chipset giving greater sync at same snr, I'm not sure it supports exchange-chipset match giving extra sync. bf, have you got a 3rd chipset that clarifies this?

I have 3 2wire 2700s, a linksys wag54gs, a thompson 585(v7?), and a zyxel645R and the 2wire's (bought because they are more "stable" on a long line) just sync'ed at 15dB snr giving a dismal, stable speed. All the others sync'ed at 6dB SNR and have given about the same speeds over 4 different houses.

Edited by deleted (Fri 03-Aug-12 07:51:54)

I'm in the same boat,

I have had an estimated cancellation charge from BT and I think its about £110.

My estimated speed is 18.9 meg, my line is 37 metres from the exchange.

I'm due to go live on the 8th so I will let you know what speed I actually end up with.

cheers

Ben

In reply to a post by Myth:

edit: frogmellas data supports the non-broadcom chipset giving greater sync at same snr, I'm not sure it supports exchange-chipset match giving extra sync. bf, have you got a 3rd chipset that clarifies this?

I also tried a cheap £5 TP Link modem 8817 from fleabay which uses trendchip chipset..again this synced slightly higher than both the broadcoms @ 16 meg (with 6db SNR). Shame it took me 2 years to find out that a broadcom router wasn't the fastest for my TT LLU line...partly because like many, i thought matching router>dslam chip meant diddly squat...which i now realise was a fallacy

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

TT are no better than BT surely. If BT is cheaper stick with BT, but if TT is cheaper (taking into account if you have to pay cancellation with BT) then it makes sense to make the move. Don't spend money unnec. between these two companies!

Why should the OP stick with a BT 'up to 8 meg service' (ie no BT 21CN at his exchange) when he can get TalkTalk ADSL2+ 'up to 24 meg' service? TalkTalk LLU beats a BT (spit) ADSL1 service any day....faster speeds, no slow down at peak times and far far cheaper. No brainer really.

Because, if you read any of his posts in FC, he is on a very tight budget. Spending additional on luxuries like faster internet connections is not wise. Neither is looking into bonding internet connections either.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

By matching router chipset to DSLAM chipset If i use any broadcom router, then cannot sync any higher than 16.5 meg (on a 6db noise margin), yet using a Infineon router (Draytek 120 v2) i sync at just under 18.5 meg.

Where on earth have you heard that from? I been told by people who know about these things that it is a load of rubbish and matching chip sets don't make a difference what so eever.


There are good and bad chipsets and that is what makes the difference.

Who exactly are these "people that know about things" then Adrian?

It stands to reason that matching chipsets are statistically going to play nicer together because you can bet when the chipset is being developed they test it more with their own products rather than the competitors, but not always..

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

In reply to a post by baby_frogmella:

In reply to a post by Pipexer:

TT are no better than BT surely. If BT is cheaper stick with BT, but if TT is cheaper (taking into account if you have to pay cancellation with BT) then it makes sense to make the move. Don't spend money unnec. between these two companies!

Why should the OP stick with a BT 'up to 8 meg service' (ie no BT 21CN at his exchange) when he can get TalkTalk ADSL2+ 'up to 24 meg' service? TalkTalk LLU beats a BT (spit) ADSL1 service any day....faster speeds, no slow down at peak times and far far cheaper. No brainer really.

Because, if you read any of his posts in FC, he is on a very tight budget. Spending additional on luxuries like faster internet connections is not wise. Neither is looking into bonding internet connections either.

You dont pay much attention do you.

BT = £40 PM
TT = £17.50 PM

ugh

interesting. I'm not able to say I've ever matched chipsets (how do you find out?) so I can't say that matching made no difference for me yet. I'm also wondering if it makes a bigger % difference on faster lines so on my 3-4meg line I wouldn't notice anyway.

In reply to a post by Myth:

...I'm not able to say I've ever matched chipsets (how do you find out?)...

For a guide: http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/linestats_explanation.htm - scroll down to Vendor ID.

If it's genuinely cheaper then move. If it's cheaper but you are taking a blind eye to the cancellation fee's with BT which are extortionate then I would advise you don't.

In reply to a post by Seansmit17:

With TalkTalk we will be paying:

Broadband With Evening & Weekend calls £3.25
Line rental £14.50
£17.75 Per Month.

After 6 months is goes up to £21 a month from £17.75 and that's much cheaper that BT

Its just a shame we all have to wait 2 weeks to get this

Don't forget Value Line Rental, which would effectively cut the line rental to £9.50/month.