Getting less than 50% of the advertised speed in a single thread will not be noticed or have any significant impact on the overwhelming majority of users so long as the reduction is sufficient to maintain a good HD/UHD stream. Getting less than 50% of the advertised speed when using multiple threads would obviously be an issue.
(I generally get near to 110% of the advertised speed multi-threaded, except when using TBB's tester.)

Would you agree that the speed shown in this graph of a download from wetransfer.com is unacceptable? Especially as that website used to constantly reach the full 200Mb, until VM obliterated single thread speeds. Now it doesn't even reach 20Mb/s.

https://s11.postimg.org/pmh3koxer/download.jpg

Edited by deleted (Wed 23-Nov-16 10:34:47)

Life isn't all about watching catch up TV. Some users want to download files at a fast rate.

in that case why dont they just sell a 50mbit service and be done with it?

Its like me saying I can sell a hdtv that advertises 4k resolution 10 bit colours and what not, but actually only supply a 1080p res and 8bit colours and its good because most wont notice (which would probably be true).

Same reason no consumer ISP in the world I've seen sells at the committed bit rate and then has to explain what the burst figure means.

Would you buy a 2.5 Mbps service with a burst to a maximum speed of 38 Mbps where the 38 Mbps was also capped by the distance of your line to the street hardware?

Which actually will be the end game for the ASA speed rules if taken to full conclusion.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

in that case why dont they just sell a 50mbit service and be done with it?

Are you deliberately being dumb? 50mbit would only support a single UHD stream (25mbps min) so would only be suitable for a single user. Whereas 200mbps allows all my family to stream what they want or play what they want. Also with 200mbps I can download stuff 4 times faster unless I use an antiquated system that single-threads the download.

Definitely unacceptable but I suspect that is because you have other issues not related to whether the download is single-threaded or not. If multi-threaded is quicker though why not use that?

If you think streaming is all about catch up TV you need to update your calendar, it is now 2016.
As TBB states, if you are getting slow single-thread it could indicate congestion in your area, either get VM to look into that or if multi-threaded gives better download speeds use that instead.

Multithread is fine, with 200Mbps possible on speedtest.net. Is it possible to set Google Chrome to multithread downloads?

i can get full speed on EA Origin and Steam which are multithreaded, but the vast majority of other downloads are ridiculously slow (standard file downloads, music from Amazon, app updates on phone/tablets etc). They all used to be fine until around 12 months ago.

Catch up or streaming ..... whatever! I have no issues except with people stating that it's ok to have a much lower speed than you pay for and expect.

Surely not everyone in your home requires 4K download capability. Not many films and content in 4K anyway.

Get out more!