seems to be flip flop? 10 years ago it was nearly all upstream congestion.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

seems to be flip flop? 10 years ago it was nearly all upstream congestion.

Usage patterns have changed. Usage is more asymmetrical now. VM are in the process of rolling out 4 upstream bonding too, a bunch of areas already have it in production.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

There are very few upstream capacity issues on the network.

Your TBB test is horrible for 8:29am. If that is local congestion I'd expect the service to be unusable at peak times if the node is already saturated before 9am.

It's very similar all day, there isn't much variation. Just about all my usage is either Steam (I have about 8TB of games installed, just keeping up with the updates keeps it busy when I boot my main PC), Torrents, or Newsgroups on my server, all of which max out the connection happily.

I rarely if ever drop below the 70/80mbit single threaded results shown here, and my only other option would be FTTC at ~35mbit, so still better off on VM for me.

Not that I can remember the last time I downloaded something with a single thread!

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

seems to be flip flop? 10 years ago it was nearly all upstream congestion.

Usage patterns have changed. Usage is more asymmetrical now. VM are in the process of rolling out 4 upstream bonding too, a bunch of areas already have it in production.

Don't forget as well that other than Gamer 200, and HW300/Vivid 300, everyone has strong traffic management controls on their upstream. Even Vivid 200 can go down to what, 3mbit if you try to use much upload.

My area is still 2 upstream channels