Available Now: Buy the new iPhone 14, iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max from AT&T!
Get superfast AT&T Fiber internet
dannyloski's profile

New Member

 • 

12 Messages

Mon, Jun 27, 2022 1:42 PM

AT&T Internet 1000 Fiber Plan, but only getting 100-200Mbps via Ethernet

I just switched over yesterday from Spectrum to AT&T Fiber as it was just made available in my neighborhood (been waiting patiently for this lol). I went with the AT&T Internet 1000 plan, which offers 1Gbps speeds.  However, while my PC is connected via Ethernet I'm only getting 100-200Mbps.  Doing a speed test at https://www.att.com/support/speedtest/ gives me the below results:

So my gateway seems fine as it's getting the 1Gbps, but for some reason my PC is not getting anywhere close to that. Here's more info on the setup ...
 
Computer:
Lenovo Thinkpad X1 - Gen 1 ( specs)
Windows 10 64-bit
Intel Core i7
8GB RAM
Lenovo Thinkpad USB 3.0 Pro Docking Station ( specs)
 
Connection:
Ethernet Cable (Cat6a) connected from Port 4 of gateway to the Lenovo Thinkpad USB 3.0 Pro Docking Station.  This docking station features a Gigabit Ethernet Port and is connected via USB 3.0 to the PC.  The Network Adapter properties page shows the link speed of 1000/1000 Mbps.
 
AT&T Fiber Gateway:
Model BGW320-505
Firmware 3.17.5
 
Troubleshooting Done:
  • I tried a few different Cat5e, Cat6, and Cat6a Ethernet cables, but problem persists.
  • Set Ethernet Adapter's settings to 1.0 Gbps Full Duplex as well as Gateway's Port 4 settings to 1G full duplex, but problem persists.
  • Tried different ports on the back of the Gateway, but problem persists.
  • Removed docking station and connected PC via USB 3.0 to Gigabit Ethernet Adapter dongle (specs), but problem persists.

 

Any helpful tips or insights to try and get better speeds on my PC?  Appreciate any and all help.  Thanks in advanced!

New Member

 • 

12 Messages

3分前

@tonydi yeah, not sure what's going on either.  I don't see the pics I uploaded and did notice my last post where I had the pictures is showing as "Edited" at the bottom and I didn't edit it.  Maybe a moderator decided to edit the post for me?  Not sure why.

New Member

 • 

12 Messages

3分前

I went back and re-added the pics to the post.  It was edited by a moderator because I used the acronym of "What The Heck" but the vulgar version of it.  Apparently it's against community guidelines to use that acronym, my apologies as it was not meant in an offensive way!  When they edited the post, it deleted the pictures/results I had uploaded.  Not sure why @tonydi's posts were deleted.

JefferMC

ACE - Expert

 • 

29.8K Messages

3分前

Probably got caught when the moderator was editing.  The forum software doesn't seem all that bright.  

New Member

 • 

12 Messages

3分前

So, on that last posts that was edited the pictures show the huge difference in speed test results.  Through the App I got 773/830 Mbps versus via the browser I got 78/143 Mbps (down/up).  Tests were both done to the same server (Frontier in Miami).  I get what you mentioned @JefferMC about all the different factors that can take part in impacting the speed test's results, but you think it would be this huge of a difference from app to browser?

I keep getting great numbers when doing the Speedtest via the App to the Frontier server in Miami.  However, as soon as I switch to an Orlando-based server my download speed results drop significantly with the latest being 268/783 Mbps to Century Link in Orlando.

I retested to the default Ookla selected AT&T server in Daytona Beach and got 351/820 Mbps via the App.  Why they're routing the traffic through Atlanta is beyond me though.

I'm unsure what to make of all this or how to move forward (if there's even anything else that I could do).

JefferMC

ACE - Expert

 • 

29.8K Messages

3分前

Your "real world" (vs. speed test) speed will depend on where you normally access data.  If you pull it from china, you'll likely never see gigabit data anyway.  If you pull it from a server in the Frontier data center in Miami, well, then you might get gigabit.   Local Orlando resources on CenturyLink will apparently not be fast, due to routing to Atlanta and apparently other issues with the peering.

I guess my question would be how widespread is this routing issue; if it's only CenturyLink then it might just be a bad peering situation that will (hopefully) get worked out. 

ATTHelp

Community Support

 • 

199.9K Messages

3分前

It looks like you may need a new gateway to fix get your speeds to where they're supposed to be, dannyloski.

 

Meet us in the Direct Messages, so we can get started. Look for the chat icon next to the bell icon in the upper right corner of the Forums.

 

Talk to you soon!

 

Aminah, AT&T Community Specialist

JefferMC

ACE - Expert

 • 

29.8K Messages

3分前

Aminah, a new gateway isn't going to fix a problem that doesn't happen when he changes destinations or software.  I know that shipping a gateway is the cheap answer to everything.  Except it's not.

If you want to fix a problem, figure out why routing from AT&T Orlando to CenturyLink Orlando has to go through Atlanta.  Get a network engineer on that.

New Member

 • 

12 Messages

3分前

@ATTHelp I replied to your DM.

 

@JefferMC I agree, I doubt a new Gateway is going to fix the issue.  It has to be more in-depth and take some actual footwork from a higher tier support to actually find/correct the issue.  But hey, if AT&T is willing to swap out the Gateway for me, I'll entertain it. Not holding my breath in it actually being the solution though.

 

If you're interested, I did a TRACERT to a few of the Ookla Speedtest server hosts in Orlando, FL and here's the results on that:

 

C:\Users\danny>tracert orlando.speedtest.centurylink.net

Tracing route to orl-speedtest-01.inet.qwest.net [205.171.98.14]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  dsldevice.attlocal.net [192.168.1.254]
  2     3 ms     1 ms     2 ms  104-183-116-1.lightspeed.dybhfl.sbcglobal.net [104.183.116.1]
  3     3 ms     3 ms     3 ms  99.168.25.184
  4     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  5     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  6     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  7    19 ms    19 ms    20 ms  32.130.16.197
  8    12 ms    15 ms    19 ms  4.68.62.225
  9    14 ms    15 ms    14 ms  4.69.219.146
 10    13 ms    18 ms    13 ms  Lumen-level3-Atlanta.Level3.net [4.68.62.94]
 11    18 ms    18 ms    18 ms  orlf-agw1.inet.qwest.net [67.14.55.126]
 12    19 ms    18 ms    18 ms  orlando.speedtest.centurylink.net [205.171.98.14]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\danny>tracert speed-server1.summit-broadband.com

Tracing route to speed-server1.summit-broadband.com [216.189.211.34]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  dsldevice.attlocal.net [192.168.1.254]
  2     2 ms     2 ms     1 ms  104-183-116-1.lightspeed.dybhfl.sbcglobal.net [104.183.116.1]
  3     3 ms     2 ms     2 ms  99.168.25.184
  4     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  5     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  6     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  7    15 ms    17 ms    14 ms  32.130.16.203
  8    15 ms    14 ms    13 ms  ae4.cr4-atl2.ip4.gtt.net [173.241.128.81]
  9    24 ms    23 ms    23 ms  xe-1-0-2.cr1-orl1.ip4.gtt.net [89.149.134.146]
 10    23 ms    22 ms    22 ms  ip4.gtt.net [69.174.2.98]
 11    19 ms    18 ms    18 ms  216.239.191.165
 12    19 ms    18 ms    17 ms  speed-server1.summit-broadband.com [216.189.211.34]

Trace complete.

C:\Users\danny>tracert speedtest.orld.fl.wtsky.net

Tracing route to speedtest.orld.fl.wtsky.net [208.64.158.14]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  dsldevice.attlocal.net [192.168.1.254]
  2     1 ms     3 ms    <1 ms  104-183-116-1.lightspeed.dybhfl.sbcglobal.net [104.183.116.1]
  3     2 ms     2 ms     2 ms  99.168.25.184
  4     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  5     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  6     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  7    14 ms    16 ms    15 ms  32.130.16.203
  8    14 ms    13 ms    14 ms  192.205.33.42
  9    13 ms    17 ms    13 ms  silicondesertinternational-svc070194-ic356003.ip.twelve99-cust.net [62.115.42.217]
 10     *        *        *     Request timed out.
 11    22 ms    21 ms    22 ms  69.1.195.78
 12    22 ms    21 ms    21 ms  208.64.158.255
 13    23 ms    21 ms    22 ms  208.64.158.14

Trace complete.

C:\Users\danny>tracert orlflspeedtest.nexgencom.com

Tracing route to orlflspeedtest.nexgencom.com [68.68.214.52]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  dsldevice.attlocal.net [192.168.1.254]
  2     2 ms     1 ms     2 ms  104-183-116-1.lightspeed.dybhfl.sbcglobal.net [104.183.116.1]
  3     3 ms     3 ms     2 ms  99.168.25.184
  4     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  5     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  6     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  7    18 ms    15 ms    15 ms  32.130.17.65
  8    14 ms    13 ms    13 ms  be7018.ccr41.atl04.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.11.85]
  9    14 ms    14 ms    30 ms  be2847.ccr41.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.6.101]
 10    21 ms    20 ms    19 ms  be2449.rcr21.jax01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.46.98]
 11    19 ms    20 ms    19 ms  be3641.rcr52.mco01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.24.22.125]
 12    23 ms    22 ms    21 ms  be2442.nr61.b005287-0.mco01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.24.54.118]
 13    21 ms    20 ms    22 ms  38.104.88.98
 14    21 ms    21 ms    20 ms  68-68-214-230-static.t3com.net [68.68.214.230]
 15  68-68-214-230-static.t3com.net [68.68.214.230]  reports: Destination host unreachable.

Trace complete.

C:\Users\danny>tracert rad1.832communications.com.prod.hosts.ooklaserver.net

Tracing route to rad1.832communications.com [148.59.90.5]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  dsldevice.attlocal.net [192.168.1.254]
  2     2 ms     6 ms     1 ms  104-183-116-1.lightspeed.dybhfl.sbcglobal.net [104.183.116.1]
  3     2 ms     2 ms     2 ms  99.168.25.184
  4     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  5     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  6     *        *        *     Request timed out.
  7    16 ms    16 ms    14 ms  32.130.17.65
  8    13 ms    13 ms    14 ms  be7018.ccr41.atl04.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.11.85]
  9    13 ms    14 ms    15 ms  be2848.ccr42.atl01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.6.117]
 10    20 ms    23 ms    19 ms  be2450.rcr21.jax01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.54.46.102]
 11    19 ms    19 ms    21 ms  be3639.rcr51.mco01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.24.19.133]
 12    21 ms    20 ms    21 ms  be2227.nr61.b005287-0.mco01.atlas.cogentco.com [154.24.54.114]
 13    22 ms    21 ms    22 ms  38.142.101.218
 14    18 ms    20 ms    18 ms  148.59.90.5

Trace complete.

 

I also found this cool tool called sSpeedtest (https://www.dcmembers.com/skwire/download/sspeedtest/).  I ran it for all the servers in the Orlando, FL area and this was the result from my PC.

 

JefferMC

ACE - Expert

 • 

29.8K Messages

3分前

Clearly your connection is capable of near Gigabit speed.  There could be several things that could be in your way:

1) Obviously the peering in most cases runs through Atlanta.  This is not ideal for local sites, but insignificant when reaching national/international destinations.

2) You are not consistently getting your full pipe to every speedtest server, and this may just be how busy the AT&T network in Orlando and/or the peering connections in Atlanta are.

3) Since your gateway is consistently reporting the full pipe, it's probably not the fact that your fiber is shared with up to 31 (or 63, depending on the fiber protocol in use there, GPON or XGS-PON) of your neighbors and if more than a handful of you run speed tests (or otherwise exercise their full subscribed capacity), you will all start to notice.  But it can be a factor.

(edited)

JefferMC

ACE - Expert

 • 

29.8K Messages

3分前

@dannyloski , @tonydi is inexplicably unable to post in this thread now, so he asked me to thank you for the "cool sspeedtest tool" and to say that he had been going to suggest downloading some ISOs or some such to get a different take on your speed.

tonydi

ACE - Guru

 • 

7.3K Messages

3分前

Well, looks like I'm allowed back in today.  Stupid forum software! 🙄

Anyway, yeah, we haven't really seen any real world confirmation of the speeds so I thought that might be useful. 

New Member

 • 

12 Messages

3分前

Last night I was to put it to the test finally. I downloaded a game update through my Xbox Series X console that’s connected via Ethernet to the Gateway. Update was about 25GB in size and the console was averaging ~400 Mbps during the download process. All this while 2 iPads were streaming video (one YouTube and the other Netflix) and my wife was playing on the other Xbox One X console we have located in the living room connected via Wi-Fi.

tonydi

ACE - Guru

 • 

7.3K Messages

3分前

That's really encouraging, especially given that game servers often throttle downloads.

Are we calling it good at this point?

New Member

 • 

12 Messages

3分前

I think so, at least for now. I will continue to monitor the service. It’s only day 3 with it, so I’ll give it a few weeks and see the behavior. If it degrades, then I will reach out to AT&T for support.

Want to take the opportunity to thank both @JefferMC and @tonydi for their assistance! Greatly appreciate it!

Need help?
New to AT&T Community?
New to the AT&T Community? Start by visiting the Community How-To.
New to the AT&T Community?
Visit the Community How-To.