24 package seems.... not so great on download.

Teacher

24 package seems.... not so great on download.

I had upgraded to the 24/3 package a week ago.  Overall the speed is good, but download is not hitting close to 24.  the highest I have gotten has been around 21 most of the time between 17-19.   The upload is better, I am getting around 2.7 there.  I used the realtime tool and honestly dont understand everything.  Except for the Vrad distance says it is around 1,800 feet and it is more like 500 or less feet.  The house has new wiring coming in from the interface box to the RG directly.  I have noticed some of the readings are Amber and red.  So I was wondering if someone could take a look at these numbers and let me know if any of this could be a reason why I am not getting close to the 24Mb down?

 

Thanks3006i0A3EE18237306EAA

Tags (1)
1,242 Views
Message 1 of 17
Expert

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

Your pic hasn't been approved yet.

Message 2 of 17
ACE - Expert

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

The distance the signal travels via the wires from the VRAD can be much higher than the line of sight distance.  Also, this utility calculates that distance based on the various measurements of signal strength and typical plant characteristics that may not exactly apply in your situation.


The tool is currently saying that your connection between the RG and the VRAD isn't capable of handling the 32/5 profile you're currently configured for.  Please capture and post the information from the bitloading tab as well so that we can advise you further.  If you connection cannot be improved, you may have to drop down to 25/2 profile which I think would mean no 24/3 HSI.

 

Also note that the bandwidth at which you download may also be constrained on the other end.

*The views and opinions expressed on this forum are purely my own. Any product claim, statistic, quote, or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer, provider, or party.
Message 3 of 17
Teacher

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

I would normally understand the bandwidth being saturated if it was from one or two speed test site.  However, when it is from speakeasy.net at 4 different location and from speedtest.net at at least 5-7 different location.  I tend more to think it's on my end. 

 

 

here is the bitloading.3012iDE07696B134E01D4

Tags (1)
Message 4 of 17
Scholar

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

I'll let the other more qualified guys comment on the results of the UverseRT output - but a quick question - are you running the speed tests from a computer that is wired to the RG, or are you going wireless?

Tags (1)
Message 5 of 17
Teacher

Re: 24 package seems.... other so great on download.

Some of the time it is wired and other times it is wireless.

Tags (1)
Message 6 of 17
Teacher

Re: 24 package seems.... other so great on download.

Any ideas?

Message 7 of 17
Expert

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

Bitloading looks pretty normal for your distance.  However, your line is only barely carrying the 32/5 profile.  There's very few reserve bits left.

 

I would say the current speeds you're getting out of the 24/3 package are probably the best you'll be able to get.  If you went down to the 25/2 profile on the line, you'd be limited to the 18/1.5 internet package, but it may run a bit more consistent with the download speeds.

 

You may want to leave the line alone at this point unless your performance begins to suffer in a more impactful way.

 

Tags (1)
Message 8 of 17

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

My opinion is that your speeds are pretty good and you should be satisfied with them, especially since U-verse Realtime is telling you your connection is not really suitable for the service you're requesting.  You will never get the absolute full 24 megabits when downloading.  

Tags (1)
Message 9 of 17
Teacher

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

Thanks for the reply SomeJoe, could this be due to a degraded line?  I mean even the premtech made the comment that I am so close to the Vrad my speeds should be blazen.

Tags (1)
Message 10 of 17
Teacher

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.


MyDogHasFleas wrote:

My opinion is that your speeds are pretty good and you should be satisfied with them, especially since U-verse Realtime is telling you your connection is not really suitable for the service you're requesting.  You will never get the absolute full 24 megabits when downloading.  


So in your opinion when someone is paying for a teir that shoud be in a range or maybe 20-24 and the person is only getting 15-19.  You would tell them that they should be satisifed with that connection rate?  I guess maybe I would, if they would keep me at this unstable connection rate and drop the price to say a 18 teir  range since we know the connection is closer to that than the actual 24 I am paying for. 

 

If you look at the stats now, they have changed to a point where it suggests i shoudl be on the 32/5 profile.

 

3018i48770947EA565D47

Tags (1)
Message 11 of 17
Scholar

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

SomeJoe is the one to comment on what UverseRealtime is saying about your line ...

 

But your reply to my question of whether you are running speedtests wireless or wired was ... both.  I hate to keep asking questions, but are your wired test results more consistent and closer to the 20+ mb and wireless the lower ones?

 

You may be chasing two different issues here.  802.11g's actual performance will vary greatly with any manner of interference, distance, vendor compatibility, other wireless devices on the network, etc. 

 

A wired connection is the only way to measure very accurately and isolate what the RG and service are actually getting.

 

 

Tags (1)
Message 12 of 17
Expert

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

 


mike44107 wrote:

Thanks for the reply SomeJoe, could this be due to a degraded line?  I mean even the premtech made the comment that I am so close to the Vrad my speeds should be blazen.


 

It's possible there's a line issue there, although there's not anything real obvious showing up on the bitloading graph.  The drop-off in bitload in the upper frequencies though does look a little odd, but it's not necessarily indicative of anything in particular.

 

The only way to truly find out is to have a premises tech come check the line, and he should have I&R check for a bridge tap.  If they find one, it could explain much.  At 1800 feet, I would expect more max rate -- in the 45 Mbps range instead of 40 Mbps.

 

Tags (1)
Message 13 of 17
Teacher

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

 


bsdsmb wrote:

SomeJoe is the one to comment on what UverseRealtime is saying about your line ...

 

But your reply to my question of whether you are running speedtests wireless or wired was ... both.  I hate to keep asking questions, but are your wired test results more consistent and closer to the 20+ mb and wireless the lower ones?

 

You may be chasing two different issues here.  802.11g's actual performance will vary greatly with any manner of interference, distance, vendor compatibility, other wireless devices on the network, etc. 

 

A wired connection is the only way to measure very accurately and isolate what the RG and service are actually getting.

 

 


I understand what you are saying about the speed tests with a wired connection.  Trust me, I have ran my speed tests on wire.  However, it has shown no improvement to run it either way.  Someone else had me download a file from a FCC website that was 600MB to see what the speed was running at.  First I was getting around 2.40MB download speed then within the matter of seconds it dropped down to 1.97MB and completed at that speed.  Which if I am not mistaking that comes out to about.... 16Mb-15Mb download speed.  

 

Tags (1)
Message 14 of 17
Highlighted
Teacher

Re: 24 package seems.... not so great on download.

 


SomeJoe7777 wrote:

 


mike44107 wrote:

Thanks for the reply SomeJoe, could this be due to a degraded line?  I mean even the premtech made the comment that I am so close to the Vrad my speeds should be blazen.


 

It's possible there's a line issue there, although there's not anything real obvious showing up on the bitloading graph.  The drop-off in bitload in the upper frequencies though does look a little odd, but it's not necessarily indicative of anything in particular.

 

The only way to truly find out is to have a premises tech come check the line, and he should have I&R check for a bridge tap.  If they find one, it could explain much.  At 1800 feet, I would expect more max rate -- in the 45 Mbps range instead of 40 Mbps.

 


What are the chances of them sending out a premise tech?  My whole concern is if I decide to get the TV service turned back on by December.  This is really going to cause some issues with the tv wanting bandwidth and the computers.  The readings from the realtime program bounce back and fourth one time the profile I am on looks good, Then the next day it will read lower.  It just appears to me like something is unstable? 

 

Tags (1)
Message 15 of 17
You must type a description before you click preview or reply.
Share this topic
Announcements

Welcome to the AT&T TV Hub!
We have some helpful articles located under TV Hot Topics.
On the left you will see DIRECTV and U-verse TV links. Click on those links for more information regarding Apps, Billing, and TV troubleshooting tips.

Additional Support