My Thunderbolt is rooted and LTE is live throughout campus down the road from me at Notre Dame. I get 4G speeds on my Thunderbolt just fine, all the way up to 40mbps down and 15mbps up.....But when I tether to my laptop, I get 2-3mbps down and 1mbps up AT BEST!
I have tried every free tethering app out there, both wireless and wired.
What am I doing wrong? Is there some sort of trick to doing it?
Thanks!
flooritnfly said:
My Thunderbolt is rooted and LTE is live throughout campus down the road from me at Notre Dame. I get 4G speeds on my Thunderbolt just fine, all the way up to 40mbps down and 15mbps up.....But when I tether to my laptop, I get 2-3mbps down and 1mbps up AT BEST!
I have tried every free tethering app out there, both wireless and wired.
What am I doing wrong? Is there some sort of trick to doing it?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you must be in an area where they haven't throttled your normal phone data usage yet. i've tried out 4G in a few places and seem to get around 3 - 5Mbps max (1 - 3Mbps average) with my phone as is. when i tether it's slower.
and yes, i've tried different rom/kernal/radio combinations
voxigenboy said:
you must be in an area where they haven't throttled your normal phone data usage yet. i've tried out 4G in a few places and seem to get around 3 - 5Mbps max (1 - 3Mbps average) with my phone as is. when i tether it's slower.
and yes, i've tried different rom/kernal/radio combinations
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They have not "throttled " my data either because I'm getting great data speeds.
As for tethering. When I was doing that I was getting a little less than what my smartphone got. But my tablet was still getting 12-15Mbps download speeds.
Sent from my ADR6400L using xda premium
flooritnfly said:
My Thunderbolt is rooted and LTE is live throughout campus down the road from me at Notre Dame. I get 4G speeds on my Thunderbolt just fine, all the way up to 40mbps down and 15mbps up.....But when I tether to my laptop, I get 2-3mbps down and 1mbps up AT BEST!
I have tried every free tethering app out there, both wireless and wired.
What am I doing wrong? Is there some sort of trick to doing it?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know a why? Because 14 megabits per second is about 2.5 megabytes per second
give or take a little
Now the speedtest app measures using megabits, your computer uses megabytes. See the confusion?
It's a clever sales 'trick' to say 20 megabits per second instead of about 3.5 to 4 megabytes. And I think it's a dirty little trick that they shouldn't use
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk
superchilpil said:
You know a why? Because 14 megabits per second is about 2.5 megabytes per second
give or take a little
Now the speedtest app measures using megabits, your computer uses megabytes. See the confusion?
It's a clever sales 'trick' to say 20 megabits per second instead of about 3.5 to 4 megabytes. And I think it's a dirty little trick that they shouldn't use
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think I'll buy that explanation. And I'll agree it's stupid as hell since NOBODY uses bytes to measure serial data transfer. It's ALWAYS measured in bits. And there's reasons for it, too. ...just further confirms my belief that bandwidth tests are total BS.
loonatik78 said:
I think I'll buy that explanation. And I'll agree it's stupid as hell since NOBODY uses bytes to measure serial data transfer. It's ALWAYS measured in bits. And there's reasons for it, too. ...just further confirms my belief that bandwidth tests are total BS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never understood everyone wanting to post number in bits, since I'd say a good amount of the forum have no idea what megabits means in terms of their download speeds (other than more is better), but as you said, it's just a way for ISPs to make it look "super fast." It's about as relevant to most people as me telling the average American how fast I am driving in kilometers per hour or the current temperature in Celsius.
I suspect the reason no one posts their speed in bytes (despite most speedtests allowing you to change to that in the settings) is because of the same reasoning. When someone finds a user friendly app or browser that defaults to telling you your speed in kilobits per second, let me know, but until then showing everyone your bandwidth in Megabits per Second is silly. I mean even wget and curl on the command line use kilobytes by default, lol.
Not sure the megabit/megabyte explanation is completely accurate. It may be in this specific case but in general bits are always used for network traffic measurements (speedtests, nic speeds, etc) and bytes for storage measurements (hdd/sd space, etc). Unless the OP manually changed how it was being measured (or used a different site/tool than on the phone) which I suspect isn't the case since he would know he did it, it should still be in megabits.
Someone else noticed slower speeds when tethering to certain hardware but for some reason I can't remember the reasonable explanation for it at the time.
@OP: try tethering another device/phone and check through it.
I suppose this assumes the OP is using a similar tool/site (i.e. tried speakeasy on both).
yareally said:
I never understood everyone wanting to post number in bits, since I'd say a good amount of the forum have no idea what megabits means in terms of their download speeds (other than more is better), but as you said, it's just a way for ISPs to make it look "super fast." It's about as relevant to most people as me telling the average American how fast I am driving in kilometers per hour or the current temperature in Celsius.
I suspect the reason no one posts their speed in bytes (despite most speedtests allowing you to change to that in the settings) is because of the same reasoning. When someone finds a user friendly app or browser that defaults to telling you your speed in kilobits per second, let me know . I mean even wget and curl on the command line use kilobytes by default, lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason serial data transport is usually measured in bits and parallel data transport is measured in bytes is because serial transport must take into account transmission protocol and QoS overhead, whereas parallel data transport usually doesn't because much of those controls are handled via sideband. For instance parallel SCSI: SCSI3 (U2, U160, U320) specifies a 68 pin twisted pair, actively terminated data cable. Only 16 of those pairs are data channels though, the remaining 18 pairs are there for ID, QoS, and control protocol. In serial applications, such as SAS (Serial Attached SCSI), those features must be integrated, usually in a packet method, with the data stream, usually incurring a 20% tax on actual data throughput across the interconnect. Serial data ratings include that 20% as part of the data rate, whereas parallel data ratings usually do not. Therefore, a U320 implementation of SCSI can realistically achieve near the theoretical maximum of 320 megabytes per second (310 MB/s is pretty much bus saturation in practice) of real data transfer. However, a serial implementation of SAS rated for 6Gbit, transferring a theoretical 750MB/s, in practice will only transfer roughly 600MB/s assuming a mean protocol/QoS overhead of 20%. That's a significant loss of throughput, however, the loss isn't assumed. Some methods of serial transport take up more bandwidth with protocol, some less. It's not technically accurate to describe a physical interlink's transport capabilities in terms of what the applied protocol can provide since that can change. For instance, 1Gbit Ethernet can move 1Gbit, however, the protocol applied over that topology can vary yielding different actual data throughput results.
That's why serial is always measured in bits and parallel in bytes.
Related
I'm used to getting around 2.5-3Mb/s on 3g data. Yesterday, I got my Photon in the mail and activated and now my data is ridiculous. I'm averaging .02-.05Mb/s with the highest being .10mb/s. I've called tech support thrice and done a hard reset and nothing has helped. I keep reading about how great the data speeds are on this device and I feel like I didn't get an invite to the party.
Its not the Photon phone that has abysmal 3G/4G speeds. It is Sprint network's horrendous backhaul that is the problem. Can't transfer that much data running on a bunch of T1 line connections at the base station.
Good news is that the network vision project is suppose to upgrade the backhaul tremendously from T1 lines to fiber/microwave backhaul on their new multimodal towers. This is still a long term project that will take 3-5 years.
As I said, though, I normally get much faster speeds than what I've been able to get on this phone.
My speeds are around 2mb down. As good or better than my epic.
Sent from the best phone yet!
newalker91 said:
Menu - Settings - Wireless & Networks - Mobile Networks - Network Mode: Automatic
##3282# - Multimedia: Set addresses to 0.0.0.0 and ports to 0, set buffer to 10 (You will need your MSL from this, get it from Sprint)
Reboot (Leave off for 30 seconds)
Test your connection again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks. however, it's still completely terrible. time to visit a store, i suppose.
Ya'll need to get your terminology correct. Its not Mb/s its mb/s. I highly doubt you were any where near 2Mb/s on any 3g service. Lol
Sent from my MB855 using XDA Premium App
simmer down said:
I'm used to getting around 2.5-3Mb/s on 3g data. Yesterday, I got my Photon in the mail and activated and now my data is ridiculous. I'm averaging .02-.05Mb/s with the highest being .10mb/s. I've called tech support thrice and done a hard reset and nothing has helped. I keep reading about how great the data speeds are on this device and I feel like I didn't get an invite to the party.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah i know
tonight my data sucked, trying to get to dl in the market was a joke kept disconnecting
newalker91 said:
Unfortunately it is your terminology that is incorrect.
"M" stands for mega and should always be capitalized, on the other hand "b" stands for bit and "B" stands for byte. There are 8 bits to every byte, therefore 1 Mb (one megabit) is equal to .125 MB (.125 megabyte). This is the same when speaking in terms of kb (kilobit) and kB (kilobyte) except k (kilo) should always be lowercase.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No.............10 char
But seriously, you are right, that's what I get for reading and typing whilst on hold with my damn call center for 45 minutes. I hate call centers...
My bad though, ignore my previous.
-Dj
Nc area. Speeds have took a serious drive. Only at like 3am my speeds are descent.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
I get 5-6 on average and 9-10 at like 1 am
Me too. But what do I get during the day, when u actually use your phone. Something has changed. Is sprint throttling bandwidth?
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
JaY iZz BaKk said:
I get 5-6 on average and 9-10 at like 1 am
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where in NC are you b/c here in south raleigh they blow. i get MAX PEEK at like 4-5am and thats only about 0.8Mbps, and then by 9-10am the speeds drop off to roughly 0.25Mbps. I've seen many many times that by 4pm they drop off to 0.04Mbps. this of course is on 3G.
When i spoke to one of the techs on their forum he looked up and actually spoke with the Raleigh/Durham network market manager who said "switch upgrades scheduled for this weekend, BSC migrations, and optimization changes are scheduled to all take place by November 3. Site level solutions are in the pipeline with an ETA of 12/31 for noticeable market improvement"
Thanks for the update!!! I'm closer to the knightville area. I was really thinking about changing carriers but ill wait to after 12/31..
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
I work in downtown Raleigh and 3g speeds have dropped significantly since last year. It can be unbearable at times.
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
I'm at fort bragg and my speeds haven't changed much they have been a steady .3. I take trips up to chapple hill quite often and the 4g there is a steady 8megs and peaks at 10megs. But that's with speed test i still load YouTube faster than ATT and Verizon phones.
Sent from my phone
wow sorry I have T-Mobile >_>
I forget the 3D is a sprint phone mostly in the states
you guys make it sound like sprint has ever had fast 3G speeds, its always been well below other carriers and well below 1mbps
bloodrain954 said:
you guys make it sound like sprint has ever had fast 3G speeds, its always been well below other carriers and well below 1mbps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get around 800-1.2 sometimes higher... but no 4g... and I live in a town of 60k so its not well "developed" but getting better than T-Mobile in my area
MIUI Powered Shooter
welcome to sprint
I think the point has been well made (its always been bad). Their 3G network has been way way over sold. The decrease in speed lately is likely due to increased traffic of the holiday season. Also as it gets colder in all parts of the country more people spend more time in doors and the network gets even more use. Obviously as it gets later at night/early morning you see speeds increase slightly because less traffic.
This isn't something you will see get drastically better until many people are moved onto the LTE network, with very wide coverage, and a huge percentage of users have hardware capable of accessing that LTE network. This of course is if the LTE upgrade actually happens the way they say it will. People can say "oh it will work, you will see" all they want. That's great if it does, but don't count on everything working out the way they say it will. Hope it does, but don't count on it. It is highly dependent on third party funding, third party building up the network, not going bankrupt, their partners and investors not having funding problems, FCC approval, etc. All it takes for this to turn out like Wimax is for anyone of those things to go wrong.
Sprint has made the same promises with the same conditions they had when they tried to roll out Wimax. Clear had financial trouble, and the whole roll out stopped completely.
Well.. my 3G has always been between 2.0 - 2.5MB. My slowness until a few months ago. Some users say they are throttling because of the number of iPhone users. Don't know..
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
I'm in Garner NC and I get decent speeds usually .78mbps download on 3g I can't pull more than 1mbps until late night. On 4G i can get around 2-4 download and 1 to 1.6 upload.
bloodrain954 said:
you guys make it sound like sprint has ever had fast 3G speeds, its always been well below other carriers and well below 1mbps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not true, as of a few years ago sprint customers on average got higher 3g speeds than all the other carriers but since then everyone else has upgraded their networks while sprint has been on a steady decline.
Sad Panda said:
I think the point has been well made (its always been bad). Their 3G network has been way way over sold. The decrease in speed lately is likely due to increased traffic of the holiday season. Also as it gets colder in all parts of the country more people spend more time in doors and the network gets even more use. Obviously as it gets later at night/early morning you see speeds increase slightly because less traffic.
This isn't something you will see get drastically better until many people are moved onto the LTE network, with very wide coverage, and a huge percentage of users have hardware capable of accessing that LTE network. This of course is if the LTE upgrade actually happens the way they say it will. People can say "oh it will work, you will see" all they want. That's great if it does, but don't count on everything working out the way they say it will. Hope it does, but don't count on it. It is highly dependent on third party funding, third party building up the network, not going bankrupt, their partners and investors not having funding problems, FCC approval, etc. All it takes for this to turn out like Wimax is for anyone of those things to go wrong.
Sprint has made the same promises with the same conditions they had when they tried to roll out Wimax. Clear had financial trouble, and the whole roll out stopped completely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While most of what you say is true here the part about it not getting better till LTE is not likely true. Sprint has oversold their network but from what I've been told they are having to increase the switch capacity at the towers as they all bottleneck there on top of adding more T1 lines to.the stations. I was shown via email a screen shot of the work approved to add T1 line to my tower here and the guy said I had no idea how bad of a problem it is now, and they finally after all these years of seeing this happen are starting to get around to fixing it.
Just know come 2015 stuff here will be all good and most being complete by 2013. The thing I'm more mad about with sprint is the premier program going away.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
sgt. slaughter said:
While most of what you say is true here the part about it not getting better till LTE is not likely true. Sprint has oversold their network but from what I've been told they are having to increase the switch capacity at the towers as they all bottleneck there on top of adding more T1 lines to.the stations. I was shown via email a screen shot of the work approved to add T1 line to my tower here and the guy said I had no idea how bad of a problem it is now, and they finally after all these years of seeing this happen are starting to get around to fixing it.
Just know come 2015 stuff here will be all good and most being complete by 2013. The thing I'm more mad about with sprint is the premier program going away.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I definitely agree with the premier opinion. Using a T1 line to improve performance, that's a terrible idea in my opinion. I hope you were misinformed about that part, because in todays age using a T1 line from tower to backbone would be creating a bottleneck in and of itself. While a full T1 has bandwidth on its side it doesn't have throughput speed on its side. A full T1 has a mere 1.44mbit of throughput. That's a huge handicap. Todays' RESIDENTIAL coaxial cable lines are being fed by fiber optics and the throughput speed has effectively no technical limitations. We are seeing both DSL and cable at people's homes running at 50mbit, and as equipment keeps getting upgraded raising that number almost twice a year for Pennies cost of the ISP. So both the bandwidth and throughput of DSL and cable have far out preformed T1 lines and far cheaper to run and maintain.
Sprint has OC 192 lines for the backbone, and in many places have upgraded to OC 768. We are talking Terabits per second at the backbone level. 3G is capable of double or more throughput than T1's measly 1.44mbit, so that T1 just ends up creating bottle necks. If sprint was real cheap they wouldn't even be using full T1, but fractional and that 1.44 mbit gets cut into pieces. So....I really hope their solution to the bottle necks are not T1. If you were in fact correct, we basically won't ever see fast 3G
Sad Panda said:
I definitely agree with the premier opinion. Using a T1 line to improve performance, that's a terrible idea in my opinion. I hope you were misinformed about that part, because in todays age using a T1 line from tower to backbone would be creating a bottleneck in and of itself. While a full T1 has bandwidth on its side it doesn't have throughput speed on its side. A full T1 has a mere 1.44mbit of throughput. That's a huge handicap. Todays' RESIDENTIAL coaxial cable lines are being fed by fiber optics and the throughput speed has effectively no technical limitations. We are seeing both DSL and cable at people's homes running at 50mbit, and as equipment keeps getting upgraded raising that number almost twice a year for Pennies cost of the ISP. So both the bandwidth and throughput of DSL and cable have far out preformed T1 lines and far cheaper to run and maintain.
Sprint has OC 192 lines for the backbone, and in many places have upgraded to OC 768. We are talking Terabits per second at the backbone level. 3G is capable of double or more throughput than T1's measly 1.44mbit, so that T1 just ends up creating bottle necks. If sprint was real cheap they wouldn't even be using full T1, but fractional and that 1.44 mbit gets cut into pieces. So....I really hope their solution to the bottle necks are not T1. If you were in fact correct, we basically won't ever see fast 3G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll double check my emails tomorrow as it did sound wired to me for them to be running T1 lines into the towers. He said most are adding more T1 lines in to boost capacity and all.
Like i said i thought it was wired bc my previous work hell we ran DS3 connection...
Edit:double checked and it is a T1 line for voice and another T1 for EVDO capacity because my tower near my home is overflooded like most are evidently. This is also aside from the actual switch upgrades he said were planned soon too. All of this has zero to do with the network vision rollout unfortunately for me. Lol
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
sgt. slaughter said:
I'll double check my emails tomorrow as it did sound wired to me for them to be running T1 lines into the towers. He said most are adding more T1 lines in to boost capacity and all.
Like i said i thought it was wired bc my previous work hell we ran DS3 connection...
Edit:double checked and it is a T1 line for voice and another T1 for EVDO capacity because my tower near my home is overflooded like most are evidently. This is also aside from the actual switch upgrades he said were planned soon too. All of this has zero to do with the network vision rollout unfortunately for me. Lol
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ugh dude....this terrifies me. I hope he is trying to say they are adding more T1 lines. I think there is a way to combine multiple T1 lines to one tower. I'm not an expert on T1 lines, because that technology is getting very old (50+ years). T1 and T3 are the same thing. Basically T3 is just multiple T1 channels multiplexed, so you get close to 50 times the throughput. Even still there are so many cheaper alternatives I have no idea why they would choose this topology. Now, hopefully what they are really doing if they are using the technology is using many many T1 lines and multiplying the channels. However even a T5 only gets around 400 mbit. Again something like cable fed by fiber would be capable of that. I don't honestly have the expertise to guess whether it has enough bandwidth to keep speed high for 100+ people.
I just don't know enough to understand why they are doing it this way. Even if they were really using T3 it just wouldn't have enough bandwidth to hold very many people at high speed. Anymore than what they already have anyway. Someone with more knowledge needs to explain this to me.
Sad Panda said:
Ugh dude....this terrifies me. I hope he is trying to say they are adding more T1 lines. I think there is a way to combine multiple T1 lines to one tower. I'm not an expert on T1 lines, because that technology is getting very old (50+ years). T1 and T3 are the same thing. Basically T3 is just multiple T1 channels multiplexed, so you get close to 50 times the throughput. Even still there are so many cheaper alternatives I have no idea why they would choose this topology. Now, hopefully what they are really doing if they are using the technology is using many many T1 lines and multiplying the channels. However even a T5 only gets around 400 mbit. Again something like cable fed by fiber would be capable of that. I don't honestly have the expertise to guess whether it has enough bandwidth to keep speed high for 100+ people.
I just don't know enough to understand why they are doing it this way. Even if they were really using T3 it just wouldn't have enough bandwidth to hold very many people at high speed. Anymore than what they already have anyway. Someone with more knowledge needs to explain this to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea obv its adding more T1 lines. Not saying they are running their first line to the tower.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
I just got around to downloading the speed test app to see how fast me x2 is and after the first test here is what I got:
Ping:19ms
Down:4989kbps
Up:703kbps
Now I dont know much but something tells me that up speed is a little low.
Im on cm7 with the Mash up script and wifi on.
Will the numbers be different if Im on 3G? Are these numbers even remotely good?
Many thanks to all!!
Apps aren't always accurate. I'm not sure what you meant will it be different if I'm on 3G? Wifi and 3G will always differ, wifi is much faster depending on your provider, where 3g can lag at times
On 3g I usually hit 3d and 1 up
Where wifi I'm like 25 down 8 up out there about.
SMILE It's Not Illegal Yet
Your ping time and up/down speeds can vary even when connected to the same tower or wifi network depending the congestion at any given time on the bandwidth provider's network, among other factors.
Your seemingly low upload speed could be attributed to other devices on the wifi network using the upload bandwidth allotted by the isp at the time you performed the speed test. It may also be the case the connection supplying the wifi network is 6Mbps down/1Mbps up. Your upload and download speeds while on wifi can only be as good as the connection from the isp regardless of the settings on your device or how many other devices are on the network.
For what it's worth, I have a Verizon 3G Network Extender plugged into my wireless router, meaning that both my WiFi and the Network Extender can only supply a connection that at best is only as fast as my cable modem's connection to Comcast. Eliminating all conflicting variables (e.g. no other devices on the network when running tests), my Droid X2's 3G upload and download speeds are consistently slower than when I'm on wifi.
19ms is a pretty good ping time, btw.
Lots of useful info. Thanks guys!
Sent from my MB870 using xda premium
I have also been curious and suspicious of my 3g data speeds. When I was stock and rooted with 2.3.4 I would get on average 20-30 kilobytes/sec in my house with a poorer signnal of -87dbm this is using speed test and checking the down up speeds with the mobile network app that puts the speeds up on the notification bar. I used that to monitor downloads and web browsing speeds which agreed well with speed test. In a good coverage area -67dbm I achieved pretty consistently 130-230 kilobytes/sec. I am now running eclipse 2.0.4 with CMDA build.prop edit to increase 3g speeds. I ve only noticed a doubling of speed when in -87dbma area nut otherwise I cannot achieve anyhigher than 300 kilobytes/sec. I wonder could my radio be weak or bad? I thought 3g speeds would but up to ~500 or greater in really good coverage areas.
MunkinDrunky said:
I have also been curious and suspicious of my 3g data speeds. When I was stock and rooted with 2.3.4 I would get on average 20-30 kilobytes/sec in my house with a poorer signnal of -87dbm this is using speed test and checking the down up speeds with the mobile network app that puts the speeds up on the notification bar. I used that to monitor downloads and web browsing speeds which agreed well with speed test. In a good coverage area -67dbm I achieved pretty consistently 130-230 kilobytes/sec. I am now running eclipse 2.0.4 with CMDA build.prop edit to increase 3g speeds. I ve only noticed a doubling of speed when in -87dbma area nut otherwise I cannot achieve anyhigher than 300 kilobytes/sec. I wonder could my radio be weak or bad? I thought 3g speeds would but up to ~500 or greater in really good coverage areas.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never considered radio quality when I looked at my speeds. Exactly how one would go about checking ones radio quality is far beyond me. Its definitely something worth exploring (in my opinion)
Right I would also need to test other 3g speeds on a different phone on the same networko in the same area to rule out network end probs. Plus I got my DROID x2 used so that might be it there. Also if the radio heats up from persistent use that might reduce efficiency and lower speeds.
Those are fairly decent speeds. For a mobile device, that's about what I would expect. Your ping, 19ms, means that it takes .019 second to reach from your device to the Verizon servers, then to the servers of the sites you are accessing, and then finally back to your phone. Anything less than 80ms is considered good, so you have an excellent ping.
And to clarify, your upload speed will never be as high as your download speed. It's a throttling mechanism used by all (and I do mean all) internet providers of any kind to prevent things like hogging their bandwidth with torrents and the like. It's essentially an industry standard.
I can get 20MBPS down and 15 MBPS uploads on this phone, but my MS is around 110.
Does anyone know of any tweaks or changes I can make to improve the MS/ping?
Thanks!
MS just stands for milliseconds. You can't really talk about improving the ms
Anyway, ping is just the measurement of the time it takes for a signal to get to the server and back. It's a physical distance. The only way to improve it, is to move closer to the server.
On a mobile device, the signal is required to travel via mobile masts, and satalites, hence the ping will be higher than your desktop's wired link. You can't really improve it.
Hope this helps!
Chris.
Bloved said:
MS just stands for milliseconds. You can't really talk about improving the ms
Anyway, ping is just the measurement of the time it takes for a signal to get to the server and back. It's a physical distance. The only way to improve it, is to move closer to the server.
On a mobile device, the signal is required to travel via mobile masts, and satalites, hence the ping will be higher than your desktop's wired link. You can't really improve it.
Hope this helps!
Chris.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know what ping and latency and MS are, but thanks for the help.
I don't think you are right. Can't different radio/modem drivers change things? What about tweaks? For example, on Windows running Leatrix Latency Fix lowers latency a TON! Is there anything like this for a android phone? (Galaxy S3 - Verizon)
Zacharybinx34 said:
I know what ping and latency and MS are, but thanks for the help.
I don't think you are right. Can't different radio/modem drivers change things? What about tweaks? For example, on Windows running Leatrix Latency Fix lowers latency a TON! Is there anything like this for a android phone? (Galaxy S3 - Verizon)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, because of the nature of HSDPA (Even H+) you can't really get low latency, maybe around 100 milliseconds at best. The real low latency wireless currently on market is probably LTE, which still would get you around 20 - 50ms versus. 5-10ms on a wired connection.
Connection speed itself has nothing to do with latency 5mbps connection on same technology would have exactly same latency as 10mbps one. Higher speed connection technologies just tend to be bit more advanced infrastructure and that way have less latency.
Bloved said:
MS just stands for milliseconds. You can't really talk about improving the ms
Anyway, ping is just the measurement of the time it takes for a signal to get to the server and back. It's a physical distance. The only way to improve it, is to move closer to the server.
On a mobile device, the signal is required to travel via mobile masts, and satalites, hence the ping will be higher than your desktop's wired link. You can't really improve it.
Hope this helps!
Chris.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sormus said:
No, because of the nature of HSDPA (Even H+) you can't really get low latency, maybe around 100 milliseconds at best. The real low latency wireless currently on market is probably LTE, which still would get you around 20 - 50ms versus. 5-10ms on a wired connection.
Connection speed itself has nothing to do with latency 5mbps connection on same technology would have exactly same latency as 10mbps one. Higher speed connection technologies just tend to be bit more advanced infrastructure and that way have less latency.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have Verizon's LTE 4G service.
So shouldn't I be able to get around 20-50MS?
Any ideas?
Zacharybinx34 said:
I have Verizon's LTE 4G service.
So shouldn't I be able to get around 20-50MS?
Any ideas?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*sigh*
You're in the wrong f'ing forum, this is the forum for the INTERNATIONAL VERSION.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
nodstuff said:
*sigh*
You're in the wrong f'ing forum, this is the forum for the INTERNATIONAL VERSION.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad.
Sorry
Hey guys, I have fios with 50/25 mbps I can get around 40 with my laptop but my note is getting low teens. I switched from a wep security to wpa2 security whichever increased my wifi on my laptop but not on my phones (note 2 and ssg3).
Any ideas how to increase this? Am I missing a setting when connecting to wifi? At the moment, my 4g is faster than my wifi.
Upload speeds are fine... Actually higher than my download speeds. Seems like something is restricting my download speed.
Thanks in advance.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
koreankabachy said:
Hey guys, I have fios with 50/25 mbps I can get around 40 with my laptop but my note is getting low teens. I switched from a wep security to wpa2 security whichever increased my wifi on my laptop but not on my phones (note 2 and ssg3).
Any ideas how to increase this? Am I missing a setting when connecting to wifi? At the moment, my 4g is faster than my wifi.
Upload speeds are fine... Actually higher than my download speeds. Seems like something is restricting my download speed.
Thanks in advance.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have FiOS as well and encounter the same "problem...". My chrombook gets above 40 Mbps and my Note 2 gets around 18-25 even standing next to my router...I just think its the way it is to be honest...I really don't know but just wanted to share that I'm seeing the same thing here...it really doesn't inhibit my experience at all 18-25 Mbps is perfectly fine for cell phone downloads etc.
JamesPumaEnjoi said:
I have FiOS as well and encounter the same "problem...". My chrombook gets above 40 Mbps and my Note 2 gets around 18-25 even standing next to my router...I just think its the way it is to be honest...I really don't know but just wanted to share that I'm seeing the same thing here...it really doesn't inhibit my experience at all 18-25 Mbps is perfectly fine for cell phone downloads etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same set up here...with similar results. I did some research on this as my ipad2 (which is now in a drawer thanks to the Note 2 BTW) wasn't getting anywhere near the speed I would have expected despite it supposedly being N compatible (my lenovo laptop gets 45 Mbps down all the time). Best answer I could find is that not all wireless radios are equal and can't handle the same speeds.
I have a 25 download connection on FIOS, and am sitting in my living room about ten feet from my router. I just ran a test on my laptop and phone via speedtest.net, and got 24/5 on the laptop and 25/6 on the Note 2. Initially I was going to respond to your post and say I am used to the same result you are seeing, but I just proved myself wrong.
When I'm in other parts of the house however, I do tend to see more of a performance degradation on the phone vs. the laptop...I don't have any exact data at the moment since I'm feeling too lazy to walk upstairs and repeat the test, but I do know the falloff happens more rapidly on the phone with distance from the router.
This is what I get on my Comcast 50/15 connection.
Desktop hardwired: 59Mbps down / 12Mbps up
Desktop wireless: 55Mbps down / 12Mbps up
Note 2: 40Mbps down / 16Mbps up
My desktop on wireless connects at 144Mbps, while my Note 2 only connects at 72Mbps. Both are within 4' of the router. Both using the same SpeedTest.net server.
I've noticed a huge difference in WiFi speeds between the different radios, the one that had given me the best spotted on WiFi is VRAMC3. The one that gives me the best speed on LTE is L4. The speed definitely differs from which radio you flash, that's why I wish Samsung would give our devs access to their radio tools and let us build our own. I guarantee if they did we wouldn't see this kind of crap.
Sent from my SCH-I605 using XDA Premium HD app