[Dabhand16]

Britain 'failing' net speed tests

There is a huge gap between advertised broadband speeds and the actual speeds users can achieve, research has shown.
A survey by consumer group Which? found that broadband packages promising speeds of up to 8Mbps (megabits per second) actually achieved far less.

Tests of 300 customers' net connections revealed that the average download speed they were getting was 2.7Mbps.

Which? has called on regulator Ofcom and Trading Standards to launch a fresh investigation into UK broadband.

Misleading ads

The speed tests were prompted by complaints from members of the public, unhappy with the speeds of their broadband connections.

In the last 12 months more internet service providers (ISPs) have offered services, promising speeds of up to 8Mbps.


FACTORS AFFECTING SPEED
How many people are being served by your local telephone exchange
How close you are to the telephone exchange (the closer, the faster)
The length and gauge of the line from the exchange
Electromagnetic noise from other lines in a cable or wiring within your home
The modem you use

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has investigated several cases of misleading promotions, most recently asking Bulldog to make it clear in its adverts that speed was dependent on how far away from the exchange people lived.

It ruled that broadband providers could use the words "up to" 8Mbps when describing services as long as customers were likely to get close to those speeds.

The average speed achieved in the Which? trials was 2.7Mbps, with the lowest coming in at under 0.09Mbps, barely at dial-up rates, and the maximum only reaching 6.7Mbps.

"It is shocking that internet service providers can advertise ever-increasing speeds that seem to bear little resemblance to what most people can achieve in reality," said which.co.uk editor Malcolm Coles.

"If it's unlikely that you'll reach the advertised speed it should be made clear up front, so that you know with some certainty what you're buying," he added.

Lack of demand?

Ofcom told the BBC News website that it was monitoring the situation.

"If we get increasing complaints we may look at what more can be done. We are working closely with the ASA and it is very important that consumers know what they are getting and what they are paying for," said an Ofcom spokeswoman.

According to a Which? survey, done in conjunction with the speed tests, only one in 10 of its members thought that a broadband service advertised as up to 8Mbps would actually deliver the top speed.

Tim Johnson from analyst firm Point Topic believes that people are generally resigned to the fact that they are not going to get super-fast broadband any time soon.

"There is currently small demand for 8Mbps and we are in the early days for things that need that kind of bandwidth. The fact is that video generally is not served at those speeds even if you could receive it," he said.

A BT spokesman confirmed that 8Mbps would be a rarity for users.

"Virtually no-one will get it. The laws of physics start applying as soon as it leaves the exchange and you would have to live on top of the exchange to get the full 8 megabits," he said.

BT is currently upgrading its exchanges as part of its 21st Century Network (21CN) programme. It will allow for broadband speeds of up to 24Mbps and will start to be made available from early 2008.

Source: BBC

[Dave]

About time ...I only get 1.9 Mbps on 8Mbps service. At previous property I complained about speed & was told as long as it was above 512K there was nothing they would do



So what speed do you recieve ??

[Mr Blue Sky]

heres mine,



im with aol paying for 2mb/s and due for a free upgrade to 4mb/s this month so i will have to wait and see what happens with that (thats if they do it this month !) so im recieving pretty much what im paying for

[Dabhand16]

I've got BT 'up to 8mbs' broadband. I was advised that in my area, I could expect 5.5 mbs. When I checked, I got 5624 download and 338 upload on the first test, then 6538/337 on the second, 6178/362 on the third.

[VikingPhotography]

I'm way happy with Sky Broadband Max package - advertised as 'up to 16Mbps' and here's what I pull down:



When you factor for the distance to exchange (approx 1km of cable), network congestion and overheads, it's really not bad to be getting about 75% of the theoretical maximum bandwith.

More critical for me is blazing fast uploads... if a job isn't a rush one, I like to send my photos to the agencies from my home PC. That said, my 3G laptop card from T-Mobile is no slouch either... I can get around 400kbps in an area with good 3G coverage.

I compare the above to the time when I was with Telewest on a 10Mbps package, I was getting results closer to 30% of maximum at best... there's was so much traffic on their network that it was like dial-up at peak times.

[Gary Bagshawe]

Im with AOL platinum, don't know if this is a good result or not.

[Angela]

Mine seems pretty crap!!

[Dave]

All according Angela ...if you are paying for 1Mbs (1000Kbs) then your getting near full amount . Seems we all have a way to go to beat our current speed freak VP

[spxxxx]

Mine is as advertised - upto 8Mbs - same money per month as I was paying for a 1Mbs service

[sgotwr]

Pipex up to 8mb package, and I am only about 200 yards from the exchange.
When I tried the speed test from the Maidenhead server, (the recommended server), the speed almost halved, so it's worth trying different servers.

Alwyn

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Dave

All according Angela ...if you are paying for 1Mbs (1000Kbs) then your getting near full amount . Seems we all have a way to go to beat our current speed freak VP

Actually you're right - that was at work and I suspect we are only paying for 1mb.

This is home where I am paying for up to 8mbs



Which seems to compare quite well with everyone else - be interesting to see if that improves when my ethernet is connected again. I'm told USB connection is slower?