Help in interpeting speed test results please

[HammerHeadHank]

Hi,I am considering Using a VOIP service to save money.I tried the broadband speed tests and the results vary.Is this to be expected?
The Broad band service I currently have is Roadrunner.There specs. are as follows.Basic is download 5 MBps.Upload speed is 384 kbs.
Here are my broad band speed results:

« SpeedGuide.net Speed Test Results »
855 kbps down (~0.85 Mbps, 104 KB/s)↓
454 kbps up (~0.45 Mbps, 55 KB/s)↑
1024 KB downloaded in 9.813 seconds
250 KB uploaded in 4.515 seconds
Tested on: 2006-10-06 13:23 EDT
Provider: columbus.res.rr.com
Tested from: http://www.dvrsupply.com/
Test Validation ID: http://www.speedguide.net/speedtest/stats.php?t_id=HD8KFI3523M

As to my question I know I need to obtain at least 90% of these figures,but the conversion rate has got me confused.

454 kbps= 55 kb/s? upload speed aren't the units the same ? Kbps=kb/s.

The VOIP requirements state if I choose to surf the web and talk on the phone I need at least 512 kbs.According to my test results,If I'm understanding them correctly I have a long way to go to achieve the desired results,Don't I ?

I am currently using the TCP optimizer 2.03,With the connection speed to the max.

What other tweaks do you recommend I can do to try and get the 90% of my provider specs?

download roadrunner specs 5 MBpS. 90% = 4950000 bps= 4.95 Mbs right ?

Upload roadrunner specs 384 Kbs. 90% = 345600 Bps = 345 kbs right ?

Here are my TCP/IP Analyzer results :

TCP options string = 020405b40103030401010402

MTU = 1500
MTU is fully optimized for broadband.

MSS = 1460
Maximum useful data in each packet = 1460, which equals MSS.

Default TCP Receive Window (RWIN) = 1027840
RWIN Scaling (RFC1323) = 4 bits (scale factor of 8)
Unscaled TCP Receive Window = 64240

RWIN is a multiple of MSS
Other RWIN values that might work well with your current MTU/MSS:
513920 (MSS x 44 * scale factor of 8)
256960 (MSS x 44 * scale factor of 4)
128480 (MSS x 44 * scale factor of 2)
64240 (MSS x 44)

bandwidth * delay product (Note this is not a speed test):

Your TCP Window limits you to: 41113.6 kbps (5139.2 KBytes/s) @ 200ms
Your TCP Window limits you to: 16445.44 kbps (2055.68 KBytes/s) @ 500ms

MTU Discovery (RFC1191) = ON

Time to live left = 52 hops
TTL value is ok.

Timestamps (RFC1323) = OFF
Selective Acknowledgements (RFC2018) = ON

IP type of service field (RFC1349) = 00000000 (0)


One other question the Tcp analyzer and the ipconfig /all command prompt utility display two different IP addresses

I did follow the recommendations by unchecking all boxes in the connection page pertaining proxys.

I am using XP Pro for OS.
IE 7 for browser



Thank You, HammerHeadHank

[trogers]

Use the TCP Optimizer with these custom settings for optimizing:

General Settings tab:
Custom settings - check
Modify All Network Adapters - check
network adapter selection - your NIC
MTU - 1500
TTL - 64
TCP Receive Window - 128480
MTU Discovery - Yes
Black Hole Detect - No
Selective Acks - Yes
Max Duplicate ACKs - 2
TCP 1323 Options:
Windows Scaling - check
Timestamps - uncheck
Advanced Settings tab:
Max Connections per Server - 10
Max Connections per 1.0 Server - 20
LocalPriority - 5
Host Priority - 6
DNSPriority - 7
NetbtPriority - 8
Lan Browsing speedup - optimized
QoS: NonBestEffortLimit - 0
ToS: DisableUserTOSSetting - 0
ToS: DefaultTOSValue - 80
MaxNegativeCacheTtl - 0
NetFailureCacheTime - 0
NegativeSOACache Time - 0
LAN Request Buffer Size - 32768
Then select "Apply Changes" and reboot to take effect

[HammerHeadHank]

trogers Thank you very much for your quick reply.

Could you review these results,and give an opion.

before optimal settings with SG tcp optimizer.

WEB100 Enabled Statistics:
Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done
running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 486.94Kb/s
running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 2.35Mb/s

------ Client System Details ------
OS data: Name = Windows XP, Architecture = x86, Version = 5.1
Java data: Vendor = Sun Microsystems Inc., Version = 1.5.0_06

------ Web100 Detailed Analysis ------
Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found.
Link set to Half Duplex mode
Information: throughput is limited by other network traffic.
Good network cable(s) found
Normal duplex operation found.

Web100 reports the Round trip time = 143.07 msec; the Packet size = 1460 Bytes; and
There were 107 packets retransmitted, 285 duplicate acks received, and 315 SACK blocks received
The connection stalled 1 times due to packet loss
The connection was idle 0.31 seconds (3.1%) of the time
This connection is network limited 99.97% of the time.

Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to:
RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: ON
RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON
RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF
RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF
RFC 1323 Window Scaling: ON
Packet size is preserved End-to-End
Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End
Information: Network Address Translation (NAT) box is modifying the Client's IP address
Server says [204.xxx.xxx.xxx] but Client says [192.xxx.x.xxx]


after optimal changes with SG TCP optimizer.

WEB100 Enabled Statistics:
Checking for Middleboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Done
running 10s outbound test (client to server) . . . . . 484.96Kb/s
running 10s inbound test (server to client) . . . . . . 3.75Mb/s

------ Client System Details ------
OS data: Name = Windows XP, Architecture = x86, Version = 5.1
Java data: Vendor = Sun Microsystems Inc., Version = 1.5.0_06

------ Web100 Detailed Analysis ------
Cable modem/DSL/T1 link found.
Link set to Full Duplex mode
No network congestion discovered.
Good network cable(s) found
Normal duplex operation found.

Web100 reports the Round trip time = 164.09 msec; the Packet size = 1460 Bytes; and
There were 4 packets retransmitted, 87 duplicate acks received, and 86 SACK blocks received
The connection was idle 0 seconds (0%) of the time
This connection is receiver limited 17.15% of the time.
This connection is network limited 82.82% of the time.

Web100 reports TCP negotiated the optional Performance Settings to:
RFC 2018 Selective Acknowledgment: ON
RFC 896 Nagle Algorithm: ON
RFC 3168 Explicit Congestion Notification: OFF
RFC 1323 Time Stamping: OFF
RFC 1323 Window Scaling: ON
Packet size is preserved End-to-End
Server IP addresses are preserved End-to-End
Information: Network Address Translation (NAT) box is modifying the Client's IP address
Server says [204.xxx.xxx.xxx] but Client says [192.xxx.x.xxx]

Also if you notice that the IP addresses for the server and client are not one and the same.will this pose a problem? :confused:

my router is a Linsky wrt 54g version 5 with the latesed firmware to date flashed.

Thanks again.

HammerHeadHank

[trogers]

Web100 reports the Round trip time = 164.09 msec; the Packet size = 1460 Bytes; and
There were 4 packets retransmitted, 87 duplicate acks received, and 86 SACK blocks received
The connection was idle 0 seconds (0%) of the time
This connection is receiver limited 17.15% of the time.
This connection is network limited 82.82% of the time.


The reason for two different IP addresses is that your ISP has a web proxy at the 2nd address. This is normal with some ISPs.

Your signal quality is not too clear. Latency of 164ms is a little high from the normal 90-130ms.

Problem may be with your cable connections, splitter or some electromagnetic interference on your modem from other electrical device such as router, speakers, cordless phone.

See if you can move things about to bring your latency down.

[HammerHeadHank]

The reason for two different IP addresses is that your ISP has a web proxy at the 2nd address. This is normal with some ISPs.

Your signal quality is not too clear. Latency of 164ms is a little high from the normal 90-130ms.

Problem may be with your cable connections, splitter or some electromagnetic interference on your modem from other electrical device such as router, speakers, cordless phone.

See if you can move things about to bring your latency down.

Thank you again I will try what you suggested,And run the test again.

HammerHeadHank