***my Dsl Speed***

**Dalegas** · 08-04-2003, 01:17 AM

Yawn....

REAL 512kbps.

Even so.. I get bored..

btw shn....wtf is that machine????.... U_U.-...

**Izagaia** · 08-04-2003, 02:44 AM

Originally posted by Xilo@3 August 2003 - 11:37
You do know thats megaBITS per second right? So:

1 Mb = 1,048,576 bits
2.8 Mb * 1,048,576 bits = 2,936,012.8 bits
8 bits = 1 byte
2,936,012.8 bits / 8 bits = 397,001.6 bytes
1,024 bytes = 1 kilobyte
397,001.6 bytes / 1,024 bytes = 358.4 kilobytes.

PS: And big deal, mine says 100Mbps...

Same here. I am using a DSL connection with my system network connections manager stating it runs @ 100Mbps...

If you perform a "through-test" of your system's connection, the results will be significantly different. My IP is clocking me at an actual speed of 674kbps connection and downloads at roughly 128kbps.

chalkmongoose · 08-04-2003, 04:07 AM

Mine are about what they are advertised as:
Details

Your raw speed was 721420.67 bits per second which is the same as:

Communications

721.4 kilobits per second
How communication devices are rated. Kilo means 1,000 and mega means 1,000,000. Examples include 56k modem and 10Mbit Ethernet

Storage

88.1 kilobytes per second
The way data is measured on your hard drive and how file sharing and FTP programs measure transfer speeds. Kilo is 1,024 and mega is 1,048,576.

1MB file download

11.6 seconds
The time it would take you to download a 1 megabyte file at this speed.

Rating

Compared to all connection types worldwide, yours is fantastic

**BawA** · 08-04-2003, 05:26 AM

[QUOTE=Xilo,3 August 2003 - 20:37]

i think u got 100Kbps not Mbps
MBps is not MegaByte its MegaBits

chalkmongoose · 08-04-2003, 05:30 AM

[quote]Originally posted by bawa@Klite_user@4 August 2003 - 05:26

Originally Posted by Xilo,3 August 2003 - 20:37

i think u got 100Kbps not Mbps

No, 100Mbs sounds right. That's the maximum amount of bits per second... For his card. I'd guess a 100Mb Ethernet card... Probably not wireless since you usually are hard pressed to find a 100Mb wireless card, unless you feel like fiddling with 802.11G...

**Busyman** · 08-04-2003, 05:49 AM

HEY
does anyone have a T1
then shut up
thats 1.544 Mbps (1544 Kbps)
Noone's connection actually gets their full bandwidth. Current protocols for DSL and cable are too inefficient.

By the way noone here can get an OC 192 or even an OC 3 (is 3 T3's muxed together) for that matter without a mux in their house.
Most of you guys don't know what the fuck your're talking about.
bawa thinks his ethernet connection is his real outside connection

chalkmongoose · 08-04-2003, 05:53 AM

Originally posted by Busyman@4 August 2003 - 05:49
HEY
does anyone have a T1
then shut up
thats 1.544 Mbps (1544 Kbps)
Noone's connection actually gets their full bandwidth. Current protocols for DSL and cable are too inefficient.

By the way noone here can get an OC 192 or even an OC 3 (is 3 T3's muxed together) for that matter without a mux in their house.
Most of you guys don't know what the fuck your're talking about.
bawa thinks his ethernet connection is his real outside connection

I happen to know quite a bit about network design and communication, as both me and my estranged father do work in that area. The only major limitation towards installing an OC192 would be cost, because after installing the equipment needed to properly run the plant, you'd be up to several hundred thousand monthly. Partial T3 should be fine for most of what people need these days.

EDIT:
Of course, you could pay additional fees and install fifty phone lines in your house, and then connect them all to fifty modems in your computer, link the modems together and get 56Kb per second rates multiplied by fifty, which leads to very sexy speeds.