Thread 106516118

ITT: We judge each other based on our internet speeds. I'll start.

>>106516118 (OP)
We also judge based on where you go to measure your internet speed

like 120 and 28 ish

>>106516193
>Fast

>mogs everyone ITT
>even more so because it only costs 70 bucks a month
>init7.net

Insane shit in here. I can't even watch 480p on youtube if the aspect ratio is wide. Small price to pay for living off the grid.

>>106516391
That's insane

>>106516391
Genuinely why do you even need that for a residence?

>>106516391
is this p2p or multiplexed TDMA faggotry?

>>106516504
>>106516551
>>106516627
VM with VPS connection newfags

>>106516391
>still posting that 2022 screenshot

Stop posting speeds you don't actually have

>>106516118 (OP)
Eurocuck or third worlder
>>106516167
American/Asian
>>106516193
Eurocuck
>>106516291
Inawoods americuck
>>106516352
American

>>106516352
I'd personally rather have a bit of additional loaded latency than be a bandwidthlit.
anything under 100mbps in 2025 is jewish, I don't care what your latency is.

>>106516746
Latency requires closeby infrastructure, so high latency is more jewish, not the opposite. Try living in the third world where the closest CDN or any other major datacenter is 70-120 ms away from you, you would want to kill yourself daily (I do )

>>106516713
>American/Asian
wrong

>>106516713
Missing one

>>106516391
Swiss

>>106516782
Sure, but this guy is acting superior when the others in the thread are posting generally decent latency.

Why should I give a fuck about 1-2ms ping vs my 10-20ms ping?

Again, i'll take my extra ~1900mbps and the added latency every single day of the week.

>>106516805
Probably didn't want to reply to the 3 year old bait, since the guy just posts the exact same speedtest anytime he wants to "show off".

I doubt he even has access to those speeds anymore or else he'd have a more recent test to post.

>>106516812
Fair enough
>>106516796
South american, SP/Santiago/Buenos Aires only.
>>106516391
Have no fucking clue, also, no way you are sending that to personal computer.

>>106516877
First thing I thought was american, major datacenter, did not disappoint lmao

>>106517221
Small perks of living near Ashburn.

>>106517199
the only relation i have with SA is that american fucked us more than the nazi

wifi on my T480

>>106516352
>>106516746
it's harder to get low load latency when you're hitting physical hardware limitations (1000BASE‑T bandwidth, NIC speed, router CPU speed, etc)
at 250mbit i was doing 0/1/1 or 1/1/1

>>106517287
Correct, at higher speeds it's a lot harder to handle loaded latency, won't stop retards from acting superior with their 50mbps though.

>>106517287
poorfag cope

>>106516118 (OP)
i've got 8gig from gfiber
its been a good upgrade from shitrum internet

>>106517313
What good does that do you without 10 gig hardware? Your processors won’t be able to decompress anything you download fast enough either

>>106517332
i have 10gig hardware

Two more days

>>106517426
damn, i feel sorry for you anon... hope it will get better

>>106517426
Starlink exists

>>106516391
Stop posting that shit, you butt hurt cretin! That's not even yours, you pathetic LARPer!

>>106516667
Nobody cares, you butt hurt cretin! Those internet connection speeds aren't yours anyway!

>>106516688
This!

He's obviously embarrassed to reveal his real internet connection speeds because they're so slow!

>>106517285
Not bad for wifi, though that ping isn't amazing.

>>106517537
I blame the ping on my ISP-provided router. wifi speeds are pretty good since I replaced the original card with an AX210 (wifi 6E) on all my machines, because I'm renting and drilling holes for ethernet cables isn't allowed. even my home server has to run on wifi kek

>>106517556
You can't use your own router?

>>106517600
technically ISPs where I live "allow" it but nobody does it because they make it pretty difficult. the easiest I could do would be to connect an access point to the router and use that for wifi instead, but I never felt the need to honestly

if you have less than 250 just get starlink. The ping for it nowadays is phenomenal, less than 30 ms

>>106517618
Yea fair enough, as long as you're not needing low loaded latency it wont matter too much.

>>106517472
it sounds so hot when you bully me and call me a cretin, gosh

>>106516746
+10ms/+12ms isn't bad since you probably won't be maxing that out while gaming anyway

also what router do you use? mine only has 1gbit WAN and I'm thinking of upgrading

>>106518022
I'm using a Dream Router 7 since I also use Ubiquiti access points.

Though if I were buying today i'd probably pick up the Cloud Gateway Fiber since it has 2x 10Gbps SFP+ and a 10GbE port instead of the Dream router 7 which just has a single 10Gbps SFP+ port.

Though it doesn't have Wifi, I would just buy another access point.

its ok

>>106518098
that loaded latency is pretty shit

>>106517855
I see!

I can actually get 1100mbps if I use something that is 2.5gb capable.
All 2.5gb nics are shit tho

>>106518278
>All 2.5gb nics are shit tho
accurate, and I say that as someone using a 2.5GbE NIC.

Gonna buy a motherboard with a 10GbE for my next platform upgrade

>>106518310
My main PC is on 10g and my NAS
The NIC would be for my router.
The way around is is 10G NICs, but support is limited to mostly intel for base-t and nbase-t is only properly supported on X710s.
Might wait for the rtl8127 is that ever gets supported or move to something Linux based

Finally got fiber, still never seed.

>>106518570
bruh what's wrong with your font rendering?

It's actually 100/25 but powerline over separate circuits. I'd use MoCA but can't figure out where the coax running to my room terminates to. Old house shit

>>106518378
some absolute faggot salesman tries to sell me a 300mbps fiber connection the other day! i lost myself when he said it holy shit. imagine, fiber at 300mbps. its appalling that the baseline slowest package isnt measured in gbps in 2025.

>>106519552
1Gbps is a bottleneck most consumers aren't willing to spend money to upgrade beyond.

300-500mbps is a great baseline speed most consumers can use and never need more.

>>106516118 (OP)
946/981

>>106516118 (OP)
Go home. The university internet is there for learning, not for your amusement.

>>106517445
keep niggers away from the internet

>>106520394
Multigigabit internet at home isn't that uncommon these days anon.

>>106518570
>>106518700
Seriously though, why does it look like that.

>>106520394
Assuming he lives on campus, it's for both.

>>106520509
There are very good reasons for letting them have as much access to it as dey want.

>>106520509
How many rural blacks do you know that can afford $80-120/month for internet? Plus the intiial hardware costs of multiple hundreds of dollars, to multiple thousands of dollars depending on which kit you want and the performance you want.

Starlink is a white man's technology bud.

>>106517332
You can buy a 10-Gig normal-fag tier router off of Amazon nowadays. 10 Gig is out there if you're willing to pay for it.

>>106520394
>>106522062
OP here, nah, I'm in my 30s and own my own house. They just finally offered me a reasonable deal on multi gig speeds so I upgraded that and my network gear. I'd been using a 15 year old router at this point.

>>106522213
That's pretty damned good. Australia is of course twenty years behind. 100 Mbps plans are the equivalent of US$70 a month and most of us have fiber running down the street in front of our house.

>>106522213
Same here >>106516877


I was on 1gbps for 7 years until my ISP finally brought multi-gig speeds to my neighborhood.

>>106518336
Don't buy Realtek if you ever want to consider Linux.
Get Intel or one of the Aquantia NICs. Asus sells (Pic related) which is decent for the price. I use this in multiple desktops and in my OpenWRT based x86 router because I only need one Ethernet connection to connect to my LAN switch. The WAN is a 2.5 Gig Intel but I'm stuck on gigabit speeds for now because I live in the UK and am stuck on Openreach and don't see the point in paying more for an asymmetric 2500/100 connection (currently get 900/100).

>>106522253
The realtek chip isn't out yet, you have no idea how it'll behave in linux.

NTA, but i'll be buying the realtek 10GbE NIC because it's less than 2 watts per port, about half the power draw of the Aquantia and intel options available right now.

part of me thinks I need to replace the Cat5e with Cat6a

>>106522270
I know it'll be crap in Linux specifically, all their drivers are very bad. Realtek doesn't know how to write a Linux driver.

It'll probably be fine in Windows though.

>>106522283
Just run fibre. It's cheap to do so now and you'll be future proof forever.

>>106522285
No, you ASSUME it'll be crap in linux.

At least wait for the hardware to hit the market before judging it you dumb cunt.

>>106522295
Lol

lmao even

are you the same retard that had the thread a few weeks ago about running fiber throughout their house for their LAN?


Anyone suggesting someone run fiber instead of CAT6A I have to assume is either a complete retard, or literally sells fiber optic cable and is looking to snag a customer.

>>106522303
Do you have specs for it? Did they at least put more than one hardware queue on their NIC this time? My Aquantia one has 7 dedicated tx/Rx queues, every Realtek NIC I've ever owned only has rx-0 and tx-0.

>>106522314
That wasn't me but I do have fibre, yes. Not through the whole house though that's kind of overkill. I use it to interconnect switches between downstairs and upstairs but if you're going to run Ethernet you could just as easily run fibre and it'll be cheaper as long as you discount the cost of the switches.

>>106522295
>future proof forever
until they make a new type of fiber cabling and then it’s all useless.

>>106522283

cat5utp literally works let them wait

>>106522314
I just ran some fiber for my NAS a few rooms over
Wasn't a big deal.

>>106522363
The cheapshit mutimode with LC connectors are good for 40Gb or even 100Gb

>>106522295
Seconding running fiber at home, it's just so easy to work with compared to ethernet

>>106522336
There are no official specs yet outside power draw and interface.

But as of a few days ago, they became available on aliexpress and other online markets.


The AQC107 supports up to 8 hardware queues, the RTL8127 LIKELY supports 4 queues based on previous recent realtek models.


The AQC107 uses between ~4.5-6W, the RTL8127 is less than 2 watts.


For a desktop PC, workstation, or server the AQC107 is still likely better on paper, but it'll generally require a PCIe card, or dedicated cooling if integrated on a motherboard directly due to the power draw. Whereas the RTL8127 can be cooled fully passively and thus would make for a good option for small form factor PCs, routers, switches, access points, etc.

> A Japanese user got one and tested it at up to about 7,400 Mbps over Google Fiber. He mentions there were no issues like packet jams or loss he experienced with a Marvell AQC107 card, and the RTL8127 runs pretty cool, consuming just 1.95W, against 6W for the Marvell chip


https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256809578672160.html

>>106522411
>so easy to work with compared to ethernet
Lol what the utter fuck are you talking about?

I can run ethernet TODAY with a basic wire cutter and a crimping tool. Any length you need.

Fiber I need to own a $1000+ fusion splicing kit, or I need to pre-measure all my fiber runs and buy fiber cables pre-terminated at the exact length I need for my runs.

How the fuck is that easier than ethernet?

>>106522411
>test server: your own ISP
try again

>>106522461
You buy pre-terminated at the exact lengths you need. Much easier to work with unless you live in a mansion.

>>106522461
You don't have to get exact length, nothing bad will happen if have a few excess meters coiled up you know?

>>106522470
Again, how is needing to premeasure and plan out EVERY run, purchase cables in the exact lenghts you need, and then install them somehow magically "easier" than just spending 2 hours cutting and running ethernet cables today?


While you wait 2 weeks for your cables, i'll have been running my network without any issues, at the exact same 10Gbps speeds you're doing over your fiber, and i'll have spent significantly less money.

>>106522485
If you're that lazy why even bother running cables through the walls at all? Just tape it to your ceiling and coil the excess at one of the ends.

>>106522461
Fiber is thin as hell and actually quite easy to manipulate.
I ordered a 30m cable to run under the house and I thought for a second they sent the wrong one as the spool was so small. An armored cable that's going to be basically resistant to anything is only 3mm in diameter.

>>106522501
The point is to be future proof. While you're stuck with 10Gb/s, you'll be able to get anywhere from 10gb/s to 100gb/s out of fibre.

>>106522501
You can just leave the spool in the crawl space or wall cavity

>>106522512
That's a fantasy, greater than 10gbps isn't happening anytime in the next 20 years for consumer PCs.

>>106522531
>anon doesn't have a NAS

>>106516118 (OP)
Using the asus 10gbe aqc113c nic
I have no idea why it doesnt go beyond 7.4gbps or so, maybe its a b650 chipset bottleneck or something

>>106522537
Anon, your NAS isn't running QSFP or higher.


Go ahead and post it, i'll wait.

>>106522531
But at least you can run iperf3 on your LAN to flex!
You're not wrong I guess. If that Ethernet lasts you the 20-40 years required before we get faster speeds then it's done its job.

>>106522549
Anyone who cares enough to know how impressive those speeds are likely already knows the only way you're hitting those speeds is on a LAN connection and thus wouldn't be nearly as impressed.

>>106522582
you can download from Steam at like 20Gbps

>>106522578
Do the command line speedtest if you want to get loaded latency results.

>>106522619
Yes, but that would require a 20gbps WAN connection, which no one here has.

And don't post the retard from the start of the thread that has been reposting that 2022 speedtest from switzerland for years.

>>106522545
You're right!
My NAS was actually using 10Gbase t but since I needed another connection as the new board had IPMI, the cheapest option was just a cheap x520 card and a length of fiber.
It actually eliminated one of the SFP+ 10g modules that I hate using.

>>106522639
So lets go ahead and recap.

I said
> greater than 10gbps isn't happening anytime in the next 20 years for consumer PCs.

you replied with
> anon doesn't have a NAS

and then you admit your NAS is using 10Gbps

wewlad, you sure showed me huh?

>>106522619
steam actually uses some shitty compression which makes the cpu a bottleneck when downloading. You won't be downloading that fast until they fix it, even if you could

>>106522670
It depends entierly on the game, some games when I download them I can max out my 2gig connection, but some games as you said, are heavily compressed and rely on CPU horsepower to decompress fast enough to keep up with the download speeds.

>>106522646
Difference is that it's a NIC swap to go from 10G to 25G or 40G.
Pure RJ45 setups is permanently stuck for the extreme foreseeable future.
I get the rational, CAT6 might as well be end game, why bother with anything else but the whinging about fiber is weird. I get it's not "consumer friendly" but that doesn't mean "impossible"

>>106522670
LTT did this in a video, they have 40Gb WAN to their offices

>>106522720
I never said it was impossible, my only complaint is framing it as EASIER than ethernet.

See >>106522411 as an example
>it's just so easy to work with compared to ethernet

>>106522766
Depends
If all you ever bought is pre-terminated cables (piss easy now with Amazon giving you any length in 1-2 days), fiber is no different than ethernet, in some ways it is easier given how thin and flexible it is. Modern fiber cables are even pretty resistant to low bend radius.
If your obsessive about having the right cable lengths or have to do 20+ runs then CAT6 is easier and probably cheaper for the cabling itself.

>>106516391
Imagine all the tiktoks you could load at the same time, lol!

>>106521755
I dont know, most likely it's some weird windows glitch with printscreen. Looks fine on the display but looks like ass in mspaint.exe. windows is also the reason the brightness is wrong since it cant into HDR properly and breaks screenshots more or less at random but looks fine on the display.