Home Internet Speed - 200, 400, 800mbps. Can we really tell the difference?

[wmc1000]

Our ISP has 4 levels to choose from:

Base is 50mpbs
Next is 100mbps for an extra $10
Third is 500mbps for another $10
Top speed is 1000mbps for yet another $10

We started with the 50mbps and everything was pretty speedy and rarely had a issue during streaming. Decided to up the speed and since $10 extra doubled but for $20 we could potentially get 10X I sprung for the 500mbps plan and I can definitely feel a difference even just surfing the web. Our REMC fiber provider gives us symmetrical speeds so up and down are both up to 500mbps.

 

[cyber888]

My speedtest showed 300-310 Mbps before being upgraded 2 months ago. Then, my Internet provider said they upgraded my new Tv/Internet/Phone package to 400 Mbps instead of 300. I'm getting around 360-370 Mbps, with 380 Mbps at the highest test. Well, wife notice the difference, which is around 20%-25% faster.

 

[ERD50]

... We started with the 50mbps and everything was pretty speedy and rarely had a issue during streaming. ... I sprung for the 500mbps plan and I can definitely feel a difference even just surfing the web. Our REMC fiber provider gives us symmetrical speeds so up and down are both up to 500mbps.

I'd bet the difference is in ping/latency times, rather than BW/speed.

I'm assuming the 50M service was not fiber, and would typically have worse ping times.

I just did an "Inspect" on another page from this site with 63 posts and a few pics, and only ~ 772kB gets downloaded, that takes less than second at even 10 Mbps speeds (which is more like 1MBps - bits vs bytes). But it shows 98 requests, and if every one of those was a 20mS ping, that's 2 seconds right there, and low single digit pings on fiber would cut into that.

But if you got even 50Mbps actual on the 100Mbps service, the download time would be almost instant, ~ 14msec, which is quicker than one frame of 60 fps video - like the blink of an eye.

Of course, if the only way to get ow ping times is with that speed upgrade, then that's what you get to get faster response. Just trying to make it clear, speed isn't the only thing to look at.

-ERD50

 

[ERD50]

... Well, wife notice the difference, which is around 20%-25% faster.

I believe most of this "noticing the difference" is placebo effect. See my previous post for some analysis.

-ERD50

 

[cranberryjoe]

I used to live in a rural area where the best I could get was 2 Mbps DSL. When I needed to download something large or watch a series of training videos, I would go into town where the Starbucks had 40 Mbps. Hooboy that was a huge difference.


Now I live in a city where I have 400 Mbps down / 20 Mbps up service at home. I could get > 1 Gbps if I wanted, but I figured I would try a lower tier first. I'm quite happy with it, and I pay less than half the price my 2 Mbps DSL cost.



For most regular browsing, there's really not a significant difference between the 40 Mbps at Starbucks (shared with other patrons) and 400 Mbps at home (shared with one other person). But I really appreciate it when both of us are streaming high quality videos at the same time with no glitches, or one streaming while another is zooming, or downloading a new game in less than 10 minutes (at Starbucks that would have been an hour or two, and at my old house I would forgo the game).


Agree with the previous poster that ping times can make a huge difference in perception and actual page load times. It's why Hughes and Viasat satellite internet services can give you 100 Mbps that feels like an old 56 Kbps modem. The initial page download is fast, and downloading each image on the page is fast, but because satellite ping times are so high it takes a second just to request each image file and the other things on the page (style sheets, ads, whatever). The seconds really add up.

 

[Golden Mean]

I believe most of this "noticing the difference" is placebo effect. See my previous post for some analysis.

-ERD50

Maybe, but I wouldn't go that far. I suspect it's one or all of these:
a) The slower connectivity plan is going through some sort of (or more aggressive) limiter that causes issues the user can feel/see
b) Better ping/latency in the fast plan
c) Less packet loss on the fast plan
d) Possibly different (IP) routing between the plans
e) In some cases the user's router/modem is upgraded/updated in the process of upgrading the speed

 

[folivier]

And don't forget that your web work could hit a slowdown due to slower speeds and servers in between. Doesn't matter how fast your internet is at your house if you're accessing data through their slower servers.

 

[leyland]

Hi-Def (1080p) consumes about 5 megabits per second of bandwidth. 4K (2160p) consumes about 20 megabits per second of bandwidth. Unless they are moving around very large files, most people pay for much more bandwidth than they can consume. I have 200 megabits per second and this is 10x what I need. It is the lowest priced tier from my provider.

This year I cut my cable and increased my Internet speed from 400mbps to 800mbps. I am not sure I can tell the difference. I upgraded my Modem and Router, and the OKLA speed test shows a consistent 945mbps.

I do a lot of downloading of Movies and TV Series, DW does a lot of YouTube probably averaging total around 700gb a month.

My internet usage other than that is what one would expect from an active user.

I am tempted to downgrade to 200mbps to test it out but thought I would ask the folks here if they have any real-world experience.

We always want to get the fastest possible, it is in a techie's nature to "think" faster is better.

Any input would be appreciated.

 

[Dawg52]

I have the lowest speed my local power company offers. Fibre optic @ 100mbps.
Speed test shows 105mpbs down and 99mpbs up. I do a lot of streaming and Internet surfing and it handles my situation fine. No buffering or burps in the system at all.

 

[crashdox]

250Mbps is perfectly fine for streaming HD movies (fiber from the cable company). Unless you have kids in school, 1G is a waste of money. However, be sure all of your intermediate switches & routers are current technology - 1000MB. The old stuff that was 10/100MB isn't going to cut it!

 

[ken830]

I definitely notice. I do a lot of data transfer to/from my parents' home for our shared off-site backup. I do a lot of file transfers. There is also Usenet and Plex streaming. And when I'm traveling, I do a daily back-up of each day's photos/videos to my home NAS to mitigate equipment failure/theft and some places have very fast upstream speeds, albeit rarely approaching the 1Gbps rate.

I'm eager for Sonic to upgrade my area from 1Gbps to 10Gbps... I will do a full network upgrade at that time.

 

[rayvt]

The local ISP here has recently put up billboards all over town touting that their LOWEST internet plan is 1000MB.

I salivate. We are stuck with DSL at 25MB, because ATT is unable to trench for fiber in solid rock. Our soil here is 1/2" of dirt on top of solid granite.

My son in the mountains outside of Albuquerque can only get 6MB DSL and they are able to stream movies ok, he says.

 

[ychuck46]

I live in a more rural setting but we still have the luxury of cable internet. Until recently we were about 115/11Mbps on the download/upload, and had no problems with multiple PCs, streaming TV services, security systems, etc all running at the same time. Recently Spectrum upgraded our service to about 335/15Mbps at no increase in price. Since we had no problems with the lower speed ever, can't say I notice a big difference. I appreciate having the increased speed since I don't know what load I will be putting on it in the future, but by that point Spectrum expects to have us up to 1Gb speeds so it shouldn't be an issue.

 

[mailbagman]

Just tested my downlaod speed. It was 178

 

[pb4uski]

When we returned to our Florida condo for the winter, the lowest cost Xfinity internet plan was 75 Mbps. We stream Netflix or Prime video regularly and have a half dozen or so items connected to the wifi between 2 cellphones, a laptop, a couple tablets,wifi thermostats and Blink camera system. No problems with bandwidth.

I just ran a speed test and got 90 Mbps down and 12 Mbps up and that's sufficient for our needs.

We get 300 Mbps service at our summer home but don't notice any difference.