brianiscool

join:2000-08-16

Tampa, FL brianiscool Member 1GB internet If I had this kind of speed. I would use it to stream the highest quality video possible on the internet. Maybe use Twitch.TV or Justin.TV and set it to the highest 1080p video quality.

Ozykz

join:2013-03-30

Salford, ON 1 recommendation Ozykz Member Re: 1GB internet Sarcasm? It must be, Because Twitch.tv/justin.tv dont even use a 15mbps line to its full bandwith potential when you stream at 1080p 60fps.



tiger72

SexaT duorP

Premium Member

join:2001-03-28

Saint Louis, MO tiger72 Premium Member Re: 1GB internet definite sarcasm.



dvd536

as Mr. Pink as they come

Premium Member

join:2001-04-27

Phoenix, AZ dvd536 to Ozykz

Premium Member to Ozykz

said by Ozykz: Sarcasm? It must be, Because Twitch.tv/justin.tv dont even use a 15mbps line to its full bandwith potential when you stream at 1080p 60fps.



1080P @ ~15mbps. ewwwwwww Shows they're bitstarving it.1080P @ ~15mbps. ewwwwwww



TWC_User

join:2013-07-31

Los Angeles TWC_User to brianiscool

Member to brianiscool

With that speeds you can even watch 8k videos... or watch 1080p videos uncompressed.

elefante72

join:2010-12-03

East Amherst, NY 1 recommendation elefante72 Member Re: 1GB internet With those speeds, you don't have to worry about speeds.. Which is the point.

88615298 (banned)

join:2004-07-28

West Tenness 88615298 (banned) to brianiscool

Member to brianiscool

My 30 Mbps streams the highest quality videos just fine. No need for 1 Gbps which is what I assume you meant, not the 1 GBps in your title which would be 8 Gbps.



elios

join:2005-11-15

Springfield, MO elios Member Re: 1GB internet lets see 4 people in a home all watching different stuff

30*4 thats 120Mbps right there on an NORMAL night



Steam can use the whole 1Gbps easy

the new console will have built in streaming meaning more upload will be needed then ever be for and at lest 5Mbps just for that so youll want more like 10Mbps to cover the over head + what any one else in the home is doing



lots of ways to use a 150Mbps sym pipe

and once you get that fast and your using fiber might as well make it a gig any way

88615298 (banned)

join:2004-07-28

West Tenness 88615298 (banned) Member Re: 1GB internet said by elios: lets see 4 people in a home all watching different stuff

30*4 thats 120Mbps right there on an NORMAL night



Steam can use the whole 1Gbps easy

Bull. My son used Steam all the time and I had no issue streaming videos. What video streams at 30 Mbps? Even Netflix Super HD is 7 Mbps. You DO NOT need 1 Gbps to stream HD video I even if had 20 users doing it.



elios

join:2005-11-15

Springfield, MO elios Member Re: 1GB internet because no one has that kind of speed

streams right now even 1080p are VERY compressed

if more people has a 1Gbps connection you wouldnt need ANY compression

34764170 (banned)

join:2007-09-06

Etobicoke, ON 34764170 (banned) Member Re: 1GB internet Video is never distributed with NO compression. What you really mean is lower levels of compression. What is distributed on a Blu-ray is still compressed over the original source material. There is zero justification to bother with truly un-compressed video material.



dvd536

as Mr. Pink as they come

Premium Member

join:2001-04-27

Phoenix, AZ dvd536 Premium Member Re: 1GB internet said by 34764170: Video is never distributed with NO compression. What you really mean is lower levels of compression. What is distributed on a Blu-ray is still compressed over the original source material. There is zero justification to bother with truly un-compressed video material.





id welcome 1gbps video over any of the bitstarved offerings. 1080P at 40mbps is still going to be better than anyones bitstarved crapola including netflixes bitstarved super hd or whatever the garbage is called.id welcome 1gbps video over any of the bitstarved offerings.

34764170 (banned)

join:2007-09-06

Etobicoke, ON 34764170 (banned) Member Re: 1GB internet said by dvd536: 1080P at 40mbps is still going to be better than anyones bitstarved crapola including netflixes bitstarved super hd or whatever the garbage is called.



id welcome 1gbps video over any of the bitstarved offerings.





You do know there is a difference between having a purpose and making yourself feel better.



1Gbps video? Now that is daft. This is not 8K video were talking about. Wow, for real? You mean a Ferrari is going to be faster than the average sedan?You do know there is a difference between having a purpose and making yourself feel better.1Gbps video? Now that is daft. This is not 8K video were talking about.

Bengie25

join:2010-04-22

Wisconsin Rapids, WI Bengie25 to 88615298

Member to 88615298

Wonderful thing, this TCP. You may not notice streaming issues with your relatively low bandwidth video stream, but your son's Steam install on a 10GB game will take longer to download.

34764170 (banned)

join:2007-09-06

Etobicoke, ON 34764170 (banned) to 88615298

Member to 88615298

said by 88615298: My 30 Mbps streams the highest quality videos just fine. No need for 1 Gbps which is what I assume you meant, not the 1 GBps in your title which would be 8 Gbps.

Most of the typical streaming video sites are using relatively low bit rate encodings. I am not advocating jacking it up to 20Mbps as Blu-ray encodinds are beyond what is necessary if using a good H.264 encoder, but Netflix (as an example) even providing a bump up from the 7Mbps encoding to 10Mbps would be very nice. That 30Mbps wouldn't go very far with decent encoding levels.

tmc8080

join:2004-04-24

Brooklyn, NY tmc8080 to brianiscool

Member to brianiscool

I doubt you can even Skype with resolutions/bitrates higher than 1080p. First make an app that supports the higher bit/resolutions. Don't forget you NEED an HD cam which supports the higher resolutions too!



batterup

I Can Not Tell A Lie.

Premium Member

join:2003-02-06

Netcong, NJ batterup Premium Member Let's see the graphic.





Mine is slow tonight.

88615298 (banned)

join:2004-07-28

West Tenness 88615298 (banned) Member Re: Let's see the graphic. You're using wireless not fiber. And of course you speeds will be low there. Wireless is shared resource with limited spectrum and bandwidth. And with more and more people using 4G devices yes you're speeds are going to slow down. Especially if you are unfortunate to be using it in an area with a lot of people with unlimited data still. The cell tower sector you're using only has a max bandwidth of 150 Mbps to be shared with as many as 400 others at a time. Do the math. Consider yourself lucky to be getting 8 Mbps.

iansltx

join:2007-02-19

Austin, TX iansltx Member Re: Let's see the graphic. Correction: 73 Mbps per sector. Closer to 225 Mbps per tower than 150. And VZW has started deploying AWS for more capacity over a smaller area.

88615298 (banned)

join:2004-07-28

West Tenness 88615298 (banned) Member Re: Let's see the graphic. said by iansltx: Correction: 73 Mbps per sector. Closer to 225 Mbps per tower than 150. And VZW has started deploying AWS for more capacity over a smaller area.





Yes I know they are deploying AWS but unless you have a phone that can use it ( so far only the GS 4 and the Nokia 928 can ) then it doesn't do you any good. So yes when Verizon deploys AWS, small cells, gets 600 MHz spectrum in the incentive auctions, converts 3G and 1 X spectrum to LTE and upgrades to LTE-Advanced and has devices that can take advantage of all of this then capacity won't be much of an issue. This will take until 2021. I said 150 Mbps per SECTOR not per tower. It doesn't matter what the total tower can handle you're only using ONE sector of it.Yes I know they are deploying AWS but unless you have a phone that can use it ( so far only the GS 4 and the Nokia 928 can ) then it doesn't do you any good. So yes when Verizon deploys AWS, small cells, gets 600 MHz spectrum in the incentive auctions, converts 3G and 1 X spectrum to LTE and upgrades to LTE-Advanced and has devices that can take advantage of all of this then capacity won't be much of an issue. This will take until 2021.



batterup

I Can Not Tell A Lie.

Premium Member

join:2003-02-06

Netcong, NJ batterup to 88615298

Premium Member to 88615298

said by 88615298: You're using wireless not fiber.

I meant I showed mine now Google should show theirs.

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26

Fremont, OH TBBroadband to 88615298

Member to 88615298

All Internet is shared. Just at different points. Google still has a shared connection along with FiOS.

88615298 (banned)

join:2004-07-28

West Tenness 88615298 (banned) Member Re: Let's see the graphic. said by TBBroadband: All Internet is shared. Just at different points. Google still has a shared connection along with FiOS.

Fiber has much more capacity for sharing than current LTE technology that is deployed or are you going to argue that point too.



DocDrew

Try Everything!

Premium Member

join:2009-01-28

SoCal 93.2 20.1

Ubee E31U2V1

Technicolor TC4400

ARRIS TG1672

DocDrew Premium Member Re: Let's see the graphic. It's getting to the point where last mile speeds aren't the bottle neck anymore. Now it's peering and interconnects between networks is the bottle neck. That will continue to get worse as last mile speeds go up. How many gige connections can a 100gig interconnect support? How many 100gig connections can 1 router support?

34764170 (banned)

join:2007-09-06

Etobicoke, ON 34764170 (banned) Member Re: Let's see the graphic. said by DocDrew: It's getting to the point where last mile speeds aren't the bottle neck anymore. Now it's peering and interconnects between networks is the bottle neck. That will continue to get worse as last mile speeds go up. How many gige connections can a 100gig interconnect support? How many 100gig connections can 1 router support?





The bottlenecks exist due to providers being greedy, lazy or having poor policy, not due to technical limitations in the infrastructure that can be utilized.



Routers and switches as designed around a full proper 100Gb platform, as opposed to an older routers/switches designed around a 10Gb platform but had 100Gb+ slots meaning limited to 1x 100Gb blade per slot, can handle upwards of hundreds of 100Gb ports/connections. Capable of forwarding upwards of hundreds of terabits per second. Yes, getting to that point.. as in over the next couple of years. cable D3 networks are still going through upgrade phases to make that a reality. VDSL2 based networks are still playing catch up; providers rolling out line bonding + Vectoring as well as next gen DSL will push things far enough along.The bottlenecks exist due to providers being greedy, lazy or having poor policy, not due to technical limitations in the infrastructure that can be utilized.Routers and switches as designed around a full proper 100Gb platform, as opposed to an older routers/switches designed around a 10Gb platform but had 100Gb+ slots meaning limited to 1x 100Gb blade per slot, can handle upwards of hundreds of 100Gb ports/connections. Capable of forwarding upwards of hundreds of terabits per second.

Bengie25

join:2010-04-22

Wisconsin Rapids, WI 2 edits Bengie25 to DocDrew

Member to DocDrew

The new hotness is 8tb/s per trunk fiber.



"How many 100gig connections can 1 router support?"



Depends on the router, but high end ones are about 370 100gb ports, at full non-blocking speed.



Those are expensive.



edit: Never mind, Cisco's new router supports up to 1 petabit/s of routing. So about 5,000 100gb ports? Actually, it is meant to use 400gb and 1tb ports to reach its full speed. Even then, that's still 500 1tb ports. What ever.

34764170 (banned)

join:2007-09-06

Etobicoke, ON 34764170 (banned) to TBBroadband

Member to TBBroadband

True, but some networks are designed with good broadband performance in mind and have lower levels of over-subscription.

Bengie25

join:2010-04-22

Wisconsin Rapids, WI Bengie25 Member Re: Let's see the graphic. According to my ISP, they have zero over-subscription on the last mile. But they don't offer 1gb speeds, only 200/200 max.

34764170 (banned)

join:2007-09-06

Etobicoke, ON 34764170 (banned) Member Re: Let's see the graphic. Too many broadband networks are trying to work with over-subscription models that simply do not work when people actually use their connections. That's why you have "peak hours" congestion; especially with cable.

Bengie25

join:2010-04-22

Wisconsin Rapids, WI Bengie25 Member Re: Let's see the graphic.



He told me it was a waste of time to constantly be playing whack-a-mole with congestion and the increased load on the call center for customer care.



It was cheaper to just build it "right" in the first place.



He said they have 1 primary connection, a secondary fail-over, and a 3rd link that is an alt route which can all also handle over-flow if the primary gets congested.



He said they haven't been congested at the trunk in a long time. Mix that with a fully dedicated non-oversubscribed last and middle mile, and I have awesome pings.



I get 8ms pings to Chicago game servers and I'm in Wisconsin. I used to get 8ms pings just to my head-node with cable. My ISPs network latency is measured in microseconds. I love active Ethernet.



I'm sure if they went the Google Fiber route, they could have done it cheaper than every person getting their own fiber all the way back to the CO, but I'm not complaining I was talking to a Sr Tech and he said over-subscription and congestion management is just too much work, so the ISP went with a full non-oversubscription model.He told me it was a waste of time to constantly be playing whack-a-mole with congestion and the increased load on the call center for customer care.It was cheaper to just build it "right" in the first place.He said they have 1 primary connection, a secondary fail-over, and a 3rd link that is an alt route which can all also handle over-flow if the primary gets congested.He said they haven't been congested at the trunk in a long time. Mix that with a fully dedicated non-oversubscribed last and middle mile, and I have awesome pings.I get 8ms pings to Chicago game servers and I'm in Wisconsin. I used to get 8ms pings just to my head-node with cable. My ISPs network latency is measured in microseconds. I love active Ethernet.I'm sure if they went the Google Fiber route, they could have done it cheaper than every person getting their own fiber all the way back to the CO, but I'm not complaining

Bengie25 Bengie25 to TBBroadband

Member to TBBroadband

The Internet is shared in the same way we all share this Universe. It doesn't matter if it's shared if we can't make use of all of it.



Wireless is called "shared" because the end points all share the same bandwidth. At least with fiber, the sharing is all up-stream where trunk lines can easily handle it.



DocDrew

Try Everything!

Premium Member

join:2009-01-28

SoCal DocDrew Premium Member Google Fiber forum With all of these customers there should be a Google Fiber forum on DSLR, right?



I'd love to see some reviews, speed tests, and general discussion about the services from actual users.



I've seen more PR releases than actual users...



wsda77

@comcast.net wsda77 Anon Underground Utilities Does Google fiber service neighborhoods with underground utilities?



fatpipe

join:2011-10-02

Austin, TX fatpipe Member Re: Underground Utilities said by wsda77 : Does Google fiber service neighborhoods with underground utilities?

Yes, they do. Google Fiber will lay the fiber underground.

silbaco

Premium Member

join:2009-08-03

USA silbaco Premium Member Re: Underground Utilities In some areas they will put it underground.

jorcmg

join:2002-10-24

USA jorcmg Member Google now serving the booming metropolis of Merriam. This is small time. At this rate they'll have Kansas City burbs covered by 2050. By then their customers will be complaining that the stuff is too slow.



justthinking

@ameritech.net justthinking Anon Rural fiber If Google really wants to make the news... why not build in the rural areas where you have 5 houses per mile of road and show us how rural broaband can be a reality? /sarcasm