Jump to content

AT&T Uverse / vs. TWC - Average Ping ?


Spartacus

Recommended Posts

For those using AT&T Uverse or TWC service in the US, could you please share what your average ping is to major sites such as www.google.com or www.xbox.com  or even their DNS server 8.8.8.8 ? 

 

I'm located in the mid-west US and have 30 up / 6 down service from AT&T UVerse.  

 

My average ping to www.google.com is :

 

--- www.google.com ping statistics ---

10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss

round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 44.267/44.715/45.830/0.442 ms

 

for www.xbox.com I get :

 

--- e2537.dspb.akamaiedge.net ping statistics ---

10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss

round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 40.291/42.446/49.777/3.023 ms

 

For most speed tests I get approx 30 ms ping.  Seems a bit high, and I'm trying to determine how much of a detriment this is to games like BO3 etc.

 

While I definitely get the benefit of geo-filter, I don't ever end up with gameplay like what others report after using the R1.  I'd like to hear what others are experiencing with using uVerse service and how it compares to TWC.  My current commitment with AT&T ends soon and I am considering switching depending on how TWC users experience service in my area.  They offer 50 up/5 down  for about the same price as I'm currently paying for 30/5  so seems like a reasonable upgrade, but not sure how their users fare wrt gaming...

 

Any insights would be greatly appreciated :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would run the duma diagnostics on the router as that's the most reliable.I don't trust the speeds thru xbox or playstation,very unreliable.

 

And the boys across the pond have better internet than us which is why they get those insane 5-10 ms pings during games.

 

I can't speak on TWC as I've never used them as an ISP,but run the internet diagnostics thru the duma and see what you get.The reason it's more reliable is it shuts everything else off but the computer your running the test on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Fuzzy Totally agree. I really like the way that the diag functionality is implemented on the NetDuma -- it came back with results stating my ping was just "OK" but everything else was excellent. 

 

In the interim, I did manage to find a friend who has Time Warner service and had him run the tests for me. His results were almost identical to mine, so I'm thinking it may just be that we're not so lucky wrt having faster ping (or even faster internet speeds) like the folks in UK/Europe etc.   However, to that point, as long as I'm able to use the GeoFilter and make sure I'm playing with others with about equivalent connection as mine, it should still be an even playing field :)  

 

These are results from TWC -- on their 60/5 service:

 

MacBook-Pro-3:~ rk$ ping -c 10 www.google.com

PING www.google.com (74.125.226.16): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=0 ttl=51 time=46.227 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=1 ttl=51 time=53.156 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=2 ttl=51 time=40.788 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=3 ttl=51 time=45.778 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=4 ttl=51 time=44.491 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=5 ttl=51 time=47.371 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=6 ttl=51 time=43.583 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=7 ttl=51 time=39.433 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=8 ttl=51 time=40.900 ms
64 bytes from 74.125.226.16: icmp_seq=9 ttl=51 time=42.630 ms
 
MacBook-Pro-3:~ rk$ ping -c 10 www.xbox.com
PING e2537.dspb.akamaiedge.net (104.73.163.17): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=0 ttl=56 time=45.385 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=44.897 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=44.543 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=41.877 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=48.348 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=43.582 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=46.508 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=44.178 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=8 ttl=56 time=43.809 ms
64 bytes from 104.73.163.17: icmp_seq=9 ttl=56 time=44.887 ms
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those using AT&T Uverse or TWC service in the US, could you please share what your average ping is to major sites such as www.google.com or www.xbox.com  or even their DNS server 8.8.8.8 ? 

 

I'm located in the mid-west US and have 30 up / 6 down service from AT&T UVerse.  

 

My average ping to www.google.com is :

 

--- www.google.com ping statistics ---

10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss

round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 44.267/44.715/45.830/0.442 ms

 

for www.xbox.com I get :

 

--- e2537.dspb.akamaiedge.net ping statistics ---

10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss

round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 40.291/42.446/49.777/3.023 ms

 

For most speed tests I get approx 30 ms ping.  Seems a bit high, and I'm trying to determine how much of a detriment this is to games like BO3 etc.

 

While I definitely get the benefit of geo-filter, I don't ever end up with gameplay like what others report after using the R1.  I'd like to hear what others are experiencing with using uVerse service and how it compares to TWC.  My current commitment with AT&T ends soon and I am considering switching depending on how TWC users experience service in my area.  They offer 50 up/5 down  for about the same price as I'm currently paying for 30/5  so seems like a reasonable upgrade, but not sure how their users fare wrt gaming...

 

Any insights would be greatly appreciated :)

In my personal experience I have found that gaming on cable (TWC) is much better than gaming on vdsl (Uverse).  My pings were only slightly improved, however the playing experience was night and day improvement for me.  The interleaving process for uverse adds about 10-20 ms to your first hop over standard dsl, which I'm pretty sure at&t no longer offers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all for the feedback.  I'll shop around to see what's available and also test out gameplay on my friend's network when I get a chance and then decide.

 

I know AT&T is also expected to roll out faster service in my area in early 2016 so that may be another option I may be able to consider provided pricing is competitive.

 

Good to see that we do have ping times < 20 ms at least in some spots in the US!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all for the feedback.  I'll shop around to see what's available and also test out gameplay on my friend's network when I get a chance and then decide.

 

I know AT&T is also expected to roll out faster service in my area in early 2016 so that may be another option I may be able to consider provided pricing is competitive.

 

Good to see that we do have ping times < 20 ms at least in some spots in the US!

One thing to remember is increased DL / UL speed won't make your ping improve. You could have 300 Mbps up and down but if your base ping is 100ms, your games with stink.

 

U verse is prone to congestion because it's a dsl technology. Your ping will vary based on your distance to the dsl repeater and how many other people in your area are using the internet at the same time. With coax, you're not subject to the same congestion rules that apply to dsl.

 

Imo, if possible your first choice should be fiber, then Coax (TWC), then dsl (Uverse)

 

Not to rub it in, but I have VZW fios, my base ping when running the diagnostics on the R1 is usually around 12ms. When pinging a server in a game, I usually have around 25ms or lower. Every once and a while something will be crappy and the ping to the games will be 40-50ms and I feel like I notice a huge disadvantage when compared to my normal speeds. There are definitely more wtf moments. It's crazy to think that 50ms is s disadvantage because in all honestly it is an extremely short period of time very hard for a human to even recognize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...