Fastest ISP?

[ieatcable]

Are you using mobile data to test? Mobile data is not the same as home fibre internet. Different Technology la. If 4G the local speed is 20 to 60 Mbps only and if connect to US or Canada is 2 to 5 Mbps and also must see what mobile phone you are using and the actual location you are connected. In Singapore most of the time our video streaming is from CDN, can always buy video streaming from CDN. Why want to stream from such a far location with a mobile phone? Then what is the point of having CDN in the first place? If you are testing using laptop then something is not right.

Aiyo..... read the posts again. The slow download affect M1 broadband too and I'm using ST mobile data to grab traceroute information to confirm my theory that the Germany route is having slowness. As M1 used the same congested path. I also use my friend's ST broadband to confirm that he have the same issue. @xiaofan did not face the issue as his ST broadband IP have a different routing.

Actually most people will not usually have to connect to such far places.

Then wat is this thread for?

 

[Henry Ng]

Aiyo..... read the posts again. The slow download affect M1 broadband too and I'm using ST mobile data to grab traceroute information to confirm my theory that the Germany route is having slowness. As M1 used the same congested path. I also use my friend's ST broadband to confirm that he have the same issue. @xiaofan did not face the issue as his ST broadband IP have a different routing.


Then wat is this thread for?

Then something is really wrong with M1. Better jump ship.

 

[Henry Ng]

 

[Henry Ng]

See my speedtest here. SH is very good. For 1Gbps plan no way i can get this speed.

 

[Henry Ng]

 

[sglandscape]

See my speedtest here. SH is very good. For 1Gbps plan no way i can get this speed.

Have found the nperf servers tend to not be as performant as those on speedtest, but likely represent real world speeds if the sites are not hosted by one of the major hyperscalers. Speedtest better to show the peak speed.

 

[ieatcable]

See my speedtest here. SH is very good. For 1Gbps plan no way i can get this speed.

Start: 2024-12-28T05:07:21+0000
HOST: gra.lg.ovh.net                                                  Loss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
  1. AS16276  141.94.18.1                                              0.0%     3    0.4   0.3   0.2   0.4   0.1
  2. AS???    192.168.143.254                                          0.0%     3    0.4   0.4   0.4   0.4   0.0
 10. AS???    10.200.2.13                                              0.0%     3    5.1   5.1   5.1   5.2   0.0
 11. AS???    ???                                                     100.0     3    0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0
 12. AS1299   prs-bb1-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.125.170)            0.0%     3    6.0   6.3   6.0   6.7   0.4
 13. AS1299   mei-b6-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.138.227)             0.0%     3   18.2  17.6  17.0  18.2   0.6
 14. AS1299   sng-b6-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.140.41)              0.0%     3  235.1 235.0 233.9 235.8   1.0
 15. AS1299   sng-b4-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.136.199)            33.3%     3  235.0 234.8 234.7 235.0   0.2
 16. AS1299   starhub-ic-335810.ip.twelve99-cust.net (62.115.167.49)   0.0%     3  229.1 229.0 228.9 229.1   0.1
 17. AS4657   203.118.6.242                                            0.0%     3  155.8 155.7 155.6 155.8   0.1
 18. AS4657   203.116.3-130.unknown.starhub.net.sg (203.116.3.130)     0.0%     3  155.8 157.8 155.8 161.8   3.5

Downlink via Arelion. The good results from your test speak for it.

So for OVH Gravelines we got.
Singtel: 166ms
Starhub (with superior 5Gbps arelion downlink): 156ms
M1: 315ms

Then something is really wrong with M1. Better jump ship.

Then maybe you are right after all But moi wanna support underdog ISP in the spirit of competition. I would do VQ but cost, static IP, and ONR are an issue.

 

[Henry Ng]

Start: 2024-12-28T05:07:21+0000
HOST: gra.lg.ovh.net                                                  Loss%   Snt   Last   Avg  Best  Wrst StDev
  1. AS16276  141.94.18.1                                              0.0%     3    0.4   0.3   0.2   0.4   0.1
  2. AS???    192.168.143.254                                          0.0%     3    0.4   0.4   0.4   0.4   0.0
 10. AS???    10.200.2.13                                              0.0%     3    5.1   5.1   5.1   5.2   0.0
 11. AS???    ???                                                     100.0     3    0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0
 12. AS1299   prs-bb1-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.125.170)            0.0%     3    6.0   6.3   6.0   6.7   0.4
 13. AS1299   mei-b6-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.138.227)             0.0%     3   18.2  17.6  17.0  18.2   0.6
 14. AS1299   sng-b6-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.140.41)              0.0%     3  235.1 235.0 233.9 235.8   1.0
 15. AS1299   sng-b4-link.ip.twelve99.net (62.115.136.199)            33.3%     3  235.0 234.8 234.7 235.0   0.2
 16. AS1299   starhub-ic-335810.ip.twelve99-cust.net (62.115.167.49)   0.0%     3  229.1 229.0 228.9 229.1   0.1
 17. AS4657   203.118.6.242                                            0.0%     3  155.8 155.7 155.6 155.8   0.1
 18. AS4657   203.116.3-130.unknown.starhub.net.sg (203.116.3.130)     0.0%     3  155.8 157.8 155.8 161.8   3.5

Downlink via Arelion. The good results from your test speak for it.

So for OVH Gravelines we got.
Singtel: 166ms
Starhub (with superior 5Gbps arelion downlink): 156ms
M1: 315ms


Then maybe you are right after all But moi wanna support underdog ISP in the spirit of competition. I would do VQ but cost, static IP, and ONR are an issue.

VQ is known to have connection issues but it is up to you as I have some friends who complain to me about the poor service and very poor support. Just re-think about it.

 

[Henry Ng]

Searched online:

TRex_Eggs
• 2y ago •

I switched from many years with MyRepublic to Viewqwest.
Very disappointed with VQ:

• loads of random downtimes (maybe random 5-10 minutes here and there)
• despite moving from a normal MR plan to a gamer VQ plan my ping with several games did not change much
• poor service. They did not follow their delivery schedule for the modem and I had to re-arrange for redelivery. But they started billing promptly on the original delivery date
• there was a promo for steam credits but I had to hound them for it
• they have several “free services” for 3 months that cannot be canceled ahead of time and then they end up slapping you with additional charges
• I asked for refund, which they agreed to. But ended up billing me an additional sum

I am switching the **** back to MR once this contract ends

 

[Mach3.2]

Downlink via Arelion. The good results from your test speak for it.

So for OVH Gravelines we got.
Singtel: 166ms
Starhub (with superior 5Gbps arelion downlink): 156ms
M1: 315ms

That's really weird. M1 have Arelion IP transit to France for Vultr and CDN77. Ping time about 150ms only.

HE have even lower latency, 140+ms only.

 

[ieatcable]

That's really weird. M1 have Arelion IP transit to France for Vultr and CDN77. Ping time about 150ms only.

HE have even lower latency, 140+ms only.

Yah. I am surprised too. Routing works both ways from the server provider and ISP so I guess there are some cost considerations bah. Always a case of one party thinking the other party should pay for the link.

Btw, HE having some problems since last night due to AAE-1 cable damaged. Packets re-routed and offload via USA for now.

2   1.51 ms   e0-11.switch2.sin3.he.net (184.104.209.41)
3   14.84 ms  port-channel1.core3.sin1.he.net (184.105.223.134)
4   69.10 ms  port-channel4.core3.tyo1.he.net (184.105.64.254)
5   150.52 ms port-channel11.core2.sea1.he.net (184.105.213.117)
6   ... 10
11  215.09 ms be103.bhs-g2-nc5.qc.ca (192.99.146.140)
12  ... 13
14  554.82 ms be103.gra-g2-nc5.fr.eu (213.251.128.64)
15  ... 21
22  222.40 ms gra.proof.ovh.net (141.94.30.145)

 

[firesong]

Precisely. Never felt any bottleneck or slowness with local connections on 500Mbps. For me there is almost no situation in the house where everyone consumes concurrent 500Mbps 24/7. If let's say a 4K 60 streams at 25Mbps, I need 20 devices watching the same stream concurrently to exhaust the bandwidth on 500Mbps plan.

What I find is so many people are misled into thinking upgrading to 10Gbps will fix all lag when there are so many variables beyond local port speed like adapter/router speed and further upstream bandwidth issues. Salesmen are trained to convince you why <3Gbps is the reason you have lag.



Impressive changes within 3-4 months. Seems they have made latency improvements to EU in general. M1 still mostly the same and now doing worse than Singtel if going by the number of reds.



M1 current results: https://www.meter.net/tools/world-ping-test/#0-149324-1e0bde

What I find with M1 is that, Europe is solid only if going through Arelion bi-directional. But often it is not the case, you will see destination bound go via Arelion, then source bound can either go by Vodafone (not so stable like arelion) or USA (higher ping which causes the reds in the test results). Sometimes don't even have Arelion path at all and ping goes above 300.

I suspect M1 will only have good ping if both M1 and the destination host purchases good IP transit to each other. Unlike VQ or Singtel now who advertise their IX routes in EU taking bi-directional connectivity into their own hands and does not depend on destination host having premium IP transit back to SG.

Time to take M1 out of the "better EU latency among the big 3 ISPs"?

Love the "salesmen are trained" jab. It's true tho.

The other aspect that contributes to poor network performance is poor network hardware. Lower end plans bundle crap hardware which increases the likelihood of getting poor network performance. For those who know how the ISP game is played, then it makes sense to play accordingly and deploy your own infrastructure. The more informed users will also look beyond the network hardware marketing fluff and inflated numbers - spec sheets often do not tell the real-world truth.

 

[xiaofan]

MR and Singtel seem to be good. M1 and VQ seem to be bad. Starhub may be good based on MR result. Not so sure about SIMBA.

Here is my result -- Singtel 1Gbps plan. Tested using the Asus RT-AX86U router using IPv4.

Here is my other homenetwork using OpenWRT, Singtel 1Gbps plan.

The China results are almost comparable to the above result if we just look at the colours.
Two worse results: HeiLongJIang and Taiwan
One better result: SiChuan.

The above results were from 3 Feb 2024 using Singtel 1Gbps plan.

The following results are from today's test using Singtel 5Gbps plan and using wireless, the wireless router used is Asus TUF-BE6500.

 

[Henry Ng]

The above results were from 3 Feb 2024 using Singtel 1Gbps plan.

The following results are from today's test using Singtel 5Gbps plan and using wireless, the wireless router used is Asus TUF-BE6500.

Why speed test to China?

 

[xiaofan]

Why speed test to China?

Why not?

Anyway, you can ignore the China results if you do not care about that. The above tests also test the latency to other parts of the world.

 

[rvenii]

The above results were from 3 Feb 2024 using Singtel 1Gbps plan.

The following results are from today's test using Singtel 5Gbps plan and using wireless, the wireless router used is Asus TUF-BE6500.

Singtel 1gbps Mesh
quite different ah haha

want to switch to MR soon le

 

[xiaofan]

Moi used excel feature and color scales to make it more colourful

Included moi network to pit against the big boys as well
I removed MR biz since here mostly consumer ( i suspect biz and gamer is the same routing anyway)

This table was tabulated on 4 Feb 2024.

It may be good for more people to carry out more tests to reflect the changes.

 

[SkyShroud]

If latency is anybody's main concern, can just buy VPS running on GSL network. Check LET often and you can find very cheap long term deal showing up few times a year. Then get some cheap local internet plan, whatever cheapest you could find. Then hook up your router via tunnels or wireguard, wg will incur 1 extra ms btw though good thing about wg is it work with cgnat. Router preferably running OpenWRT. Finally route most traffic to VPS, done, you got a good latency at cheapest possible price, no need spend money on gamer mr. VPS only need 1tb to 2tb bandwidth for most use case.

Pinging gra.lg.ovh.net [141.94.18.80] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=45
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=45
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=152ms TTL=45
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=45

Ping statistics for 141.94.18.80:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 151ms, Maximum = 152ms, Average = 151ms

Pinging rds.us-east-1.amazonaws.com [52.46.159.85] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235

Ping statistics for 52.46.159.85:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 208ms, Maximum = 208ms, Average = 208ms

Pinging rds.us-east-2.amazonaws.com [52.95.18.89] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=240
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=240
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=240
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=240

Ping statistics for 52.95.18.89:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 199ms, Maximum = 201ms, Average = 199ms

 

[Henry Ng]

Why not?

Anyway, you can ignore the China results if you do not care about that. The above tests also test the latency to other parts of the world.

Did not see got other countries.

 

[ieatcable]

If latency is anybody's main concern, can just buy VPS running on GSL network. Check LET often and you can find very cheap long term deal showing up few times a year. Then get some cheap local internet plan, whatever cheapest you could find. Then hook up your router via tunnels or wireguard, wg will incur 1 extra ms btw though good thing about wg is it work with cgnat. Router preferably running OpenWRT. Finally route most traffic to VPS, done, you got a good latency at cheapest possible price, no need spend money on gamer mr. VPS only need 1tb to 2tb bandwidth for most use case.

Pinging gra.lg.ovh.net [141.94.18.80] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=45
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=45
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=152ms TTL=45
Reply from 141.94.18.80: bytes=32 time=151ms TTL=45

Ping statistics for 141.94.18.80:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 151ms, Maximum = 152ms, Average = 151ms

Pinging rds.us-east-1.amazonaws.com [52.46.159.85] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235
Reply from 52.46.159.85: bytes=32 time=208ms TTL=235

Ping statistics for 52.46.159.85:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 208ms, Maximum = 208ms, Average = 208ms

Pinging rds.us-east-2.amazonaws.com [52.95.18.89] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=201ms TTL=240
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=240
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=200ms TTL=240
Reply from 52.95.18.89: bytes=32 time=199ms TTL=240

Ping statistics for 52.95.18.89:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 199ms, Maximum = 201ms, Average = 199ms

Lucky. From moi M1 in west area to local VPS is 6ms + overhead. Reach M1 POP already 3ms.

Pinging 103.167.150.90 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 103.167.150.90: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=55
Reply from 103.167.150.90: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=55
Reply from 103.167.150.90: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=55
Reply from 103.167.150.90: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=55

Ping statistics for 103.167.150.90:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 5ms, Maximum = 7ms, Average = 6ms