Cable vs. DSL

[Homerboy]

And cable companies are offering 20-50 Mbps just about anywhere urban.

http://www.att.com/u-verse/explore/internet-landing.jsp

UVerse also offers up to 24Mbps too.
I dont pay for that though. I realize I'm not getting the top tier.

My only point is that DSL can be as fast as cable companies. Obviously this varies by how fast your cable company offers. Most DSL lines on AT&T DSL aren't CO limited now as they have deployed fiber to boxes within your neighborhood (mine is 1 block away).

 

[CVSiN]

And cable companies are offering 20-50 Mbps just about anywhere urban.

Um 20 is the base here.. the top tier Comcast is 100mbps for 100 bucks.

 

[frostedflakes]

yea I do a lot of online gaming on xbox360 as well, and I'm wondering if the wireless infrastructure will jack up my latency even more than it is now (i run wireless to my 360 but it is wireless to a hardwired router).

i also can't find a definitive answer on the actual speeds you get with Clear as far as DL speeds go.

With a good signal, ping on Clear should be acceptable, I think about 60ms or so. But with a poor signal pings will shoot through the roof. Download speeds will depend on connection quality as well, really you just have to try it out to be sure. There are a lot of silly things that can affect signal strength, for example there can be pretty significant variations (20dBm or so) in received signal strength in a single room of your home. Signals can bounce off walls, furniture, etc. and destructively interfere with each other, causing these relatively large variations even if the receiver is only moved a couple feet. Foliage on the trees can affect signal propagation during certain times of the year, you may get a better signal during fall/winter than spring/summer. etc. Check online to see what others users get, but that will only give you an idea of what to expect, don't assume your connection will perform the same.

Latency due to your wireless network should be insignificant, a millisecond or two.

 

[CVSiN]

Clear is not good for gaming at all.
fine for web browsing where a buffering wont hurt you.

It's just too all over the place for any kind of stable gaming connection.

that's here in Houston.. same problem we are having with Sprints 4G network as well.
since they are the same it's no surprise.

 

[frostedflakes]

If pings are all over the place, you probably have a pretty weak or variable signal. Under optimal conditions, Clear should be fine for gaming and other latency sensitive applications like VoIP.

 

[ViviTheMage]

DSL is slow and unreliable speeds from my experience. My comcast hits 6-8MB/s on occasion.

 

[purbeast0]

Clear is not good for gaming at all.
fine for web browsing where a buffering wont hurt you.

It's just too all over the place for any kind of stable gaming connection.

that's here in Houston.. same problem we are having with Sprints 4G network as well.
since they are the same it's no surprise.

yea i was just reading on the forums on clear and it also seems like they may throttle a bit but claim they don't, so i'm not sure.

they do offer a 14 day trial however. i just don't know if it's worth it.

the advertised speeds are 'between 3-6Mb with bursts up to 10Mb' but who knows where on that spectrum it truly stays.

 

[Fritzo]

DSL was dead technology the day it came into existence. You should be ashamed to be on a tech forum and then ask these questions.

:hmm:

You know it's the most popular type of high speed Internet connection in the world, right?

It's also less expensive and typically has lower latency than cable, so it's great for VoIP and gaming.

 

[guyver01]

It's also less expensive and typically has lower latency than cable, so it's great for VoIP and gaming.

wow. you fell for the hype, didnt you?

next, you'll spout the standard DSL bullshit.. "Cable is shared, DSL is not"


DSL = cheaper because its SLOWER.

less latency = false.

 

[Fritzo]

I wish I could get DSL...all I get is a pack of lies about it coming soon.

If you don't have it by now, you ain't gettin' it

DSL requires you to be around 15000ft. or less from your phone company central office to get a 1.5mb connection. If you can't get it, you're probably beyond that range, and the aren't going to build a new CO or remote terminal just for you. Population density has a lot to do with it.

 

[JechtShot]

I have AT&T Uverse internet and i have the 12mb down/1.5 up and I only pay $35 a month (permanent). I consistently get about 11.5mb down/1.48 upload so no complaints here

I used to have Charter Pipeline back when Cable internet was in its infancy (late 90s?) and it would slow to a crawl during peak usage hours. Is cable internet still grouped in clusters among neighborhoods and blocks?

 

[SKORPI0]

http://www.att.com/u-verse/explore/internet-landing.jsp



Most DSL lines on AT&T DSL aren't CO limited now as they have deployed fiber to boxes within your neighborhood (mine is 1 block away).

Did not release that. When I had DSL (Earthlink via Covad) a few years back max was 3 MB/sec since I was about 950 feet from the CO. I'm using AT&T currently as backup for my Internet (primary is Comcast Business HSI at 16/2- no 250GB cap) and can only get 3 MB/sec, same as before (via the phone line). I'll check link provided above and see what is offered. I'm paying $24.99/month for that speed tier.

 

[Homerboy]

wow. you fell for the hype, didnt you?

next, you'll spout the standard DSL bullshit.. "Cable is shared, DSL is not"


DSL = cheaper because its SLOWER.

less latency = false.

It has not proved any slower in my experience. RR only offers 15Mbps in my area (Wisconsin). AT&T DSL is available at 24Mbps.

Newsflash: offerings and prices vary from location to location. You simply can not use blanket statements like you are making.

Getting back to the OP, I still attest AT&T was offering him 1.5MBps at that price.

 

[Homerboy]

I have AT&T Uverse internet and i have the 12mb down/1.5 up and I only pay $35 a month (permanent). I consistently get about 11.5mb down/1.48 upload so no complaints here

I used to have Charter Pipeline back when Cable internet was in its infancy (late 90s?) and it would slow to a crawl during peak usage hours. Is cable internet still grouped in clusters among neighborhoods and blocks?

This is a brilliant point too. Many DSL providers offer you higher upload speeds versus the local cable provider. Again AT&T is WAY better in my area than TW/RR

 

[SlowSpyder]

wow. you fell for the hype, didnt you?

next, you'll spout the standard DSL bullshit.. "Cable is shared, DSL is not"


DSL = cheaper because its SLOWER.

less latency = false.

My DSL typically has quite a decent latency. I remember having much less download speed then my buddies who had cable. Playing HL2 I typically had lower latency. But then again that was probably close to 10 years ago.

While I really can't complain about the speed of my DSL connection for what I use it for, I did switch to cable today. With Time Warner I get 3Mb faster speed than my 4Mb DSL for $15/ month cheaper with the 12 month intro rate.

 

[SlowSpyder]

This is a brilliant point too. Many DSL providers offer you higher upload speeds versus the local cable provider. Again AT&T is WAY better in my area than TW/RR

I haven't really thought about that. I just had Time Warner cable installed and have DSL. I get over 1Mb upload. Any idea what I can expect with 7Mb cable for an upload speed? I upload files here and there, sometimes large ones...

 

[guyver01]

It has not proved any slower in my experience. RR only offers 15Mbps in my area (Wisconsin). AT&T DSL is available at 24Mbps.

The comparable speed packages are comparably priced between cable & dsl.

The 24Mbps DSL is gonna run around the same as the 30Mbps cable.

The 1.5Mbps DSL is gonna be ALOT cheaper than the 20Mbps cable.

So saying DSL is cheaper... is a pack of crap. It's not cheaper. Its comparably priced... for comparable packages.

Its like saying Dialup is cheaper than cable.

No shit its cheaper... its slower.

 

[ViviTheMage]

Did not release that. When I had DSL (Earthlink via Covad) a few years back max was 3 MB/sec since I was about 950 feet from the CO. I'm using AT&T currently as backup for my Internet (primary is Comcast Business HSI at 16/2- no 250GB cap) and can only get 3 MB/sec, same as before (via the phone line). I'll check link provided above and see what is offered. I'm paying $24.99/month for that speed tier.

uhh, 3MB/s = 30mbps .. so you're getting double what you're paying for.

My DSL typically has quite a decent latency. I remember having much less download speed then my buddies who had cable. Playing HL2 I typically had lower latency. But then again that was probably close to 10 years ago.

While I really can't complain about the speed of my DSL connection for what I use it for, I did switch to cable today. With Time Warner I get 3Mb faster speed than my 4Mb DSL for $15/ month cheaper with the 12 month intro rate.

My comcast has 10MS to Chicago ... 400miles away...all depends on how you're routed.

 

[JechtShot]

I live in an area where I can receive up to 24mbps (New housing area with pre-wired Cat5 in the house, don't know if that matters) on AT&T Uverse internet but I don't think I need that much speed for my uses. I believe AT&T Uverse uses FTTN technology (Fiber to the node) compared to Verizon FIOS which uses FTTH (Fiber to the house). FTTN (Fiber to the node, then copper to your house) compared to FTTH (Fiber optic cable directly to the junction box of your home?). Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[brandonb]

I like DSL more than Cable.

DSL, you typically actually get a router with your DSL line, where you can hook up multiple computers. Cable... You have to hook up a 3rd party router, and usually use a forced MAC address (Comcast) on the router to allow multiple computers.

DSL, you typically get a constant ping since you are the only one on the line at the time until you get to the CO and hop on the net. Traffic in the neighbhorhood does not affect ping.

DSL is usually slower, but I find the service to be better all around.

 

[guyver01]

uhh, 3MB/s = 30mbps

technically... 25.17 Mbps

 

[guyver01]

DSL, you typically get a constant ping since you are the only one on the line at the time until you get to the CO and hop on the net. Traffic in the neighbhorhood does not affect ping.

wow. another DSL shill monkey who fell for the DSL lies.

 

[ViviTheMage]

technically... 25.17 Mbps

my calculator says 24.00 Mbps

he's still bursting 1.6x what he's paying for.

 

[JechtShot]

wow. another DSL shill monkey who fell for the DSL lies.

Not trying to start any flame war but just wondering which part of his statement isn't true. I can honestly say I get very constant low pings on my DSL and it doesn't fluctuate much (from my knowledge). I do like that AT&T gives you a modem which has multiple ethernet ports and you don't have to pay rental charges on the modem. They even let me keep my old ones ( I have 2 old 2wire modems from them). I remember having to pay to rent a cable modem from Charter and I had to hand it back to them once I cancelled service.

Going back to Homerboy's statement, It just depends on area I suppose. AT&T DSL is better all-around in my area.

 

[guyver01]

Not trying to start any flame war but just wondering which part of his statement isn't true.

This part:

you are the only one on the line at the time until you get to the CO and hop on the net. Traffic in the neighbhorhood does not affect ping.

DSL is shared at the DSLAM... not the CO.

The DSLAM is the equivalent of the node for cable.

Multiple DSLAM's will service a CO.

You do NOT have a dedicated line to the CO.

Traffic in the neighborhood does in fact affect your ping.