Gaming using AT&T Uverse?

badnewcastle

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,016
0
0
I signed up for u-verse and wondering if I should cancel. It isn't installed yet so I don't have any experience but I have heard that it make FPS gaming much more difficult.

What I've read is that the your Ping jumps 30-50 milliseconds or so. I play alot of FPS games so that would be bad. Does anyone have U-verse and care to share their experience?
 

nsafreak

Diamond Member
Oct 16, 2001
7,093
3
81
I don't have any experience with the service but that doesn't make sense. The Uverse network is a good bit faster than most DSL services.
 

BAMAVOO

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
8,087
41
91
The only person I know that has it, says it is horrible (internet related and gaming) compared to his dsl connection before the "upgrade" to uverse.


 

BAMAVOO

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
8,087
41
91
Here is what he wrote.


" AT&T UVerse Sucks
For anyone that is considering at&t uverse I would say reconsider. These guys are idiots and can't get anything correct. I have had my service re-installed 3 times to work out the bugs and the bugs still remain. The DVR doesn't work very well if it works at all. Half the times I record a hockey or football game when I go back to watch the rest of the game that was recorded it only shows a blank screen. And for those of you who are jealous of my low 4 ping on the server, well don't worry it actually doesn't feel like 4 ping, I do get a hell of a lot of jumpyness, and unexplainable lag spikes. I checked everything, turn all services and any running programs in the background off and still the same. Also the HD channels are terrible, they are jittery. I really never cared about cable (other companies have you believe they are evil) but at least they were reliable, HD were awsome clarity and smooth, and gaming was very smooth. I have heard that verizon fios is pretty awsome, too bad I can't get verizon in my area, but I guess I will have to go back to time warner because it was a hell of a lot better than Uverse. Just rememer AT&T Uverse = idiots, a simple equation I don't think their service techs would understand"


"That was the craziest thing, I used to have sbcglobal dsl(now at&t) thru the old copper twisted pair and that rocked, It was really smooth and still ultra low ping. When they switched me from the old copper to the fiber they shut down the or I guess disconnected the copper and will not switch me back after I asked to switch me back. My downloads were much quicker than now. My only guess is that there must be a conflict between the signals of the tv and internet that run on the same fiber. They finally copped to known issues they have had since the beginning, I had to get transfered to the general manager of the Tech department. She said that the software engineers have been trying to get it fixed since last year and they have no expected date of the fix . Pisses me off though, the amount of time they had me waste both running through settings on my computer routers, and cable boxes as well as having techs come in for hours upon hours and 3 full reinstalls along with blatent lies of programs being blacked out, because they didn't record, on different channels and different times. If they would have just said that they were having issues with their program on the server side that would have been enough for me to wait until they had it fixed. Now I am leaving Uverse and going back to Time Warner. It was better than what I have now, but not as good as the dsl copper wire. Too bad they will not switch me back to it, their older technology is superior to their new technology.

I would change to satellite for tv but the only issue I have with them is the inclement weather, I live in Texas and remeber when I had dish network there was a lot of acquiring satellite signal and at the best times during games which you did not want to miss.

I think I'll go with the 10 meg cable, that would seem to rock.


Ben, I would wait for Uverse, don't jump into it probably for another year, they have soooo much to fix. They rolled it out way too early just to try and compete with Verizon fios (which I hear rocks both from gamers and tv lovers)."

"actually I went from Time warner to at&t Uverse and I would say it was better, not the best but certainly better. At least TW's HD channels did not skip or jitter. The other weird thing about Uverse is when I record a show it seemed to cut seconds off the show just before commercials, I noticed it happen almost every show, they stopped mid sentence. So I recorded a show and watched it live. On watching it live I didn't notice the cut off on mid sentence, right after the show finished I watched it recorded and sure enough it did cut the show off mid sentence seconds before the commercial break. I called them and told them, well the duplicated it and don't know why, so I guess the have even more re-programing to do on their dvr.

they certainly do have issues right now, all I can say is after having Uverse, sbc dsl on the copper, and time warner, right now Uverse does not deliver on what it promised. Time Warner is better (although they do have their issues, but not as many as Uverse) and that the old dsl technology was also superior to the Uverse dsl on fiber. I do remember that coble with timewarner wasn't the best out there, not better than my old dsl but since they will not change me back to the old dsl then all I have left is to go back to time warner, I remember it being smooth and I didn't have that high of dl/upl speeds either. I'll try it at 10mbs dl and see how it runs."


 

badnewcastle

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,016
0
0
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Uverse IS DSL.

That's kind of what I was thinking, it is DSL, only difference is the fiber is being compressed at the closest box and when it is compressed you loose time...This is where the delay would come in at. I haven't seen too many people complain about it yet but it is a concern of mine.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
U-verse isn't DSL... it's fiber optic to the house or premises.

I haven't had any problems with FPS gaming
 

Gusty987

Golden Member
Mar 24, 2004
1,473
0
0
I have uverse and I have had zero issues while online gaming. Was playing cod4 yesterday with pings in the 60s.
 

badnewcastle

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,016
0
0
Originally posted by: Gusty987
I have uverse and I have had zero issues while online gaming. Was playing cod4 yesterday with pings in the 60s.

I hope I can stay in the 20-40's, at least at the servers I play on that are within 200 mi. I guess 60 isn't bad at all either though.
 

Oceandevi

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2006
3,085
1
0
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
U-verse isn't DSL... it's fiber optic to the house or premises.

I haven't had any problems with FPS gaming

Actually it is fttn : fiber to the node(curb) most of the time. Acording to wiki they have fiber to the premise also but I have not seen this yet.


At&t's version is much cheaper to implement vs fios.
 

badnewcastle

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,016
0
0
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
U-verse isn't DSL... it's fiber optic to the house or premises.

I haven't had any problems with FPS gaming

Actually it is fttn : fiber to the node(curb) most of the time. Acording to wiki they have fiber to the premise also but I have not seen this yet.


At&t's version is much cheaper to implement vs fios.

And it's my understanding that fttn is the same as dsl but with the compression to dsl from nod to premise causes higher pings.

There have been boxes popping up all over the neighbor hood, I can count to big boxes that are loud and 8 little skiing boxes that are new on my block and the next block over so there is something going on, but I don't know if it is fttp/h or fttn.
 

SunnyD

Belgian Waffler
Jan 2, 2001
32,674
146
106
www.neftastic.com
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
U-verse isn't DSL... it's fiber optic to the house or premises.

I haven't had any problems with FPS gaming

No, it's not. It's Fiber-to-the-Node, ie: the VRAD box SOMEWHERE on your block/development. The VRAD then takes that fiber, splits it into something like 64 DSL channels, and from there it goes over COPPER to your house. There are nearly no Uverse deployments aside from 1 or 2 test markets that AT&T has deployed FTTH (FTTP). AT&T has said repeatedly that they have no interest in doing last-mile FTTH like FIOS does, simply because they're too cheap to invest the money.

Text

In its more common FTTN version, the network topology of U-verse/Project Lightspeed is similar to DSL; general network traffic travels no further than the FTTN node (analogous to a DSL remote terminal), while only the individual customer's traffic uses the copper wire to the home. FTTP follows a similar implementation where only the traffic destined for users on an FTTP node is forwarded there, then further downstream where only traffic for users on a specific fiber is sent to that fiber. Each user's home has a "Residential Gateway" from 2Wire
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,890
5,001
126
Umm any service varies GREAT from place to place.
Don't take one person's review of it as gospel.
 

Oceandevi

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2006
3,085
1
0
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
U-verse isn't DSL... it's fiber optic to the house or premises.

I haven't had any problems with FPS gaming

No, it's not. It's Fiber-to-the-Node, ie: the VRAD box SOMEWHERE on your block/development. The VRAD then takes that fiber, splits it into something like 64 DSL channels, and from there it goes over COPPER to your house. There are nearly no Uverse deployments aside from 1 or 2 test markets that AT&T has deployed FTTH (FTTP). AT&T has said repeatedly that they have no interest in doing last-mile FTTH like FIOS does, simply because they're too cheap to invest the money.

Text

In its more common FTTN version, the network topology of U-verse/Project Lightspeed is similar to DSL; general network traffic travels no further than the FTTN node (analogous to a DSL remote terminal), while only the individual customer's traffic uses the copper wire to the home. FTTP follows a similar implementation where only the traffic destined for users on an FTTP node is forwarded there, then further downstream where only traffic for users on a specific fiber is sent to that fiber. Each user's home has a "Residential Gateway" from 2Wire

Turns out that AT&T in response to fios in the dallas area is trying out fiber the the home in certain cities.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
U-verse isn't DSL... it's fiber optic to the house or premises.

I haven't had any problems with FPS gaming

No, it's not. It's Fiber-to-the-Node, ie: the VRAD box SOMEWHERE on your block/development. The VRAD then takes that fiber, splits it into something like 64 DSL channels, and from there it goes over COPPER to your house. There are nearly no Uverse deployments aside from 1 or 2 test markets that AT&T has deployed FTTH (FTTP). AT&T has said repeatedly that they have no interest in doing last-mile FTTH like FIOS does, simply because they're too cheap to invest the money.

Text

In its more common FTTN version, the network topology of U-verse/Project Lightspeed is similar to DSL; general network traffic travels no further than the FTTN node (analogous to a DSL remote terminal), while only the individual customer's traffic uses the copper wire to the home. FTTP follows a similar implementation where only the traffic destined for users on an FTTP node is forwarded there, then further downstream where only traffic for users on a specific fiber is sent to that fiber. Each user's home has a "Residential Gateway" from 2Wire

Turns out that AT&T in response to fios in the dallas area is trying out fiber the the home in certain cities.

Why would they bother to do this? They only offer 1.5mpbs, 3mbps, and 6mbps for internet, out of the 28mbps that the router sees. Even if you only have one TV box, you're stuck at 6mbps max for internet.
 

Oceandevi

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2006
3,085
1
0
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
U-verse isn't DSL... it's fiber optic to the house or premises.

I haven't had any problems with FPS gaming

No, it's not. It's Fiber-to-the-Node, ie: the VRAD box SOMEWHERE on your block/development. The VRAD then takes that fiber, splits it into something like 64 DSL channels, and from there it goes over COPPER to your house. There are nearly no Uverse deployments aside from 1 or 2 test markets that AT&T has deployed FTTH (FTTP). AT&T has said repeatedly that they have no interest in doing last-mile FTTH like FIOS does, simply because they're too cheap to invest the money.

Text

In its more common FTTN version, the network topology of U-verse/Project Lightspeed is similar to DSL; general network traffic travels no further than the FTTN node (analogous to a DSL remote terminal), while only the individual customer's traffic uses the copper wire to the home. FTTP follows a similar implementation where only the traffic destined for users on an FTTP node is forwarded there, then further downstream where only traffic for users on a specific fiber is sent to that fiber. Each user's home has a "Residential Gateway" from 2Wire

Turns out that AT&T in response to fios in the dallas area is trying out fiber the the home in certain cities.

Why would they bother to do this? They only offer 1.5mpbs, 3mbps, and 6mbps for internet, out of the 28mbps that the router sees. Even if you only have one TV box, you're stuck at 6mbps max for internet.

Mu uncle was confused he has regular Uverse. the tech was not very clear about it.