|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Any experience with fiber-optic internet service and porn sites? |
| 1-11 of 11 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 03-07-10 06:18pm - 5403 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
rearadmiral (0)
Active User Posts: 1,453 Registered: Jul 16, '07 Location: NB/Canada |
Any experience with fiber-optic internet service and porn sites? I’ll have the opportunity to upgrade to a fiber-optic internet connection (right to the house, not just to a node) within a month. I’m not too tech savvy but I suspect that download speeds are based on what the servers at the other end are able to provide. Do any of you at PU have any experience with fiber-optic internet and how do you find most porn sites for speed when they may be the slower link? The available speed options are for 20, 35 and 60 Mbit services. Would going with 35 or 60 just be a waste of money if most websites can’t support it? | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 06:41pm - 5403 days | #2 | |
|
Reg Berkeley (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 22 Registered: Apr 01, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
I had this talk with the folks at TBP who are on a 50 Mbit connect and are referencing download speeds in their reviews. This is definitely helpful info for the users. However, I think that at least in the older reviews, they confused megabit and megabyte, because I saw some very shoddy sites with huge download speeds that made no sense. I'd estimate that most garden variety porn sites are hosted on traditional servers that cannot achieve much more than 100Mb output. This is due to I/O on the hard drives vs. actual pipe to the server. So 2, 50Mb users would max out a single server. This is a roundabout way of saying that I think the smaller sites will generally give you no benefit of your high bandwidth service. The larger sites that are using more robust content delivery should allow you to max it out, ie. separate the men from the boys. We could also get into latency...but that's a topic for another day :) | |
|
||
| 03-07-10 08:27pm - 5403 days | #3 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I've been on a fiber-optic internet line since day one. I chose the fastest possible speed because that's the one that allowed me the greatest possible download limit. I think the cost per return ratio is the most important thing of all. If it's going to cost you a significantly larger amount of money for faster speeds than it may still not be a good choice. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 01:37am - 5403 days | #4 | |
|
BadMrFrosty (0)
Active User Posts: 124 Registered: Mar 05, '10 Location: Prague (Czech Republic) |
I'm on a 100mbit connection and completely agree with Reg. On large sites (21sextury, bangbros) I can usually download at full speed without a problem. On smaller sites I usually get 20 - 30 mbits a sec. Just means I download content from 3 different sites at the same time which again maxes out my download. The problem with the world is stupidity. Not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself? Frank Zappa | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 11:28am - 5403 days | #5 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
I was sort of curious about Reg's remark about the TBP reviews and download speeds. I recently upgraded to a cable internet system that allows for 12 mbs download speeds. Even though I have that I rarely if ever seem to reach DL speeds stated in TBP reviews. I didn't realize that 1) they were on a 50 mb direct connect and 2) that being on a higher capacity connection would make that much difference. Just curious if any others out there have noticed really high DL speeds posted in TBP reviews that they can't achieve either even with moderately robust internet connections. | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 11:52am - 5403 days | #6 | |
|
james4096 (0)
Suspended Posts: 132 Registered: Mar 02, '09 |
I'm surprised to hear that sites would allow a single IP address to use 50 Mbps. I think we've all been to sites that cap it 1.5 Mbps. I think the only people who need fiber optic internet are us porn users. Honestly! All these stupid little suburban households will pay their providers for bandwidth they don't even need. How fast does your internet connection need to be when you have at most 3 people using it at the same time and all anybody does is look at their facebook or send emails? This is crazy. Somebody should convince these people that 5 Mbps is all they need. | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 01:33pm - 5403 days | #7 | |
|
Reg Berkeley (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 22 Registered: Apr 01, '07 Location: Las Vegas, NV |
Hey, I'm not bashing TBP. I think that early on they might have innocently mixed up MB and Mb. But honestly, they did some testing for me and at least seem sensitive now that there's a big difference between capital B and lower b. Plus, it's more than any other review site is doing. james' point is a good one. If I'm running my content out of one or two servers, you'd definitely have to cap the B/W per user to ration it out. | |
|
||
| 03-08-10 04:48pm - 5402 days | #8 | |
|
rearadmiral (0)
Active User Posts: 1,453 Registered: Jul 16, '07 Location: NB/Canada |
Thanks for all the advice. Based on this information I think I'll just sign up for the 20Mb service for now. I'm supposedly capable of around 7Mb now so it will be a substantial improvement without a big cost increase. I'll be interested to see how much of an actual improvement it will be. If it's really good I may need to increase my porn budget... | |
|
||
| 03-09-10 11:40am - 5402 days | #9 | |
|
atrapat (0)
Active User  Posts: 182 Registered: Apr 19, '08 Location: Non-USA |
Also take into account whether you are connecting to the router through wireless; then, the bottleneck will most likely be in the wireless system even if you got the 75Mbps fiber-optic connection. 802.11g advertises as 54Mbps but real life speed is less than half of that. You might not even get to 20Mbps. 802.11n will likely suffer from the same issues so a 75Mbps fiber-optic with wireless wouldn't be worth it with the current wireless technology. | |
|
||
| 03-09-10 03:39pm - 5402 days | #10 | |
|
rearadmiral (0)
Active User Posts: 1,453 Registered: Jul 16, '07 Location: NB/Canada |
Thanks for bringing the point up. It is certainly an important consideration. If I swap my PC for a laptop later this year like I'm planning, I may surf wirelessly but I'll only download with a wired link. | |
|
||
| 03-09-10 07:22pm - 5401 days | #11 | |
|
slutty (0)
Active User Posts: 475 Registered: Mar 02, '09 Location: Pennsylvania |
I have an 802.11n connection, and it doesn't come close to advertised speeds (even when downloading something from a different computer wired to my network) - best I ever get is around 20 Mbps unless I am standing right next to the router, and even then it isn't much better. It is also worth mentioning that your network equipment might prevent you from utilizing your full available bandwidth - even on a wired connection, especially if it is older or "cheap" equipment. Bunny Lebowski: I'll suck your cock for a thousand dollars. Brandt: Ah hahahahaha! Wonderful woman. We're all, we're all very fond of her. Very free-spirited. | |
|
||
| 1-11 of 11 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
