Study: Cable speeds outpace DSL

CED Magazine ^ | 4/23/03 | Jeff Baumgartner

[Pro-Bush]

Study: Cable speeds outpace DSL

Jeff Baumgartner, CED

Consumers are generally willing to pay more for a faster connection, but the speeds provided by high-speed cable and DSL providers remain rather inconsistent, comScore Networks revealed in a new study that details broadband usage and quality of service.

The research firm found that the average cable modem connection was more than 50 percent faster than the average residential DSL connection.

Citing observed network speeds in February 2003, cable averaged 708 kbps, led by Cablevision Systems at 800 kbps and followed by Comcast Corp. (794 kbps), Cox Communications (688 kbps) and Adelphia Communications (575 kbps).

Residential DSL averaged just 467 kbps, led by ATT WorldNet's 762 kbps. SBC was second with a 584 kbps average, followed by DSL reseller Earthlink Inc. (369 kbps) and Qwest (240 kbps).

If preference trends hold up, cable's better average speeds will continue to pay dividends, comScore said.

Broadband competition "has created intense pricing pressure, so performance metrics such as connection speed are likely to become an increasingly important factor, both for consumers selecting a broadband provider and as a part of providers' sales and marketing efforts," said comScore Networks Vice President of Telecommunications Solutions

[Always Right]

Cable is slow and you have to share your bandwidth, plus there is the security issues related to this sharing.

I think it depends on the service. I visited a frined in Nashville Tenn several years back and his cable modem speed was not all that impressive during peak times. But since I had my cable modem, my speed is always 'outstanding', at least that is what the on-line test sites say when I test it.

[tuna_battle_slight_return]

56K outspeeds both cable and DSL. It's one of America's secret truths. That's all you need to know.

[RAWGUY]

I wonder if you can download a 20 meg file in 1 second on DSL off their backbone.

nope, you can't.

this was a good test for whiners who said their DSL was faster.

of course with all the hops and traffic on the internet, you'd never get anything close doing real world surfing

Nope and you can't do it either with your cable connection as the total bandwidth offered by cable systems is 5 meg per second. You only get this if you are the only one on the segment at the time.

My DSL offers just over 1 meg per second and it is there all the time and is very reliable. I doubt that it will offer a total of 5 meg per second anytime soon but I don't run the risk of sharing the bandwidth with as many as 50 other people either.

[SamAdams76]

Shhh...
Cable is slow and you have to share your bandwidth, plus there is the security issues related to this sharing.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

I have had cable over a year and it a blazingly fast. This despite the fact that most people in my neighborhood have it as well and are on the same subnet. I have no issues with downloading and viewing video in real time and 4-minute MP3s download in as little as 20 seconds. In fact, downloading MP3s is so fast with cable that it is less time to just download them then to rip them from my own CDs.

Security issues are a concern no matter what form of internet access you use. With a little effort and at little to no cost, you can put up an effective firewall. If you are willing to invest a little time and money, you can put up a firewall that rivals that of a major corporation. At any rate, hackers will typically be bored to tears accessing the computer of the Joe next door. Many people have an exaggerated sense of importance of themselves. After over five years of being almost constantly online at home, I have never had a single security issue.

[mikegi]

I don't think this testing site is accurate. I tried the test with my Adelphia cable modem (capped at 3000/128) and it reported a larger than allowed upload speed (>200). The reported d/l speed was 2200, which is certainly doable.

I get more reasonable results from dslreports.com. A test there showed 2907/117.

All of these online testing sites are approximations anyway. They just give you an idea of the speed of the connection to their site.

I have yet to see any effect of the cable modem sharing, which is always touted by the DSL-heads as a downside, affecting my speed. Cable is cheaper and has a higher cap than the DSL available in my area (Bellsouth). The biggest problems with my service are the email and usenet servers although Adelphia has recently upgraded their email service (requiring an email address change for my family since our original provider got bought out, ugh!).

[chuckr]

I suggest we check the contracts and their fine print. Cable companies do not guarantee a minimum bandwidth with their Internet access service. So I ask, "what am I paying for?" just their good faith effort which does not include minimum down times also! DSL providers' contracts should be checked also look for guarantted bandwidths and availability.

[FierceDraka]

Cable is slow and you have to share your bandwidth, plus there is the security issues related to this sharing.

I'm not too concerned about pipeline security, but I have both hardware and software firewalls running on my cable setup. Besides, if I was to opt for a DSL line, I'd have to work with the local phone company. They are absolutely notorious for terrible service, and have been fined multiple times for said service.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I believe what he means is that the speed remains fairly constant with DSL as you add users to the backbone, whereas with cable, the actual speed is highly dependent on the number of users.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I don't have either, but it seems to me that if you use a router with a firewall, you can overcome many of your issues. Of course, if you connect your computer directly, you've got problems. What I was thinking of was using a router and connecting multiple computers to the router. Any problems with that concept?

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Neither DSL nor cable is available in my area. I've noticed several different options for satellite, but am confused by them. Maybe you can help me out here.

What is the cost?
Do you also have to subscribe to satellite TV?
Do you have to have an extra phone line in your house, or can you duplex from the satellite dish itself?
How stable is satellite?
Are static IP addresses offered?
Is the setup more like DSL or more like cable?

[Brett66]

Get a quote

Speed test

News & links

Forum

Tech guide

About us

Speed test

   Start a test

   Frequently asked questions

   Statistics

   Add a test to your site

   Link to our test

Results

2.9 megabits per second

Run the test again      Discuss in the forum

Details

Your raw speed was 2927442.41 bits per second which is the same as:

Communications	2.9 megabits per second How communication devices are rated. Kilo means 1,000 and mega means 1,000,000. Examples include 56k modem and 10Mbit Ethernet
Storage	357.4 kilobytes per second The way data is measured on your hard drive and how file sharing and FTP programs measure transfer speeds. Kilo is 1,024 and mega is 1,048,576.
1MB file download	2.9 seconds The time it would take you to download a 1 megabyte file at this speed.

Rating

Compared to all connection types worldwide, yours is fantastic

Comparisons

your speed
T1
56k modem

 Complete stats

See all the speed test statistics

Info

test type	Downstream Test v3 (605 KB idt type)
test was run

[Brett66]

I have Cox Cable.

[Psycho_Bunny]

If you need throughput; get cable - if latency is important; get DSL.

[js1138]

I got DSL because I hate the cable company. they couldn't deliver decent, reliable TV, so why should I trust them with internet?

[gswilder]

I have had both Cable and DSL. On DSL, I got around 400K down and 100K up. (service was supposed to be 768/128) Switched to Insight Cable about a year ago. My speeds are consistently 3000+ down and 110K up. Had around 3-4 outtages a year on DSL. Cable I have only had one during the major ice storm back in Feb-03. Only lasted for about 2 hours. (A large part of Lexington was without power and cable for 2 weeks.)

So all in all, I prefer cable since it is the same price here. I too was concerned about the cable company service and reliability. However, they have made a lot of improvements over the last 10 years or so. I'm sure everything varies location to location.

[jokar]

Bump to bookmark

[tm22721]

I'm on satellite at 1 Mbps download speed but I would take either cable or DSL in a heartbeat.

BUMP

[SeeRushToldU_So]

I have a 4 computer network on a cable router. I range between 1550k-1900k per machine.

Not bad in my book.

[Pro-Bush]

56K outspeeds both cable and DSL. It's one of America's secret truths. That's all you need to know.

lol!

[A. Pole]

DSL is generally pretty crappy, expensive, troublesome and unstable compared to cable connections of the same speed.

It depends. In Korea DSL is cheaper and runs at eight megabits per second.

South Korea shows the way on broadband :
"[...]Most KT home subscribers get a DSL line with a data transfer speed of eight megabits per second for $33 a month. In addition, KT offers a wireless access service for $8.50 monthly, which lets customers use handheld devices or laptops to connect to wireless (WiFi) networks in places such as train stations, airports, hotels and public buildings.[...]"