Can Ping Be Improved?
This is a discussion on Can Ping Be Improved? within the Sky Broadband help forums, part of the Sky Broadband help and support category; Is there anything that can be done to improve the latency of my connection. I appreciate that this is mostly ...
- 07-11-06, 12:58 PM #1
Can Ping Be Improved?
Is there anything that can be done to improve the latency of my connection.
I appreciate that this is mostly down to the infrastructure but was wondering if
(a) There is anything that can be done at my end (router, NIC etc).
(b) If there is anything that can be done by SKy (capping sync speed, removing Interlacing etc).
Currently, my sync speed is capped at 6.5Mbps (to solve the disconnection problems) and speed tests regularly give me 5.1Mbps which is more than acceptable to me.
But browsing feels sluggish - you can see pages build up as each component is downloaded.
Just wondering whether tuning or trading bandwidth could help.
- 07-11-06, 05:33 PM #2
If your on interleave then changing to fastpath will help your ping, if you decide to go with fastpath then you may need to get them to set your target snr a bit higher to make sure it stays stable.
- 07-11-06, 06:22 PM #3
It would be nice to try.
To be honest, my Sky connection is slightly better than when I was with Nildram MaxDSL - same ping, higher sync/download.
However, when I went from Nildram fixed 2Mbps to MaxDSL I was disappointed that the ping increased and browsing became more sluggish.
It actually, made the internet feel slower because most of the time I didn't see the benefit of the high bandwidth (just when doing big downloads).
I was on the point of requesting Nildram to put me back on fixed 2Mbps but then the Sky offer came along.
So can't grumble about the Sky connection (especially at the saving I'm making).
But it would be really nice to be able to experiement trading off bandwidth for ping but to be honest I doubt that Sky would be too accomodating.
- 07-11-06, 06:45 PM #4
What is your ping? It should be around 30 -70 milliseconds depending on site.
"you can see pages build up as each component is downloaded" is unlikely to be ping related. Even if your pings were say 200 milliseconds they're not sequential. Multiple images will be downloaded at the same time. You really shouldn't be able to detect ping speeds by eye!
Try running something like TCPOptimizer. This will optimize your TCP/IP stack for fast broadband and (if I recall correctly) will increase the number of simultaneous connections over the windows default. The difference can be quite noticeable.
Turning off interleaving can be beneficial to online gaming where ping really can matter.
- 07-11-06, 09:53 PM #5
I thought that as a website connection is stateless then if the website contains 50 small gifs (typical of something like Amazon or eBay) then you have to make 50 independent connections to it.
I thought this is why protected pages (such as those needed a password) use memory resident cookies to hold the authentication so that you don't have to enter your password for each component that is downloaded.
My thinking is that a page with lots of small sized components can take longer to load that a page with one big component, because there will be a latency cost for each component downloaded.
Fully accept my thinking could be flawed though - not an expert in this area.
- 07-11-06, 10:23 PM #6
Windows by default allows 100 concurrent connections.
You're right in that a page with hundreds of small images will take longer to download than one with a few but it should hardly be noticeable with a fast broadband connection.
If you've never optimised your TCP/IP stack for broadband then you really should. Go to http://www.dslreports.com/tweaks for info.
- 08-11-06, 12:06 AM #7
indeed and changing to fastpath has its own issues regarding stability.
- 08-11-06, 08:50 AM #8
I forgot to mention - I ran TCP Optimizer when I first got my Sky connection - to be honest it didn't make much difference.
My pings are well within normal range
43mS for www.jolt.co.uk
This is about the same as when I was with Nildram DSLMax.
However, when I was on Nildram fixed 2Mbps, this ping was around the 20-25mS mark, and general internet browsing seemed more spritely then.
Also in comparison with the connection I use at work which is a 4Mbps leased line shared by about 80 people ....
Large File Download Speed Test (Work) - 3.5Mbps
Large File Download Speed Test (Home) - 5.1Mbps
Ping to www.jolt.co.uk (Work) - 10mS
Ping to www.jolt.co.uk (Home) - 43mS
So in terms of brute speed my Home connection wins but in terms of pings, the work connection wins easily.
How does this show up ...
When I open websites with a number of components they appear instantly at work whilst at home I see the pages build.
I can see this effect at similar times of day with the same sites.
This is why I thought the ping was the cause.
- 08-11-06, 10:25 AM #9
Can you give me an example of a page that "builds"?
My own experience with Sky is that sometimes there is an almost imperceptible pause before the page loads and then (even with a very busy page) everything appears in an instant.
What browser do you use? I use Firefox with the fasterfox add-in. This has a small timer at the bottom of the screen which shows page loading times.
I've just run a couple of tests as I also have a 2MB BT ADSL connection. I can see no material difference between these connections (Sky ping to BBC.co.uk is 31ms, BT is 24ms). The BBC pages appear to load identically. The timer shows both complete loading in a shade under 0.8s on average.
Lastly have you tried clearing your DNS cache (ipconfig /flushdns)? Also your browser cache (windows default lets this get huge).
- 18-05-07, 02:50 PM #10
Re: Can Ping Be Improved?
I just pinged jolt and got a laughable 800ms average.
Think the quickest was 80ms and the slowest about 866ms.