Internet Statistics

PC Zone have a large exclusive article on HL2 this week (or next week, not sure), with loads of new stuff in it. They claim to have played it at Valve's office, and seem to be the first ones reporting on it (PC Gamer will have their report later in the month). HL2 will also show up at E3 with new stuff, probably the same stuff in the magazine reports.

Release dates from retailers should never be trusted, seeing we'd know if they were real or not (developers would announce this sort of thing to the public as well). They just make a guess. Right now, Valve have only said "summer".

shall be buying it, me shall.

The thing on TV was pretty lame. There was a small amount of new footage of a warehouse and a giant antlion on a roof. Well that was new to me anyway, and the giant antlion looked really good. Doug said they put vehicles in because loads of people wished they had been in HL1, and he also said that the special rendering effects on the eyes of characters made a huge difference to the realism of them in their testing. That's pretty much it... it was only on for a couple of minutes.

PC Gamer already had an "HL2 exclusive" in their last issue... which was funny, as although they said they'd been playing it at Valve they just showed us lots of pixellated E3 screenshots

PC Gamer already had an "HL2 exclusive" in their last issue... which was funny, as although they said they'd been playing it at Valve they just showed us lots of pixellated E3 screenshots

This was a mix-up. The story goes that the NDA they signed expired after the issue they were going to put HL2 in was supposed to come out, so they had to therow in everything that was known thus far. Like I said (and they said), they'll have their report later in the month.

Jeff, Well, then my ISP is probably lying their asses off

Honestly, I'm not sure, the last time I checked it, 1.5Mb was what it was clocked at.

What speed do I have then if my ISP is wrong?

If you can download at 300k/sec, you have 300*8=2.4 megabit connection. I think you mentioned what bandwidth steam says it's using - steam gives it's usage in kilobits/second, most other downloading programs using kilobytes/second.

Gwil said:
In all seriousness though Orph, i'd say 35 votes is impressive for an internet messageboard, most of which die about 3 days after their inception :razz:

that may be true, but when a flawed demographics poll can get 1/3 more votes, it tells me its more of an "i'm tired of em" thing, more so than its a poor poll in itself.

everyone here, uses the net to get here, it seems like telling everyone anonymously, how you do it, should not be to hard a task.

Thanks.

Actually, no, steam was downloading at 1.5Mb/s ... I had it clocked (I have a bandwidth clock on from time to time)

How else could I have downloaded 700Mb in less then ten minutes? :biggrin:

? posted by Crono

Actually, no, steam was downloading at 1.5Mb/s ... I had it clocked (I have a bandwidth clock on from time to time)




crono, each one of these is just short of 1.5 MBps .. and either would take much longer than 10 minutes to download 700 megs.. either your connection is much faster than 1.5 , or your perception of time is askew.

then again, both of these delivery systems could be reporting false info, as i do not actually know how fast 1.5 is supposed to be.. i am just content my dsl is pretty good.

scary_jeff said:
Awsome, just found out that all telewest packages are being increased at no extra cost. Our 512k going to 750, 1 meg is going to 1.5, and 2 meg is going to 3... and nobody has to pay anything :biggrin:

So, is that in england??? hmmm wonder if I could get one of those 1.5 megabyte connections

<!-- ZoneLabs Popup Blocking Insertion -->

After I moved up to dsl from 56k I was amazed at how much faster it was browsing the internet... for about a week. Somehow my browser settings are so horribly misconfigured that I sometimes think back to the days of my speedy 56k hehe. At least I think the problem is something to do with my flash settings . Although I could be way off . I've checked all the physical connections and I don't think it's the wires. DLing is fast and games play fine, so I'm pretty sure its the browser. Anyways this turned into a huge ramble and I need to go to bed but if anyone has any suggestions I'd be happy to hear them.

Sloth, it's for telewest. They don't cover the whole of the UK, but I think you can check it on their site (blueyonder.co.uk)

It seems very unlikely that you can download at 1.2 -1.5 megabytes per second - that's a 15 megabit connection, which isn't possible using DSL or cable... Look at how it says it will take 46 minutes to finish the 380 meg download, and also says it's going at 1212.3k/sec. If it was actually going this fast, the download would be complete in 5.2 minutes! The download speed is obviously being given in kilobits per second, as 5.2 times 8 gives us around the 46 that the estimated time indicates.

It looks like all your programs are reporting download speeds in bits per second instead of the conventional bytes. If you did in fact download 700 megs in ten minutes, you have got a T3 crono :smile:

jeff, i dunno how it reads, but to get the real numbers, move the decimal place one to the left..

if you converted the numbers it would be like saying a dial-up is 56k/sec when its really a 5.6k/sec ... so in this case the reported 1212.3k is really 121.23k.

final answer, my 1.5 (1500) is in reality 150.0k

theoretically, i can sustain a download of 150k per, but in reality, i have seen 200+

my old cable had 300+ on many occasions.. sighs when it was up that is.

Orph, moving the decimal point divides by 10, you actually need to divide by 8 since there are 8 bits in a byte... I'm sorry but if you really did download at 300kbyte/sec, you were not on a 1.5 megabit connection, you were on a 2.5 megabit.

math, smath.. you figure it then, i cannot help how the stupid thing reports it.

i have had some speedy downloads, if you wanna do it..

i downloaded the taboo HL in 1 hour and 23 minutes.. it was 1.4 gigs

all i am saying is, if you want to read the numbers correctly, move the damned decimal place one to the left..

All I am saying is that that is totally baseless and incorrect :smile:

That works out as 280k/second. Like I said, you must have been on 2.5 megabit at the time. Remember that on cable they can change your connection speed without you knowing and without you having to do anything.

Jeff, slow down..

i am not saying you are wrong.

i am saying, to read the numbers correctly, just move the damned decimal point :rolleyes:

121k is a realistic number for DSL.. ignore what you know is right, and listen for a change..

jeez

Orpheus said:
theoretically, i can sustain a download of 150k per, but in reality, i have seen 200+

my old cable had 300+ on many occasions.. sighs when it was up that is.

never trust what the reported download speed says.. im apparently able to reach 7kb/s+ on my 56k modem I think the important thing is to be thankful you actually have broadband now :wink:

unlike some of us

Orph!! No! You think dividing by ten gives you the download speed? This just isn't true!! It may happen that in some cases, you happen to get a maximum speed that just happens to be a 10th of your conenction speed in kbit/second, but this is not a set rule of any kind. A 1.5 megabit connection can download at a little under 1536 / 8 = 192 kilobytes/second. If you get 150k/second, this does not mean that dividing by ten gives you the right speed, it means that you are not maxing out your conenction!

Gwil said:

Orpheus said:
theoretically, i can sustain a download of 150k per, but in reality, i have seen 200+

my old cable had 300+ on many occasions.. sighs when it was up that is.

never trust what the reported download speed says.. im apparently able to reach 7kb/s+ on my 56k modem I think the important thing is to be thankful you actually have broadband now :wink:

unlike some of us

keep an eye on that gwil, as i hear it, the 56k can't do that, but i too have seen well in excess of 5k

i have been told though, that the only way it can do that is if you have a partial download of the file already on hand, and the download speed is misreading whats present, with whats left..

when i was in my clan however, i sustained 12k thru ICQ, from Sweden once, for almost 30 minutes.. ICQ had always read my dial-up accurately, and the 12 was a shock.. the clanmate i was getting it from was on a t-1 and i was the only person downloading from him at that moment..

needless to say, the 12k was fun to look at, and i can say, i did NOT have any of the file in advance.. so go figure :biggrin:

Modems have built in compression. If you are downloading something compressable, your apparent dowload speed will be higher than the theoretical maximum, because the data is automatically uncompressed after you recieve it. The actual data rate coming into the modem will not have gone over 7 kilobytes/second

scary_jeff said:
Orph!! No!

puts on patronizing face

sure jeff.. OK

reminds self that jeff is unable to listen

i did NOT say you were wrong jeff, i said, the GUI was, to read it you had to read the reported number just like i said to..

forget it jeff, your letting what you KNOW, stand in the way of reality again.. to close to the forest to see the tree's

LOL!! OK, let's look at what the gui says:

180 megabytes to download

18 minutes, 45 seconds = 1125 seconds to download.

180 megs / 1125 seconds = 160 kilobyte/second

160 kilobytes/second * 10 (as you suggest) = 1.6 megabit/second

160 kilobytes/second * 8 (as I suggest) = 1.28 megabit/second

Now look at how the gui says '1.23 Mbps' - the gui that you are saying uses this magic 'divide by ten' rule, doesn't actually do that. You sare saying this particular gui needs to have it's figures divided by ten, but it shows no signs that this is the case, staying very close to the correct way of working out the speeds.

Jeff, has your cheese completely slid off today?

you quoted the 1212.3 ... i carried on that comment further, now suddenly to win your point, you switch to the other GUI??

jeez bud, i didn't think you were that sort :sad:

either stick to the conversation, or don't involve me in them..

all this time, i thought we were still talking about the 1212.3

i said, 121k is a realistic number for DSL

You were talking like that rule applied to everything - "dial-up is 56k/sec when its really a 5.6k/sec". If you only meant that that particular (the first one only) gui has this rule, perhaps because of some kind of bug or error in the program, then there's nothing to argue :smile: I couldn't use the first gui because it doesn't tell you an avergage download speed, only the current one.

I'm trying to explain that dial up is 56 kiloBITs per second, which translates into 7 kiloBYTEs per second, and that to do this, you divide by 8, not 10 as that flawed gui would suggest - the same rule applies to any connection.

thus ends, another text based conversation..

bumps

hey guys, just because Jeff and i bantered the morning away, doesn't mean the poll has ended.. i know we have more than 41 active members, and i am betting, they are not using a BBS to reply with :smile:

bumps

/me refuses to concede defeat, i know there are more than 41 internet users here :heee:

Orpheus said:
bumps

/me refuses to concede defeat, i know there are more than 41 internet users here :heee:

Careful the blood pressure there Jon... :biggrin:

All I know is I've seen similar performance like Crono has where I got the latest CS or whichever game in less than 10 mins. Bandwidth and speed calculators are so fragile though. I don't take those speed tests because I can take 5 in a row and the results vary by so much it's useless information to me.

So far as I know my cable connection is uncapped, the only time they come a knocking is if I download like 8-10GB or more a week. Then they'll cut you off for a few days. Other than that, download performance is awesome. Upload isn't too much though, usually only 50 or so kbps. Not that I'm complaining for $40CDN a month :smile:

Oh now I remember, in america the speed of your cable connection is affected by how many people in your area are using the connection at that time, and the figure quoted for your connection speed is an expected average. So if all the other people in your area are just checking their emails, but you are downloading a big file, you will get way more bandwidth than them.

im cable, 512/256 :biggrin: ... dunno why i have such fast uploads lol. 3GB download limit

GO SON!!!

Me Likes Broadband its the king of the internet

512 cable.

typically around 256kbps downloads...

Oh now I remember, in america the speed of your cable connection is affected by how many people in your area are using the connection at that time, and the figure quoted for your connection speed is an expected average. So if all the other people in your area are just checking their emails, but you are downloading a big file, you will get way more bandwidth than them.

Exactly!

I just checked, and I was off, my connection used to be a (a month ago) 1.5Mb connection ... now it's a 3Mb connection ... that still doesn't explain the speeds in steam though ... hmm.

Steam gives bandwidth in Kbaud, so if it says anything below 3000, then it's a perfectly possible figure.