Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
--- nick@foobar.org wrote: From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
They may do some magic with bandwidth delay products.. If that was the case, they may have written it for a standard latency versus something that is unreasonable by interweb standards.
I don't know how they calculate bandwidth, but I was surprised that their system gave such wrong results under what were effectively lab conditions. ------------------------------------------ It'd be nice to know if NDT was not accurate as well. Anyone tested it? scott
The only reliable way to really test performance is to saturate the pipe (Iperf) and have a sufficiently well provisioned target. NDT does a good job using short non-saturation tests, but it is susceptible to slow start and other challenges. In general, NDT results will be more conservative than best case, whereas a lot of other tests are very optimistic best cases. FWIW, the actively maintained code has moved to: https://code.google.com/p/ndt/ and 3.6.4 is a bit more stable and flexible on some platforms than 3.6.5. You can either standup your own test server or point at the public sites run by a few universities and MeasurementLab (http://www.measurementlab.net/mlab_sites), which are not as widely distributed as the Ookla / speedtest.net targets, but they tend to be better provisioned and the result data for the Mlab targets is made available to the public. Once you've compiled the client, you can run again the closest host via: $ web100clt -n ndt.iupui.donar.measurement-lab.org (default install will put the test client in /usr/local/bin) If anybody want to host Mlab collection servers, they're always looking for more hosts (http://measurementlab.net/getinvolved). -- Andy On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Scott Weeks <surfer@mauigateway.com> wrote:
--- nick@foobar.org wrote: From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
They may do some magic with bandwidth delay products.. If that was the case, they may have written it for a standard latency versus something that is unreasonable by interweb standards.
I don't know how they calculate bandwidth, but I was surprised that their system gave such wrong results under what were effectively lab conditions. ------------------------------------------
It'd be nice to know if NDT was not accurate as well. Anyone tested it?
scott
It'd be nice to know if NDT was not accurate as well. Anyone tested it?
We've been using it for a few years. On my laptop that runs linux I get fairly consistent results (around 935Mb/s up and down right now) over a 1Gig routed link (a couple routers and a firewall in between.) On the Windows boxes I usually see a 100 to 200 Mb/s drop on the upload side. The last time I checked, you can compile a commandline version of the client. I seem to remember the commandline client not taking quite as bad a hit on the tests compared to running it on linux, but it's been a while since I tried it. For us it's been way more accurate than the various speedtest servers our customers insist on trying. A while back I switched from compiling my own kernel and NDT to using perfSONAR-PS (http://psps.perfsonar.net/). I like that they've got live-cd and net-install versions. If nothing else it's useful for pointing out the difference between a local network issue and Internet Suckage.
[Plug alert] For longer term monitoring, Project BISmark provides an easy-to-use system. It's an open source, customizable OpenWRT-based home router that runs periodic network measurements (latency, throughput, packetloss, jitter, etc) to nearby MLab servers. It uses netperf (single and multiple TCP threads), and shaperprobe, (UDP) for throughput measurements. Although its original target audience is home users, it can also be used as a monitoring tool in bigger networks. More information here: http://projectbismark.net/ Slides from the talk at NANOG 53: https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog53/presentations/Monday/Sundaresan.pdf - Srikanth On 04/04/2013 06:45 AM, Steve Haavik wrote:
It'd be nice to know if NDT was not accurate as well. Anyone tested it?
We've been using it for a few years. On my laptop that runs linux I get fairly consistent results (around 935Mb/s up and down right now) over a 1Gig routed link (a couple routers and a firewall in between.) On the Windows boxes I usually see a 100 to 200 Mb/s drop on the upload side. The last time I checked, you can compile a commandline version of the client. I seem to remember the commandline client not taking quite as bad a hit on the tests compared to running it on linux, but it's been a while since I tried it.
For us it's been way more accurate than the various speedtest servers our customers insist on trying. A while back I switched from compiling my own kernel and NDT to using perfSONAR-PS (http://psps.perfsonar.net/). I like that they've got live-cd and net-install versions. If nothing else it's useful for pointing out the difference between a local network issue and Internet Suckage.
participants (4)
-
Andy Warner -
Scott Weeks -
Srikanth Sundaresan -
Steve Haavik