> down 15.33Mbps, up 0.54Mbps
That doesn't seem that fast to me. I get better speeds out in the Midwest in America, where internet is supposed to be super shitty.
Particularly, I was expecting a symmetric connection.
That doesn't seem that fast to me. I get better speeds out in the Midwest in America, where internet is supposed to be super shitty.
Particularly, I was expecting a symmetric connection.
Oddly enough, I actually sometimes find sites outside the GFW are a bit faster compared to some domestic Chinese sites inside the GFW. The internal Chinese internet just has lots of problems that they haven't worked through yet.
w1ntermute, I'm fully aware those speeds are most definitely not fast, but relatively speaking it's usually worse than that.
(I love going to South Korea, I land at Incheon, there's free WiFi in the coach to the city, and the internet is FAST)
Is the last mile not the bottleneck in China? It is in America, AFAIK.
Why is this? Do the ISPs not have caching systems in place?
> To ensure better performance, my Internet provider keeps a local copy of the popular YouTube content (caching), and when I watch a trending video, they send me the stream from their local cache. However, if I request a video that’s not contained in their current cache, I’m sent over the broader Internet to the actual YouTube content servers.
I have no doubt that the vast majority of American ISPs have cached Gangnam Style. In the US at least, Google/YouTube likely assists in this process.
Beijing ping - 26ms down - 2.53Mbps up - 0.53Mbps
Shanghai ping - 148ms down - .83Mbps up - .52Mbps
London ping - 410ms down - .19Mbps up - .15Mbps