Online Game experience DSL or CABLE

disneyjoe7

What makes a better online game experience DSL or CABLE?

Is it Raw speed, 6meg vs. 20meg? Or is it

The speed in which a broadband line can ping another server? Or is it

Something else?

leroyjr1

I just switched to Time Warner from DSL. I was getting 5mbps with DSL and with time Warner I'm getting around 20mbps and I didn't notice any difference between the two when gaming.

disneyjoe7

I never had any issues with my dsl line, but feel the teleco's are not doing them self any favors. Most dsl lines are self installed, with those dsl filters thingies.... Just look at them and they cause line noise which kills sync. What are cable campanies doing they send a tech out there to install.

I'm thinking your dsl line was self installed, the difference is the pro install sends a truck cost a little more, and the filter is installed at dmark on another line in the house. Doing this way I can plug any phone in any jack without issue.

mudwrx

People still have DSL?

EndersShadow

I have Uverse and as someone that games and also did DSL tech support it comes down to both download and upload speeds.

If you get 3 MB down or more your good, the more upload you can get the better, but I have been doing fine on 1.5 - 3 MG up with gaming.

All of this assumes a hardwired connection. Wireless gaming is a whole nother monster in itself...

disneyjoe7

So it's not the speed it's the hardware wired vs. the wireless issue?

EndersShadow

disneyjoe7 wrote: »

So it's not the speed it's the hardware wired vs. the wireless issue?

Wireless can cause lots of hickups which can get you kicked from a game and cause lag, but thats a personal network issue between your router and your console.

You can still get lag if your overall connection (DSL, Cable, FIOS) is slow.

Most companies have different packages of Internet offerings broken down by their speed (Both Downstream and Upstream).

As long as whichever package you go with has a Minimum IMO of 3 Megabytes down and 1.5 Megabytes up you will be fine. The higher the numbers the less lag your system has overall to whatever servers your connecting to but you might not be able to notice that much of a difference for pure gaming.

Downloading files and videos from the web is different too.

Basically I would go with 3 or 6 Megabytes down and if possible 1.5 or 3 Megabytes up. Do that and your set.

cheddar

Yep, as long as you get a good minimum, the most important thing is that everything plays nice together. You just need a good reliable connection that doesn't get you dropped.

Uverse is unique because even the cable channels are based on IP streaming. So they have every incentive to provide a reliable connection.

Bobsama

Ping counts for a lot more. So long as the game doesn't use some ridiculously high bandwidth VoIP, that is. Either way, a solid 128kbps up/down is enough in most situations.

disneyjoe7

My thinking was the ping times made the most difference, this doesn't seem the case.

Uverse is reliable yes, since it's all fiber to the Remote Terminal / RT. But then again so can ADSL, I wonder if it's the self installed thing over not. If ADSL you got modem and most likely phone filters, but note that it could have been done differently. Uverse and it's all digital data so no filters are installed.

disneyjoe7

Bobsama wrote: »

Ping counts for a lot more. So long as the game doesn't use some ridiculously high bandwidth VoIP, that is. Either way, a solid 128kbps up/down is enough in most situations.

I use a CallCentric VOIP box for a special line to girl friends house, its takes 80k which seems fair since phone line is usually 64k if it's a nothing special pots line (Plain Old Telephone Service).

cheddar

Well, the thing about uverse for me is that if the internet craps out, it takes down every 'cable' channel on their network. With regular cable, I'd often have to call them to troubleshoot the internet 'cause their cable channels weren't affected by internet outages. So uverse really does have an extra incentive to keep the internet part of their service without too many hiccups.

EndersShadow

cheddar wrote: »

Well, the thing about uverse for me is that if internet craps out, it takes down every 'cable' channel on their network. With regular cable, I'd often have to call them to troubleshoot the internet 'cause their cable channels weren't affected by internet outages. So they really do have an extra incentive to keep the internet part of their service without too many hiccups.

+1..that and I hate COMCAST with a passion...but thats a personal preference (shared by millions however) :eek::biggrin:

leroyjr1

Just went to speedtest and I'm getting 22mbps download and .5mbps :eek:upload and I've never had any problems gaming, and .5 is alot less than the 1.5 you guys recommend .

disneyjoe7

I think even Uverse will have issues as the equipment gets older, who knows for sure.

EndersShadow

leroyjr1 wrote: »

Just went to speedtest and I'm getting 22mbps download and .5mbps upload and I've never had any problems gaming, and .5 is alot less than the 1.5 you guys recommend .

True, I suggest 1.5 up so if you happen to be sharing the connection its not going to be totally laggy if someone else in the family is uploading a youtube video, facebook pics, ect.

cheddar

disneyjoe7 wrote: »

I think even Uverse will have issues as the equipment gets older, who knows for sure.

Possibly, but like I said, the same things that would give gamers trouble would take down the TV side as well. So they'd have to upgrade or lose their whole system to competitors.

cheddar

There's a reason they install those big **** routers when they come to the house. It's primarily for the TV with the benefit that you can use it for your home network as well.

cheddar

One more benefit I just thought of. Every uverse box needs a hardwired ethernet drop. So for those with older houses they'll get a hardwired ethernet connection at installation that you can put a hub on, connect it to your console, and it just happens to be next to your TV.

disneyjoe7

My girl friend did an Uverse thing for TV, house phone, and DSL. I checked it since I never seen the house system, but I support host system so I know that side. Her Uverse goes to her router with a RG6 cable then the other boxes have a RG6 cable also then to the TV. Looks to me it can be a RG6 input also, then RG6 output also to another box.

EndersShadow

disneyjoe7 wrote: »

My girl friend did an Uverse thing for TV, house phone, and DSL. I checked it since I never seen the house system, but I support host system so I know that side. Her Uverse goes to her router with a RG6 cable then the other boxes have a RG6 cable also then to the TV. Looks to me it can be a RG6 input also, then RG6 output also to another box.

Yup, my entire network is run that way. I have the main box downstairs w/ the DVR then it goes into my office where it runs through a regular powered netgear 12 port switch (which they gave me for free). port 1 goes to the bedroom to the box there for TV and port 2 goes to my computer for internet)

Tech said that if I add more boxes later (like in the office) they just throw another line into any of the ports 1-4 and bam I am done.

Pretty nice tech. He ran all the wires under the carpet, helped me run some speaker wire along side them, and drilled holes to make the install as clean as possible.

quadzilla

Latency is the most important factor in gaming, assuming you have adequate bandwidth to handle the game's traffic. Latency is what most refer to as ping. So basically, the less latency you have, the faster response times you'll get. It's also important that your latency remain consistent. If you're bouncing between 20 ms and 100 ms, it will play havoc with your gaming.

However, most confalte bandwith with latency, because typically, a network built out to handle higher bandwidth will have more powerful routers and switches, so this means packets are forwarded faster, which means less latency.

However, I'll take a consistent 200 ms ping over one that bounces around more than 10-15 ms in varience.

cheddar

disneyjoe7 wrote: »

My girl friend did an Uverse thing for TV, house phone, and DSL. I checked it since I never seen the house system, but I support host system so I know that side. Her Uverse goes to her router with a RG6 cable then the other boxes have a RG6 cable also then to the TV. Looks to me it can be a RG6 input also, then RG6 output also to another box.

Guess they figured out it would be easier to work with existing wiring in older houses. In my old house they just ran cat-5 in the crawlspace under the house and came up next to the TV. Then I connected it to a cheap 4-port hub. One port out to the uverse box, one to the 360, one to the ps3 and I was set.

disneyjoe7

quadzilla wrote: »

Latency is the most important factor in gaming, assuming you have adequate bandwidth to handle the game's traffic. Latency is what most refer to as ping. So basically, the less latency you have, the faster response times you'll get. It's also important that your latency remain consistent. If you're bouncing between 20 ms and 100 ms, it will play havoc with your gaming.

However, most confalte bandwith with latency, because typically, a network built out to handle higher bandwidth will have more powerful routers and switches, so this means packets are forwarded faster, which means less latency.

However, I'll take a consistent 200 ms ping over one that bounces around more than 10-15 ms in varience.

Yes I think a consistent value is best, slow or fast.

Bobsama

leroyjr1 wrote: »

Just went to speedtest and I'm getting 22mbps download and .5mbps :eek:upload and I've never had any problems gaming, and .5 is alot less than the 1.5 you guys recommend .

Upload speeds only really count when you're running a server. I would much prefer a solid 60ms ping to a ping that fluctuates between 20ms & 40ms. Anyways, in gaming, (a low) Jitter > (a low) Ping > (fast) Download > (fast) Upload. That's why T1, T2, & T3 lines are so fantastic for gamers and servers yet so damn expensive. Having <5ms pings inside New England plus 44mbps up/down was practically gaming nirvana. I'd be able to log into online games and have very real advantages over "high difficulty" bots and skilled players.

SniperREX

quadzilla wrote: »

However, I'll take a consistent 200 ms ping over one that bounces around more than 10-15 ms in varience.

200ms is very high. When I used to play FPS online on the PC using servers, I remember that everything over 100ms was pretty much unplayable.