eltherza
Expert Member
I got myself a cellc connection here is a first day comparision
iBurst good signal vs Cellc
iBurst speed peak: 0.9Mbps
Cellc speed peak: 4.2Mbps
Real world it feels about 2 or 3x faster than iBurst. There is a problem with cellc, it seems that it takes long time to establish connections than iBurst. So for example, when you browse to a page you have to wait before it starts to transfer the page (in firefox, it's the "waiting for www.google.com" in the status bar that is long for cellc). I'd say it's about 2 seconds longer than iBurst. Once the connection is established, cellc dominates iburst in speed (in firefox, it's the "transfering" status bar).
Games
So I tried some TF2 on local servers:
iBurst latency: +-70ms on a good day
Cellc latency: +-40ms (I saw latency of 35ms, and usually sat at about 50ms)
Cellc's latency is better than iBurst for local but because of the higher speeds, you are less affected by random downloads [decals, wife browsing]
But, all is not well with CellC. Peak times seem to have had a strange effect on the Cellc. The lag and through put is affected (can drop to 1.8Mbps on speed test). But that is still stable enough not to worry to much about load,the biggest issue with cellc I've had so far is that the modem keeps switching modes between hsdpa/wcdma/hsdupa. When it switches, you can lose connectivity about 20seconds as it changes modes. The biggest problem with is that you timeout. Youtube videos only half load, you get disconnected in games and you have to wait over 20 seconds before you can browse again.
It's frustrating but it only started to hit me in peak times (I also moved the modem so it might be signal issues). I've enforced the slowest connection to prevent this (WCDMA), establishing connections are still slow but the speed test this morning hit 3.8Mbps. Latency tests showed 70ms (much like iburst).
Usage monitoring uses the program you use to connect, but hidden away is a nice request for balance that will show you your balance almost instantly (like prepaid cellphones).
On the whole, I'm impressed but worried about the possible random disconnects linked to the changing of connection types. I'll do more peak time benchmarks and tweeking to see if the changing of connection types (and slow establishments of connections) is really a big of a problem as I've experienced so far.
iBurst good signal vs Cellc
iBurst speed peak: 0.9Mbps
Cellc speed peak: 4.2Mbps
Real world it feels about 2 or 3x faster than iBurst. There is a problem with cellc, it seems that it takes long time to establish connections than iBurst. So for example, when you browse to a page you have to wait before it starts to transfer the page (in firefox, it's the "waiting for www.google.com" in the status bar that is long for cellc). I'd say it's about 2 seconds longer than iBurst. Once the connection is established, cellc dominates iburst in speed (in firefox, it's the "transfering" status bar).
Games
So I tried some TF2 on local servers:
iBurst latency: +-70ms on a good day
Cellc latency: +-40ms (I saw latency of 35ms, and usually sat at about 50ms)
Cellc's latency is better than iBurst for local but because of the higher speeds, you are less affected by random downloads [decals, wife browsing]
But, all is not well with CellC. Peak times seem to have had a strange effect on the Cellc. The lag and through put is affected (can drop to 1.8Mbps on speed test). But that is still stable enough not to worry to much about load,the biggest issue with cellc I've had so far is that the modem keeps switching modes between hsdpa/wcdma/hsdupa. When it switches, you can lose connectivity about 20seconds as it changes modes. The biggest problem with is that you timeout. Youtube videos only half load, you get disconnected in games and you have to wait over 20 seconds before you can browse again.
It's frustrating but it only started to hit me in peak times (I also moved the modem so it might be signal issues). I've enforced the slowest connection to prevent this (WCDMA), establishing connections are still slow but the speed test this morning hit 3.8Mbps. Latency tests showed 70ms (much like iburst).
Usage monitoring uses the program you use to connect, but hidden away is a nice request for balance that will show you your balance almost instantly (like prepaid cellphones).
On the whole, I'm impressed but worried about the possible random disconnects linked to the changing of connection types. I'll do more peak time benchmarks and tweeking to see if the changing of connection types (and slow establishments of connections) is really a big of a problem as I've experienced so far.
Last edited:
