Seacom versus SAT-3/SAFE latency

@ rpm... the Topic title does not match the contents of the article! :eek:

The article is about the new Google SA head.
 
haha... problem is most users always ping a server in the USA, so latencies to the USA are much higher.

trying now on my 4 mbps ADSL in Joburg to Paris, France... 366 ms

 
Is it just me, or can the author not count?

The latency CT - Portugal on SAT-3 is 60 ms.
The latency Durban - France on SEACOM is 74 ms.

That's a difference of 14 ms. Given that most real routes go further e.g. to London, or to New York, adding tens of ms, this is a relatively insignificant difference. Even at the SA end, you gain some ms going from Jo'burg to Durban rather than CT.

Basically, to Europe, you won't really be able to tell the difference beween SAT-3 and SEACOM on IP. You may be able to detect it if you have access to the actual transmission systems.
 
Last edited:
Best latency I've gotten to Europe was on a SAIX unshaped Web Africa account using Gamemax to a server based in Europe (Paris).

It was about 208ms, based on the WoW ingame latency meter. Now this might not be 100% accurate, but my Quartz mod confirmed 200ms latency on most casts and I could hardly see the delay in any action.

If Seacom can get anything close to this with good stability, I will be a very happy camper indeed :D
 
Surely the reduced traffic will play a part in reducing the latency.

With users switching to SEACOM the latency on SAT3 will improve too.

Maybe Telkom will tone down the shaping too?

Still, Cape Town to Joburg latency is much higher than the SA to France latency anyway (I'm in CT).
 
I have wireless and my ping is aroung to 400 mark, not this 1000 mark.

If paly a game on SAIX game severes my ping is 110ms, if i play international, there are normally about 20servers going that my ping is 200 to 320, but normally while playing its 230, and for that i can "lag free" to my eyes and reaction time.

I say we all do a ping test on a few sites at a sertain time (say speed test) then redo the tests once seacom is properly up and running!
 
Paddo said:
Surely the reduced traffic will play a part in reducing the latency.

With users switching to SEACOM the latency on SAT3 will improve too.

Maybe Telkom will tone down the shaping too?

Still, Cape Town to Joburg latency is much higher than the SA to France latency anyway (I'm in CT).
Click to expand...

That is sad if so (CT as well here). Hmmm i wonder the speed between CT and durbs, cause that better be like 30ms
 
Paddo said:
Surely the reduced traffic will play a part in reducing the latency.

With users switching to SEACOM the latency on SAT3 will improve too.

Maybe Telkom will tone down the shaping too?

Still, Cape Town to Joburg latency is much higher than the SA to France latency anyway (I'm in CT).
Click to expand...

I don't see how the cables latency is affected by the number of people on it.

Secom have released their stats and no one is using it.
 
My Latency From CPT to Paris is 269ms.

PADDO ppl moving off SAT3 will not improve latency, latency only becomes a problem under congestion
 
Paddo said:
Surely the reduced traffic will play a part in reducing the latency.

With users switching to SEACOM the latency on SAT3 will improve too.

Maybe Telkom will tone down the shaping too?

Still, Cape Town to Joburg latency is much higher than the SA to France latency anyway (I'm in CT).
Click to expand...

I don't see how the cables latency is affected by the number of people on it.

Secom have released their stats and no one is using it.
 
ITbob said:
My Latency From CPT to Paris is 269ms.

PADDO ppl moving off SAT3 will not improve latency, latency only becomes a problem under congestion
Click to expand...

Nerfherder said:
I don't see how the cables latency is affected by the number of people on it.

Secom have released their stats and no one is using it.
Click to expand...

SAT3 is congested isn't it - hence the shaping and the need for SEACOM.

As far as I understand it the lower contention will reduce latenct at least a bit.

no?
 
Nerfherder said:
I think congestion affects the reliablity of your latency.

EDIT: Latency has to do with distance IMHO
Click to expand...

Latency is not only about distance, but also about the number of switches / routers / repeaters etc from end to end. At each point (router, switch) etc, there will be some processing taking place (like routing according to a routing table) which will add to the latency.

Also, you guys need to differentiate if you are talking about the RAW latency (as I'll call it) of SEACOM, which would be just from the landing station in RSA to a landing station elsewhere, or, if you are talking about latency from the Neotel POP in Midrand which is where the bandwidth is actually "served" (as I'll call it :D ) to a POP elsewhere...
 
latency is affected by 3 things, distance (speed of light) routers the more work a router has to do the increase in latency, the more routers there are increases latency (hence VOIP normally get higher priority) and congestion.

From my understanding sat3 is not congested just expensive and it has limitations for further growth, such as increased broadband speed, IPTV and of course redundancy etc.... the new cables will allow africa to grow into the international internet market.

Prices will not drop immediately and you have to remember we still need to get the data from the landing station to the major cities and be it telkom or another provider laying fibre this all cost money and investment.

its all a positive step in the right direction, those ISP's who use sat3, seacom and the other cable when they come into play should set there networks up correctly to make sure they use the fastest path....
 
Most folk forget that Telkom doesn't do straight routing.

You *think* you're going straight to New York for example when you're going through Asia first. Or going to London but via the Asia link etc.

Go check it out, been posted a few years back
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X