Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Mainboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

Memory Prices

Shop



Sharky Extreme :





SharkyForums.Com - Print: ADSL vs CABLE MODEM

ADSL vs CABLE MODEM
By trailblazer April 26, 2001, 09:26 PM

I'll get one of these 2 services soon. In my country (Argentina), ADSL has just recently been introduced in the market, but I know that you can download from sites such as download.com or with napster at about 40 KB/S and with CM you get only about 20 kbs. From some local sites you can download at full speed. I'd been told that when CM was released here, about 2 years ago, it was much faster than now, because the quantity of users growth was too high and the company didn't get enough bandwidth to support those. I'd also been told that this cannot happen with ADSL because it uses a total different technology than CM and bandwidth isn't shared between users (like modem), so it will always remain the same. Is this true? Also, there are 2 speeds for ADSL: 256 and 512 kbs/s. Will I get more speed with 512 if I download from a site at 50 kbs with 256? Or will the difference only exist if I download from a good local site?
Both companies provide you with an ethernet adapter (I believe it's 10/100). I want to make an old computer server for my main PC. Will I download slower from my main PC if I use it with a 10 ethernet adapter? And will it be slower even if I get one of 10/100?
Thanks for spending time reading this.

By Shreck April 26, 2001, 09:44 PM

quote:Originally posted by trailblazer:
I'll get one of these 2 services soon. In my country (Argentina), ADSL has just recently been introduced in the market, but I know that you can download from sites such as download.com or with napster at about 40 KB/S and with CM you get only about 20 kbs. From some local sites you can download at full speed. I'd been told that when CM was released here, about 2 years ago, it was much faster than now, because the quantity of users growth was too high and the company didn't get enough bandwidth to support those. I'd also been told that this cannot happen with ADSL because it uses a total different technology than CM and bandwidth isn't shared between users (like modem), so it will always remain the same. Is this true? Also, there are 2 speeds for ADSL: 256 and 512 kbs/s. Will I get more speed with 512 if I download from a site at 50 kbs with 256? Or will the difference only exist if I download from a good local site?
Both companies provide you with an ethernet adapter (I believe it's 10/100). I want to make an old computer server for my main PC. Will I download slower from my main PC if I use it with a 10 ethernet adapter? And will it be slower even if I get one of 10/100?
Thanks for spending time reading this.

Well, in America generally a cable modem will be faster than a DSL line. If in Argentina, however, they have a bad over-committment problem, the speeds could get pretty slow. But 20KBps? That's incredibly slow. My average is around 80KBps. The point is, in America I'd normally recommend the Cable modem, but they are oversold in Argentina, I'd steer clear.

Yes, DSL uses far different technology than Cable, and the infrastructures are different, but is can still be over-committed. This means that there is no guarantee, and without knowing what the broadband is like in your area it makes it even harder. Still, I'd probably recommend DSL, as it is a more conventional, flexible technology. As for 512 vs. 256, at those speeds you should see an almost 90% increase in speed at 512. This accounts for the occasional slow site.

And whichever technology you pick, it doesn't matter which you go with, unless you plan on having a home network. The absolute fastest specs on ANY DSL or Cable modem I've seen is 6Mbps, and even in that case a 10Mbps Network card would work fine. In case you ever do set up a home network, I'd use a 10/100. Nearly all NICs that say 100 are 10/100, so don't worry about speed.

I hope that helps!

Shreck

By trailblazer April 26, 2001, 10:23 PM

I expressed incorrectly. What I meant to say was that if I could download a file from a server at 80 kbs max from a server with a 256 kbs/s ADSL (not using the whole bandwidth), will a neighbour in the exact same conditions (line, provider, time of the day, etc) BUT using a 512 kbs/s ADSL tries to download said file from the same server, would he suffer the same speed max (80 kbs/s) I do? In other words, the only difference between 256/512 is the IDEAL max, which, in my case, will only matter if I download from a server capable of providing download speed of more than 256 kbs/s.
Thx.

PS: all services provide 128 kbs/s of upload speed.

By slick April 26, 2001, 10:37 PM

I replyed to it in the other forum....

By e_dawg April 27, 2001, 03:26 AM

quote:Originally posted by trailblazer:
I expressed incorrectly. What I meant to say was that if I could download a file from a server at 80 kbs max from a server with a 256 kbs/s ADSL (not using the whole bandwidth), will a neighbour in the exact same conditions (line, provider, time of the day, etc) BUT using a 512 kbs/s ADSL tries to download said file from the same server, would he suffer the same speed max (80 kbs/s) I do? In other words, the only difference between 256/512 is the IDEAL max, which, in my case, will only matter if I download from a server capable of providing download speed of more than 256 kbs/s.
Thx.

PS: all services provide 128 kbs/s of upload speed.

Check Cable -- they have a massive pipe most of the time and minimal to moderate saturation. You will get much high speeds in the US.

Uploads in any case suck, so, whichever gives you the most guaranteed downstream is the winner, though cable does not guarantee, so check with other users of cable (it's subjective, but here, if I could get DSL (not yet), I could get ~512up/1000down for ~$80, while I now get ~128up/6000+down (I've had 2.5MB/sec downloads (20000kbps) at off-peak times) for $40.

By Shreck April 27, 2001, 12:21 PM

quote:Originally posted by trailblazer:
In other words, the only difference between 256/512 is the IDEAL max, which, in my case, will only matter if I download from a server capable of providing download speed of more than 256 kbs/s.

Yeah, all services are limited by the pipe on the other end. For instance, some users on napster have a 56Kb modem! But for most normal web browsing, it shouldn't be a problem. In addition, having a bigger pipe on your side means that even if all the servers you were downloading from were limited to half your bandwidth, you'd still be able to download from two different servers at full speed, saving yourself some time.

Shreck

By dadda2000 April 29, 2001, 06:33 AM

Well, I actually got ADSL here in Sweden, and I reach speeds at 548 KB / s mostly.

By awa64 April 29, 2001, 06:44 PM

Go for the cheaper of the two, usually.

If there is more sensitive data on your computer, though, aDSL has better security than Cable, because Cable is connected to your house through a network.

By ThatPaintballingGuy April 30, 2001, 09:20 AM

i use ADSL and i ususally always get maximum speed. abit more than 620kbs/s.

By MunCHeeZz May 01, 2001, 03:35 AM

I have found that overall my home cable service is far faster than any of the xDSL services that my office and clients have. Our ADSL line at the office is a dedicated 2.5 Mb/s pipe. On it's own I see an average of 125 KB/s. With a download accelerator it almost doubles. Most of my client's have the standard 1.5 Mb/s xDSL. No comparison.
With one download unassisted I am averaging 150 KB/s. With a download accelerator that opens an additional 6 ports I am averaging 500 KB/s! That's 1/2 MB per second! I've seen it peak at 850 KB/s.
Downloads tend to be very quick! :-)
Here in Alberta, Canada consumer xDSL and consumer cable services are the same price. The corporate price structures are pretty close between the services too.
jus my 2bits worth!
M.

By UT Dominator May 01, 2001, 07:16 AM

I have found that the level of service depends on how much the company which you buy it from lies and places inane restrictions on your use. I have a cable modem, with Comcast cable tv. I think i'm going to start a class action lawsuit against them. they are horrible. They cap upload speeds at 128K to 'prevent' people from hosting servers, even though they sold me a service with upload speeds of 256K.
At any rate, cable companys are typically less advanced and less buisnesslike than phone companys and as such typically do not implement the proper infrastrucutre to suppor their cabme modem networks. During peak times my cable modem is little better than dial up.
Which is better? look into the company's, into their records, and into their 'policies' govorning your use of their service. I think that dsl technology is better in theory, but it all depends on how a company implements it.

By Bandor May 01, 2001, 06:39 PM

Does anyone around you or yourself have digital cable installed? if so try using it during prime-time and then try at an off time like 5am or so. My cable company has such terrible service it takes about 5 seconds to see channel information and about 3 seconds to change chanells during prime-time 7-10pm, but during off-times like 2-5am things happen almost instantly, and my cable company wants to start cable internet now, there is no way that the seviced will be much better than dial-up since lines/equipment are already out of bandwith.

By FaTs May 01, 2001, 10:27 PM

I'd like to ask the same question.

Is ADSL higher latencty than cable ?

Which do you think would be better for gaming

In both cases i would get the Freedom Deluxe or Bussiness Dexlue plan

ADSL
Cable

Thanks

By nels1481 May 02, 2001, 11:03 PM

The pro/con argument. Cable is generally faster download and more widly available. DSL is generally faster upload and more reliable. I chose DSL 256Kbps upload and 640Kbps download from Qwest.net for $29.95/month. The people who work for qwest are incompetent so don't expect support but the technology is very reliable. Reliability does not matter until it does not work then it matters more than anything. One last thing is if you are too cheap to buy the router and want to use a pc as one do not use windows!!! Windows is slow and unreliable use linux or Solaris(free from www.sun.com)but I still strongly recommend the router for performance and reliability and with hubs far more scalability.

By lostlilchild6 May 06, 2001, 09:13 PM

i would recommend going with ADSL, mostly due to the reliability. i have ADSL and i just loooooooooooove it. it sure beats the hell outta 56K, and i top ALL the cable users in my area (ontario/california). i got my DSL through verizon, and all i have to pay is $40 monthly and thats it!! no modem fee, installation fee, or any other BS fee. i get average download speeds of about 80-90 k/sec. thats pretty fast for residential DSL. my bandwidth is 756k down, and 115K up. hope that helps


the *LOST* one'

ASUS A7V133
Thunderbird 1ghz@1.3ghz (130X10)
VANTEC HSF 7200
256 NEC PC133@130
GF2MX (210/210) =)
sb live value
20 gig 7200
2 gig 5400 (for games)
12x10x32x cd rw
32x cd rom
DSL
12 fans inside case:
CPU, northbridge controller, vid card, 3 intake fans, 2 exhaust, 1 on the 2 gig HD, 2 on the 20 gig HD, 1 on power supply.

By Molochi May 07, 2001, 12:03 AM

quote:Originally posted by FaTs:
I'd like to ask the same question.

Is ADSL higher latencty than cable ?

Which do you think would be better for gaming

In both cases i would get the Freedom Deluxe or Bussiness Dexlue plan

ADSL
Cable

Thanks


For gaming, ADSL. My ping times with cable are great, but when this POS starts dropping packets it's worthless.


Contact Us | www.SharkyForums.com

Copyright 1999, 2000 internet.com Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46

previous page
next page





Copyright 2002 INT Media Group, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. About INT Media Group | Press Releases | Privacy Policy | Career Opportunities