Latency Test
Re: Latency Test
my location : Erie, Pennsylvania
64.34.160.92 (SB-V) was best for me with an avg ping of 53 MS and a very tight variance
all of the rest were acceptable at ~120 ms
except
72.51.32.76 (SB-LA) which was a min ping of 124 and a max of 1029? weird... averaged out to be 357 if i spiked like that however... it'd probably be unplayable
upon re-pinging 72.51.32.76 (SB-LA) i got strange results seems to be that every now and then i have a random spike bringing my avg ping up.. not sure whats going on with it
64.34.160.92 (SB-V) was best for me with an avg ping of 53 MS and a very tight variance
all of the rest were acceptable at ~120 ms
except
72.51.32.76 (SB-LA) which was a min ping of 124 and a max of 1029? weird... averaged out to be 357 if i spiked like that however... it'd probably be unplayable
upon re-pinging 72.51.32.76 (SB-LA) i got strange results seems to be that every now and then i have a random spike bringing my avg ping up.. not sure whats going on with it
Re: Latency Test
I heart Texas and all, but we've been there before and have experienced major congestion.bigcheez wrote:how about we just get a central server, dallas tx, like a normal person
Re: Latency Test
From Tokyo/JAPAN (Shared FTTH via DTI)
Anything except 64.34.160.92 will be an improvement.
All other three have RTT of around 120~150msec.
64.34.160.92 would be unbearable, since the routers en route to the destination appears to drop a lot of packets.
Anything except 64.34.160.92 will be an improvement.
All other three have RTT of around 120~150msec.
64.34.160.92 would be unbearable, since the routers en route to the destination appears to drop a lot of packets.
Re: Latency Test
First one is the best
Prague , Czech Republic
Prague , Czech Republic
Re: Latency Test
The first one was best for me.
North Carolina
North Carolina
Re: Latency Test
Colorado US
64.34.160.92 108 109
67.212.163.50 92
72.51.32.76 97-98
66.226.72.172 98-99
64.34.160.92 108 109
67.212.163.50 92
72.51.32.76 97-98
66.226.72.172 98-99
-
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:48 pm
Re: Latency Test
Orlando, FL
64.34.160.92 - 40ms (15 hops)
67.212.163.50 - 38 ms (13 hops)
72.51.32.76 - 79 ms (16 hops)
66.226.72.172 - 80 ms (16 hops)
64.34.160.92 - 40ms (15 hops)
67.212.163.50 - 38 ms (13 hops)
72.51.32.76 - 79 ms (16 hops)
66.226.72.172 - 80 ms (16 hops)
- son
- UOSA Donor!!
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: I put an r in it http://my.uosecondage.com/Status/Player/67484
Re: Latency Test
traceroute 64.34.160.92
traceroute to 64.34.160.92 (64.34.160.92), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 6.300 ms 6.638 ms 9.329 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 28.935 ms 40.655 ms 41.086 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 44.507 ms 45.025 ms 51.709 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 52.634 ms 59.194 ms 59.685 ms
5 peer-02-so-0-0-0-0.chcg.twtelecom.net (66.192.244.20) 114.627 ms 115.129 ms 115.636 ms
6 oc48-po1-0.tor-1yg-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.114.142) 147.147 ms 97.261 ms 149.381 ms
7 10ge.xe-0-0-0.tor-151f-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.114.134) 149.743 ms 153.706 ms 157.173 ms
8 oc48-po3-0.mtl-bvh-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.114.198) 172.264 ms 172.783 ms 178.659 ms
9 10ge.xe-0-0-0.mtl-bvh-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.115.85) 211.273 ms 213.493 ms 215.748 ms
10 oc192.xe-4-0-0.nyc-telx-dis-1.peer1.net (216.187.115.54) 217.207 ms 437.306 ms 447.547 ms
11 10ge.ten1-2.wdc-sp2-cor-2.peer1.net (216.187.115.222) 455.460 ms 457.636 ms 456.350 ms
12 10ge.ten1-1.wdc-sp2-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.116.253) 139.211 ms 139.609 ms 143.987 ms
13 216.187.120.238 (216.187.120.238) 158.437 ms 172.863 ms 173.250 ms
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *
traceroute 67.212.163.50
traceroute to 67.212.163.50 (67.212.163.50), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 2.882 ms 4.777 ms 6.878 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 294.087 ms 298.345 ms 298.865 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 300.257 ms 303.054 ms 307.292 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 307.831 ms 314.595 ms 315.056 ms
5 peer-02-ge-1-0-0-0.palo.twtelecom.net (66.192.243.98) 315.513 ms 316.005 ms 316.512 ms
6 tge2-4.ar1.sfo1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.143.122) 317.109 ms 86.842 ms 22.679 ms
7 tge1-1.ar1.slc1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.142.98) 32.342 ms 43.472 ms 43.931 ms
8 xe-2-1-0.cr1.ord1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.142.101) 77.102 ms 81.136 ms 88.018 ms
9 111.xe-3-3-0.cr1.ord1.us.scnet.net (216.246.88.162) 122.821 ms 125.775 ms 126.272 ms
10 v21.ar2.ord1.us.scnet.net (216.246.95.244) 91.790 ms 102.704 ms 107.135 ms
11 as32475.1614.po2.ar2.ord1.us.scnet.net (75.102.19.139) 103.138 ms 107.587 ms 107.936 ms
12 10.97.198.99.no-rdns.ord02.singlehop.net (99.198.97.10) 92.647 ms 62.162 ms 73.345 ms
13 web01.singlehop.net (67.212.163.50) 74.065 ms 65.178 ms 68.414 ms
traceroute 72.51.32.76
traceroute to 72.51.32.76 (72.51.32.76), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 7.447 ms 14.894 ms 15.423 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 22.068 ms 26.854 ms 37.378 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 42.438 ms 53.780 ms 54.268 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 59.242 ms 59.820 ms 68.063 ms
5 peer-01-ge-0-0-0-0.snjs.twtelecom.net (66.192.242.190) 70.436 ms 71.794 ms 72.390 ms
6 10ge.ten1-1.sj-mkp2-dis-1.peer1.net (216.187.89.101) 74.936 ms 34.015 ms 16.177 ms
7 10ge-ten1-3.la-600w-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.88.130) 128.388 ms 128.965 ms 131.605 ms
8 216.187.88.58 (216.187.88.58) 43.506 ms 51.558 ms 52.102 ms
9 * * *
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *
traceroute 66.226.72.172
traceroute to 66.226.72.172 (66.226.72.172), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 25.403 ms 26.998 ms 32.822 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 37.810 ms 44.621 ms 45.135 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 632.656 ms 633.256 ms 633.783 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 52.774 ms 54.840 ms 68.383 ms
5 peer-01-ge-0-0-0-0.snjs.twtelecom.net (66.192.242.190) 69.432 ms 69.997 ms 73.566 ms
6 Te-9-4.car4.SanJose1.level3.net (4.68.111.161) 185.729 ms 53.689 ms 77.868 ms
7 vlan99.csw4.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.68.18.254) 40.935 ms vlan89.csw3.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.68.18.190) 49.531 ms 64.877 ms
8 ae-73-73.ebr3.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.134.229) 60.317 ms 60.750 ms ae-83-83.ebr3.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.134.233) 77.727 ms
9 ae-2.ebr3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.132.10) 71.702 ms 75.014 ms 75.506 ms
10 ae-83-83.csw3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.42) 84.394 ms ae-73-73.csw2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.38) 94.737 ms 95.169 ms
11 ae-91-91.ebr1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.13) 108.430 ms ae-81-81.ebr1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.9) 106.140 ms ae-71-71.ebr1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.5) 105.340 ms
12 ae-5-5.car1.SanDiego1.Level3.net (4.69.133.205) 57.506 ms 50.380 ms 51.722 ms
13 ae-11-11.car2.SanDiego1.Level3.net (4.69.133.210) 51.846 ms 53.715 ms 49.569 ms
14 ABACUS-AMER.car2.SanDiego1.Level3.net (4.79.34.6) 50.456 ms 52.394 ms 62.166 ms
15 gi5-15.cr1.sandiego.abac.net (66.226.66.17) 65.080 ms 70.987 ms 89.254 ms
16 gi1-1.dr1.dedicated.abac.net (66.226.66.10) 106.827 ms 93.663 ms 108.067 ms
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *
Im mooching astound which is a local bay area cable company. I will be back on ATT which had the best ping/trace to your ultrahost.
I doubled in ping when you moved out of Texas
traceroute to 64.34.160.92 (64.34.160.92), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 6.300 ms 6.638 ms 9.329 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 28.935 ms 40.655 ms 41.086 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 44.507 ms 45.025 ms 51.709 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 52.634 ms 59.194 ms 59.685 ms
5 peer-02-so-0-0-0-0.chcg.twtelecom.net (66.192.244.20) 114.627 ms 115.129 ms 115.636 ms
6 oc48-po1-0.tor-1yg-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.114.142) 147.147 ms 97.261 ms 149.381 ms
7 10ge.xe-0-0-0.tor-151f-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.114.134) 149.743 ms 153.706 ms 157.173 ms
8 oc48-po3-0.mtl-bvh-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.114.198) 172.264 ms 172.783 ms 178.659 ms
9 10ge.xe-0-0-0.mtl-bvh-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.115.85) 211.273 ms 213.493 ms 215.748 ms
10 oc192.xe-4-0-0.nyc-telx-dis-1.peer1.net (216.187.115.54) 217.207 ms 437.306 ms 447.547 ms
11 10ge.ten1-2.wdc-sp2-cor-2.peer1.net (216.187.115.222) 455.460 ms 457.636 ms 456.350 ms
12 10ge.ten1-1.wdc-sp2-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.116.253) 139.211 ms 139.609 ms 143.987 ms
13 216.187.120.238 (216.187.120.238) 158.437 ms 172.863 ms 173.250 ms
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *
traceroute 67.212.163.50
traceroute to 67.212.163.50 (67.212.163.50), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 2.882 ms 4.777 ms 6.878 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 294.087 ms 298.345 ms 298.865 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 300.257 ms 303.054 ms 307.292 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 307.831 ms 314.595 ms 315.056 ms
5 peer-02-ge-1-0-0-0.palo.twtelecom.net (66.192.243.98) 315.513 ms 316.005 ms 316.512 ms
6 tge2-4.ar1.sfo1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.143.122) 317.109 ms 86.842 ms 22.679 ms
7 tge1-1.ar1.slc1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.142.98) 32.342 ms 43.472 ms 43.931 ms
8 xe-2-1-0.cr1.ord1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.142.101) 77.102 ms 81.136 ms 88.018 ms
9 111.xe-3-3-0.cr1.ord1.us.scnet.net (216.246.88.162) 122.821 ms 125.775 ms 126.272 ms
10 v21.ar2.ord1.us.scnet.net (216.246.95.244) 91.790 ms 102.704 ms 107.135 ms
11 as32475.1614.po2.ar2.ord1.us.scnet.net (75.102.19.139) 103.138 ms 107.587 ms 107.936 ms
12 10.97.198.99.no-rdns.ord02.singlehop.net (99.198.97.10) 92.647 ms 62.162 ms 73.345 ms
13 web01.singlehop.net (67.212.163.50) 74.065 ms 65.178 ms 68.414 ms
traceroute 72.51.32.76
traceroute to 72.51.32.76 (72.51.32.76), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 7.447 ms 14.894 ms 15.423 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 22.068 ms 26.854 ms 37.378 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 42.438 ms 53.780 ms 54.268 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 59.242 ms 59.820 ms 68.063 ms
5 peer-01-ge-0-0-0-0.snjs.twtelecom.net (66.192.242.190) 70.436 ms 71.794 ms 72.390 ms
6 10ge.ten1-1.sj-mkp2-dis-1.peer1.net (216.187.89.101) 74.936 ms 34.015 ms 16.177 ms
7 10ge-ten1-3.la-600w-cor-1.peer1.net (216.187.88.130) 128.388 ms 128.965 ms 131.605 ms
8 216.187.88.58 (216.187.88.58) 43.506 ms 51.558 ms 52.102 ms
9 * * *
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *
traceroute 66.226.72.172
traceroute to 66.226.72.172 (66.226.72.172), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 25.403 ms 26.998 ms 32.822 ms
2 astound-66-234-201-1.ca.astound.net (66.234.201.1) 37.810 ms 44.621 ms 45.135 ms
3 10.50.2.1 (10.50.2.1) 632.656 ms 633.256 ms 633.783 ms
4 66-162-144-9.static.twtelecom.net (66.162.144.9) 52.774 ms 54.840 ms 68.383 ms
5 peer-01-ge-0-0-0-0.snjs.twtelecom.net (66.192.242.190) 69.432 ms 69.997 ms 73.566 ms
6 Te-9-4.car4.SanJose1.level3.net (4.68.111.161) 185.729 ms 53.689 ms 77.868 ms
7 vlan99.csw4.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.68.18.254) 40.935 ms vlan89.csw3.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.68.18.190) 49.531 ms 64.877 ms
8 ae-73-73.ebr3.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.134.229) 60.317 ms 60.750 ms ae-83-83.ebr3.SanJose1.Level3.net (4.69.134.233) 77.727 ms
9 ae-2.ebr3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.132.10) 71.702 ms 75.014 ms 75.506 ms
10 ae-83-83.csw3.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.42) 84.394 ms ae-73-73.csw2.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.38) 94.737 ms 95.169 ms
11 ae-91-91.ebr1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.13) 108.430 ms ae-81-81.ebr1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.9) 106.140 ms ae-71-71.ebr1.LosAngeles1.Level3.net (4.69.137.5) 105.340 ms
12 ae-5-5.car1.SanDiego1.Level3.net (4.69.133.205) 57.506 ms 50.380 ms 51.722 ms
13 ae-11-11.car2.SanDiego1.Level3.net (4.69.133.210) 51.846 ms 53.715 ms 49.569 ms
14 ABACUS-AMER.car2.SanDiego1.Level3.net (4.79.34.6) 50.456 ms 52.394 ms 62.166 ms
15 gi5-15.cr1.sandiego.abac.net (66.226.66.17) 65.080 ms 70.987 ms 89.254 ms
16 gi1-1.dr1.dedicated.abac.net (66.226.66.10) 106.827 ms 93.663 ms 108.067 ms
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *
Im mooching astound which is a local bay area cable company. I will be back on ATT which had the best ping/trace to your ultrahost.
I doubled in ping when you moved out of Texas
rdash wrote:BLACKFOOT STAY AWAY FROM MY FRIENDS OR MEET A BLADE OF VANQUISH AND ADDITIONAL TACTICS
- son
- UOSA Donor!!
- Posts: 3329
- Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: I put an r in it http://my.uosecondage.com/Status/Player/67484
Re: Latency Test
~ $ ping 64.34.160.92
PING 64.34.160.92 (64.34.160.92) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=86.8 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=93.0 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=111 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=89.1 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=108 ms
^C
--- 64.34.160.92 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4054ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 86.825/97.876/111.672/10.285 ms
~ $ ping 67.212.163.50
PING 67.212.163.50 (67.212.163.50) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=65.6 ms
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=71.3 ms
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=63.0 ms
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=71.5 ms
^C
--- 67.212.163.50 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3040ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 63.058/67.902/71.585/3.666 ms
~ $ ping 72.51.32.76
PING 72.51.32.76 (72.51.32.76) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=27.5 ms
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=27.6 ms
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=32.4 ms
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=22.6 ms
^C
--- 72.51.32.76 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3036ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 22.692/27.560/32.443/3.447 ms
~ $ ping 66.226.72.172
PING 66.226.72.172 (66.226.72.172) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=1 ttl=112 time=57.6 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=2 ttl=112 time=49.0 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=3 ttl=112 time=54.8 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=4 ttl=112 time=49.1 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=5 ttl=112 time=52.1 ms
^C
These all ping better to me than ultrahost, and I ddint clarify I am in the silicon valley.
PING 64.34.160.92 (64.34.160.92) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=86.8 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=93.0 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=111 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=89.1 ms
64 bytes from 64.34.160.92: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=108 ms
^C
--- 64.34.160.92 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4054ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 86.825/97.876/111.672/10.285 ms
~ $ ping 67.212.163.50
PING 67.212.163.50 (67.212.163.50) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=65.6 ms
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=71.3 ms
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=63.0 ms
64 bytes from 67.212.163.50: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=71.5 ms
^C
--- 67.212.163.50 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3040ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 63.058/67.902/71.585/3.666 ms
~ $ ping 72.51.32.76
PING 72.51.32.76 (72.51.32.76) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=27.5 ms
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=27.6 ms
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=32.4 ms
64 bytes from 72.51.32.76: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=22.6 ms
^C
--- 72.51.32.76 ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 3036ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 22.692/27.560/32.443/3.447 ms
~ $ ping 66.226.72.172
PING 66.226.72.172 (66.226.72.172) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=1 ttl=112 time=57.6 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=2 ttl=112 time=49.0 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=3 ttl=112 time=54.8 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=4 ttl=112 time=49.1 ms
64 bytes from 66.226.72.172: icmp_seq=5 ttl=112 time=52.1 ms
^C
These all ping better to me than ultrahost, and I ddint clarify I am in the silicon valley.
Re: Latency Test
From San Francisco, CA
Pinging 64.34.160.92 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=121ms TTL=48
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=101ms TTL=48
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=48
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=107ms TTL=48
Ping statistics for 64.34.160.92:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 95ms, Maximum = 121ms, Average = 106ms
Pinging 67.212.163.50 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=49
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=82ms TTL=49
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=88ms TTL=49
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=81ms TTL=49
Ping statistics for 67.212.163.50:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 81ms, Maximum = 91ms, Average = 85ms
Pinging 72.51.32.76 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=52
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=52
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=52
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=52
Ping statistics for 72.51.32.76:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 23ms, Maximum = 44ms, Average = 29ms
Pinging 66.226.72.172 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=114
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=114
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=114
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=114
Ping statistics for 66.226.72.172:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 51ms, Average = 37ms
Pinging 64.34.160.92 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=121ms TTL=48
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=101ms TTL=48
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=95ms TTL=48
Reply from 64.34.160.92: bytes=32 time=107ms TTL=48
Ping statistics for 64.34.160.92:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 95ms, Maximum = 121ms, Average = 106ms
Pinging 67.212.163.50 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=91ms TTL=49
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=82ms TTL=49
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=88ms TTL=49
Reply from 67.212.163.50: bytes=32 time=81ms TTL=49
Ping statistics for 67.212.163.50:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 81ms, Maximum = 91ms, Average = 85ms
Pinging 72.51.32.76 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=52
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=52
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=52
Reply from 72.51.32.76: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=52
Ping statistics for 72.51.32.76:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 23ms, Maximum = 44ms, Average = 29ms
Pinging 66.226.72.172 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=114
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=114
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=114
Reply from 66.226.72.172: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=114
Ping statistics for 66.226.72.172:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 51ms, Average = 37ms
Re: Latency Test
I'm in california and had the following results:
[64.34.160.92] 17 hops, 93ms
[67.212.163.50] 14 hops, 66ms
[72.51.32.76] 10 hops, 25ms
[66.226.72.172] 17 hops, 29ms
My vote is for [72.51.32.76] * Serverbeach FTW please :)
[64.34.160.92] 17 hops, 93ms
[67.212.163.50] 14 hops, 66ms
[72.51.32.76] 10 hops, 25ms
[66.226.72.172] 17 hops, 29ms
My vote is for [72.51.32.76] * Serverbeach FTW please :)
Re: Latency Test
I live in Pennsylvania.
64.34.160.92:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 1ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 7ms
gateway-t3-2-nyc2str2.nyc.ptd.net207.44.125.6 4 13ms
* Unknown Host * 12.116.102.29 5 13ms
cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net 12.122.130.50 6 21ms
cr2.wswdc.ip.att.net 12.122.3.38 7 18ms
gar1.ascva.ip.att.net 12.122.134.129 8 19ms
* Unknown Host * 12.118.44.50 9 20ms
* Unknown Host * 0.0.0.0 10 0ms
* Unknown Host * 0.0.0.0 11 0ms
cachens2.iad2.serverbeach.com 64.34.160.92 12 19ms
67.212.163.50:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 1ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 7ms
gateway-t2-2-ban2str2.ban.ptd.net204.186.238.54 4 8ms
gateway2-t8-1-sm22ban.sm.ptd.net 204.186.241.18 5 9ms
gateway-t3-3-abn2sm2.abn.ptd.net 207.44.125.2 6 24ms
ae0-821.cr2.iad1.us.nlayer.net 69.31.31.205 7 17ms
xe-1-2-0.cr1.ord1.us.nlayer.net 69.22.142.62 8 30ms
111.xe-3-3-0.cr1.ord1.us.scnet.ne216.246.88.162 9 31ms
v21.ar2.ord1.us.scnet.net 216.246.95.244 10 33ms
as32475.1614.po2.ar2.ord1.us.scne75.102.19.139 11 32ms
10.97.198.99.no-rdns.ord02.single99.198.97.10 12 30ms
web01.singlehop.net 67.212.163.50 13 39ms
72.51.32.76:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 1ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 8ms
gateway-t3-2-nyc2str2.nyc.ptd.net207.44.125.6 4 13ms
* Unknown Host * 12.116.102.29 5 12ms
cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net 12.122.130.50 6 89ms
cr2.wswdc.ip.att.net 12.122.3.38 7 87ms
cr1.attga.ip.att.net 12.122.1.173 8 89ms
cr2.dlstx.ip.att.net 12.122.28.174 9 88ms
cr2.la2ca.ip.att.net 12.122.28.178 10 96ms
gar2.lsrca.ip.att.net 12.122.129.49 11 88ms
* Unknown Host * 12.118.130.42 12 90ms
10ge-ten1-2.la-600w-cor-1.peer1.n216.187.88.126 13 109ms
* Unknown Host * 216.187.88.34 14 89ms
cachens1.lax1.serverbeach.com 72.51.32.76 15 92ms
66.226.72.172:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 12ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 7ms
gateway-t3-2-nyc2str2.nyc.ptd.net207.44.125.6 4 13ms
xe-7-3-0.edge1.NewYork1.Level3.ne4.78.132.69 5 12ms
vlan99.csw4.NewYork1.Level3.net 4.68.16.254 6 19ms
ae-94-94.ebr4.NewYork1.Level3.net4.69.134.125 7 24ms
ae-3.ebr2.Dallas1.Level3.net 4.69.137.121 8 59ms
ae-4-4.car2.SanDiego1.Level3.net 4.69.133.213 9 79ms
ABACUS-AMER.car2.SanDiego1.Level34.79.34.6 10 80ms
gi1-1.cr1.sandiego.abac.net 66.226.66.1 11 81ms
gi1-1.dr1.dedicated.abac.net 66.226.66.10 12 79ms
66-226-72-172.dedicated.abac.net 66.226.72.172 13 79ms
64.34.160.92:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 1ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 7ms
gateway-t3-2-nyc2str2.nyc.ptd.net207.44.125.6 4 13ms
* Unknown Host * 12.116.102.29 5 13ms
cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net 12.122.130.50 6 21ms
cr2.wswdc.ip.att.net 12.122.3.38 7 18ms
gar1.ascva.ip.att.net 12.122.134.129 8 19ms
* Unknown Host * 12.118.44.50 9 20ms
* Unknown Host * 0.0.0.0 10 0ms
* Unknown Host * 0.0.0.0 11 0ms
cachens2.iad2.serverbeach.com 64.34.160.92 12 19ms
67.212.163.50:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 1ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 7ms
gateway-t2-2-ban2str2.ban.ptd.net204.186.238.54 4 8ms
gateway2-t8-1-sm22ban.sm.ptd.net 204.186.241.18 5 9ms
gateway-t3-3-abn2sm2.abn.ptd.net 207.44.125.2 6 24ms
ae0-821.cr2.iad1.us.nlayer.net 69.31.31.205 7 17ms
xe-1-2-0.cr1.ord1.us.nlayer.net 69.22.142.62 8 30ms
111.xe-3-3-0.cr1.ord1.us.scnet.ne216.246.88.162 9 31ms
v21.ar2.ord1.us.scnet.net 216.246.95.244 10 33ms
as32475.1614.po2.ar2.ord1.us.scne75.102.19.139 11 32ms
10.97.198.99.no-rdns.ord02.single99.198.97.10 12 30ms
web01.singlehop.net 67.212.163.50 13 39ms
72.51.32.76:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 1ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 8ms
gateway-t3-2-nyc2str2.nyc.ptd.net207.44.125.6 4 13ms
* Unknown Host * 12.116.102.29 5 12ms
cr2.n54ny.ip.att.net 12.122.130.50 6 89ms
cr2.wswdc.ip.att.net 12.122.3.38 7 87ms
cr1.attga.ip.att.net 12.122.1.173 8 89ms
cr2.dlstx.ip.att.net 12.122.28.174 9 88ms
cr2.la2ca.ip.att.net 12.122.28.178 10 96ms
gar2.lsrca.ip.att.net 12.122.129.49 11 88ms
* Unknown Host * 12.118.130.42 12 90ms
10ge-ten1-2.la-600w-cor-1.peer1.n216.187.88.126 13 109ms
* Unknown Host * 216.187.88.34 14 89ms
cachens1.lax1.serverbeach.com 72.51.32.76 15 92ms
66.226.72.172:
Host Name IP Address Hop Ping Time Ping Avg % Loss Pkts r/s Ping best/worst
* Unknown Host * 192.168.0.1 1 12ms
gateway-c5-0-0-comm-10-229-50-1.c10.229.50.1 2 7ms
gateway2-ge2-1-058-sthblocal1.str216.144.187.62 3 7ms
gateway-t3-2-nyc2str2.nyc.ptd.net207.44.125.6 4 13ms
xe-7-3-0.edge1.NewYork1.Level3.ne4.78.132.69 5 12ms
vlan99.csw4.NewYork1.Level3.net 4.68.16.254 6 19ms
ae-94-94.ebr4.NewYork1.Level3.net4.69.134.125 7 24ms
ae-3.ebr2.Dallas1.Level3.net 4.69.137.121 8 59ms
ae-4-4.car2.SanDiego1.Level3.net 4.69.133.213 9 79ms
ABACUS-AMER.car2.SanDiego1.Level34.79.34.6 10 80ms
gi1-1.cr1.sandiego.abac.net 66.226.66.1 11 81ms
gi1-1.dr1.dedicated.abac.net 66.226.66.10 12 79ms
66-226-72-172.dedicated.abac.net 66.226.72.172 13 79ms
Re: Latency Test
Iceland
64.36.160.92
AVG 134ms
67.212.163.50
AVG 123ms
72.51.32.76
AVG 241ms
66.226.72.172
AVG 139ms
64.36.160.92
AVG 134ms
67.212.163.50
AVG 123ms
72.51.32.76
AVG 241ms
66.226.72.172
AVG 139ms
Re: Latency Test
Number One looks like the popular choice. While Number Two was a close second and cheaper, multiple reports of packet loss scared me off on that location.
I've just ordered a new server at the new data center. Today is a great day to donate if you can, and haven't recently, as we'll be paying for servers at both locations during the transition in addition to a recurring fee increase. In addition to the expected network performance increase, we'll be doubling our server capacity as well in both memory and bandwidth.
This is a top rated data-center in an area with very little congestion and the preliminary tests look great, with a especially good improvement for players who are currently pinging in excess of 150ms.
I've just ordered a new server at the new data center. Today is a great day to donate if you can, and haven't recently, as we'll be paying for servers at both locations during the transition in addition to a recurring fee increase. In addition to the expected network performance increase, we'll be doubling our server capacity as well in both memory and bandwidth.
This is a top rated data-center in an area with very little congestion and the preliminary tests look great, with a especially good improvement for players who are currently pinging in excess of 150ms.
Re: Latency Test
are we looking at shorter save times?Derrick wrote:Number One looks like the popular choice. While Number Two was a close second and cheaper, multiple reports of packet loss scared me off on that location.
I've just ordered a new server at the new data center. Today is a great day to donate if you can, and haven't recently, as we'll be paying for servers at both locations during the transition in addition to a recurring fee increase. In addition to the expected network performance increase, we'll be doubling our server capacity as well in both memory and bandwidth.
This is a top rated data-center in an area with very little congestion and the preliminary tests look great, with a especially good improvement for players who are currently pinging in excess of 150ms.
When we originally moved to the current server, saves were instant but sometimes they are over 8 seconds now.