Hughesnet Community

Gen 5 Speed Test Which One Now?

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
ecoalex2
Tutor

Gen 5 Speed Test Which One Now?

 I use Linux Mint 17.1
I cannot get the Hughes Speed test to work, a java problem. With gen4 I installed icetea-6 to get the speed test to work, I installed icetea-6 again from the synaptic , but the Hughes test still doesn't work after a restart.

What consumer speed tests are acceptable. On testmy.net I always am below 500 kps. I have read in my other thread that testmy.net is now unreliable. If I try other tests, the results range from 1 Mbs to 4Mbs.

Since I cannot make Hughes speed test function, which other tests can be used?

If someone knows which icetea to install for Linux to make the Hughes test work, that would also be appreciated.

I am scheduled for a courtesy installer visit on Tuesday, I hope to have reliable tests before and after the visit.

 

Thanks

12 REPLIES 12
GabeU
Distinguished Professor IV

I've found that, with regard to download test results, speedtest.net seems to be the most accurate when measured against Networx.  When it comes to an upload test, I've found testmy.net to still be the most accurate, again, when measured against Networx.  

 

With speedtest.net I'm using the default test (not the old, legacy test), and I manually chose a server that is close to my gateway city.  I also wait about thirty seconds to a minute before actually starting the test, as it seems to give better luck against having it default.  

 

Testmy.net seems to be choking the download speed, or Hughesnet is choking it during the test because of something having to do with testmy.net (TMN in snapshot). I'm not quite sure.  Either way, the download is being choked during the test.  

 

The following snapshot will give you an idea of what I mean....

 

Capture.JPG

 

Also, avoid fast.com.  Not only does it cause the Video Data Saver to engage, it uses a ton of data when you run it with the VDS turned off, which is the only way to get an accurate result with this particular test.  Because of these things, again, it's best to just avoid fast.com altogether.  

@GabeU or anyone else out there connected with HN...

 

Can you please explain why HN won't allow us to use Ookla? Every internet provider I've ever had recognized Ookla tests and encouraged the users to test speeds using the app/website if we ever had questions. I question what the real problems are with HN and think it is something more complex than just speed issues. When I use the Ookla app and run a speed test, it takes 10x the time to ping a test server than any other ISP I've ever had. I can run a test just using my Verizon cell signal and it will take 2-3 seconds to find a server to run the test. When I connect to HN and do the same thing, it can take 30+ seconds before a server is found to run the test.

 

That is where I think all the problems lie with trying to stream and why Netflix, Hulu, etc time out. It takes too long ot find the server.

GabeU
Distinguished Professor IV

@dirtred9

 

It was basically that testmy.net was deemed to be the most accurate out of all of the speed tests, and therefore was the only one accepted.  This was primarily because of the way TMN accounted for the latency, and because the tests could be run using a specific test size, whereas other tests could be skewed by the high latency and also finish too quickly, not giving an accurate, overall average.  

 

But, as it stands now, they're open to people trying a variety of speed tests, including Ookla/Speedtest.  I've been trying a few different ones, including Verizon's and Xfinity's, but Speedtest seems to be the most accurate, so far.   I've also tried a bunch of different things to stop TMN from choking on the download test, but nothing's worked.  And why it's doing that is puzzling, that's for sure.  One things' for sure, though:  this explains why I'm able to stream Youtube vids in 1080p when it's showing that I didn't have anywhere near the download speed required to do so.  I even tried streaming HBO Go content last evening with my laptop while my TMN results showed 380Kbps.  It worked without buffering even one time, and that requires even more bandwidth than Youtube vids in 1080p.  It turns out that my speed was actually in the high teen Mbps range, not the sub 500Kbps range as shown by TMN.     

 

And I also question what's really going on with HughesNet.  It seems like a combination of things, though what's causing the issues I have no clue.  HN and TMN definitely aren't getting along, at least on the download tests, though this may not be the case for everyone.  I sometimes have difficulties with Amazon, while others with Gen5 don't.  And, like you mention, some people have difficulties with streaming services or other types of activities where a constant connection to a remote server is key.  

 

In addition, with regard to Ookla/Speedtest, manually setting the server to one close to your gateway may help you, too.  That way it won't have to search for them.  I still wait for a little bit after going to the site before I run the test, as if I run it immediately it sometimes doesn't work and defaults back to the start, but selecting the server has made it a lot more stable, and it seems to be pretty accurate, at least for the download results, anyway.   

 

Edit:  I should add that TMN being choked during the download test only seems to happen during peak usage times, or when there is more congestion.  I just did another test and it showed a speed of 15.9Mbps, so the extreme choking only seems to be happening during times of higher congestion.   And, the worst part is that the choking isn't allowing the real speed to be seen during those times, but, at least for me, speed results of 500Kbps or so are definitely wrong.  Well, the result of that test may be correct, but only because the bandwidth is being choked to that speed during the test, while my actual possible speeds during those times are much higher, as is shown by speedtest and with Networx while downloading large files.  

 

I actually keep both a link to a Linux Mint ISO and the actual Microsoft Media Creation Tool on hand so I can test my download speed with Networx while downloading large files (Chrome shows the speed during downloads that are performed through it, too).  Early yesterday evening, while TMN showed my download speed to be just under 1Mbps, I started downloading the Linux Mint ISO and I was getting speeds in the mid 30 Mbps range, as shown by both Networx and Chrome.   I then stopped the download, went to speedtest, and ran a test.  Again, a result in the mid 30Mbps range.  TMN is seriously screwed up, or it's being seriously screwed up.  

Beam 55 Linux Mint 17.1
Thanks for the replies.

I am unable to use Ookla - error message-

A socket error occurred during the Download test. A firewall could be blocking the connection or the server might be having some issues. Please try again later.

I have tried many servers closer to me, all servers a no-go a no-go. I don't have a firewall.

Thanks for the Fast test usage warning, I was using it, and my allowance.

So it looks like the Hughes performance test is out, as I don't have the correct java using Linux, I don't dwnload any other files except from the Synaptic or package manager.

My tests using Testmy.net are always in the 400Kps range. The Fast test results were the same, but will stop using that hog.

I hope my courtesy tech visit Tuesday will help.

We gave up on watching streaming video in the evenings, I watch utube documentaries during the bonus time, although sometimes the speeds are as bad as nites.

Sure hope Hughes can get the problem addressed.

Love to see the ads on Tv, let's see how choked up we can make this thing;)

Thanks for the replies..

Thanks:) I was using the old Gen4 performance tests (Duh)

My results with Gen5 test - 2.5Mbs Dwn 2,27 Up.

Well, first day of Hughes Gen5 Speed tests results, sure went downhill for the evening.

01/22/2018 07:41 PM
 
156
 
1204
 
Yes
 
01/22/2018 07:36 PM
195
1539
Yes
01/22/2018 10:17 AM
2663
2614
Yes
01/22/2018 09:38 AM
2198
2329
Yes

Erratic Eh?

 Page 1 of 1
Date Recorded Download Result(KBPS) Upload Result(KBPS) Hughes Modem
01/23/2018 11:21 AM
 
19710
 
2605
 
Yes
 
01/23/2018 06:19 AM
453
2736
Yes
01/23/2018 06:18 AM
645
2927
Yes
01/22/2018 07:41 PM
156
1204
Yes
01/22/2018 07:36 PM
195
1539
Yes
01/22/2018 10:17 AM
2663
2614
Yes
01/22/2018 09:38 AM
2198
2329
Yes

No need- the tech did a repoint to Jupiter 1 , a new radio, modem today. The results speak for themselves. It appears my problem has been addressed. Time will tell.

01/23/2018 05:40 PM
 
25357
 
1170
 
Yes
 
01/23/2018 02:39 PM
1304
2607
Yes
01/23/2018 11:21 AM
19710
2605
Yes
01/23/2018 06:19 AM
453
2736
Yes
01/23/2018 06:18 AM
645
2927
Yes

 

happycat.resized.resized.jpg

I received this from Hughes. It is not clear to me whether I will be charged for the tech repair visit.

I should not be charged for them repairing a poor performance problem of their system.

Liz sent me a message Hughes would be performing a courtesy visit..

Would I be charged for a courtesy visit?

 

Message from Liz-

We have decided as a courtesy to dispatch a technician to do a complete review of your site due to the concerns you've been encountering.

 

Message from Hughes billing

 

This email is to confirm your recent service change. Prorated charges based on this update will appear on your next HughesNet bill. Please log in to myHughesNet.com to check your account details and monthly statement.
Order Summary
Order Number:
13227959

@ecoalex2

 

These are generic emails that are emailed whenever tech visit has been scheduled.

As Liz sated in her message, this technician visit will be done as a 'courtesy' so you will not be charged for this.

You can always reply back to Liz to confirm this...

You can also verify your 'account history' which can be viewed under the Billing Detail Information of your Hughesnet account page to verify no new charges have been applied..

 

You will probably receive a similar email message once the technician has completed the work order...again, I would simply disregard it, and/or go through the above steps again just to verify that nothing was charged to your account.

I looked at my billing, nothing posted, just my last payment. I had a visit before due to poor performance, and had to request the charges be dismissed, they were. Liz ordered that visit too. There was some confusion as to whether the visit was billable.

Thanks


@bare65 wrote:

@ecoalex2

 

These are generic emails that are emailed whenever tech visit has been scheduled.

As Liz sated in her message, this technician visit will be done as a 'courtesy' so you will not be charged for this.

You can always reply back to Liz to confirm this...

You can also verify your 'account history' which can be viewed under the Billing Detail Information of your Hughesnet account page to verify no new charges have been applied..

 

You will probably receive a similar email message once the technician has completed the work order...again, I would simply disregard it, and/or go through the above steps again just to verify that nothing was charged to your account.


 

I just noticed I lost my 3Gb tokens I received for the system outage, lost when I had my modem changed out.. I guess they are long gone;( I do have an all new system tho;)

 

th.resized.resized.jpeg