this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024
60 points (95.5% liked)

Asklemmy

44147 readers
1083 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I ask because I feel I need to save some money in the oncoming months. Currently, I pay over $76 for 100MBps/1000GB cap. And I don't think it's a bad deal, but they're going to be hiking it up to $90+ by next October and I feel it is not worth that. But I also need to save money too.

What is the difference between 55MB and 100MB when it comes to speed? The cap for the 55MBps plan is 350GB and I tried asking if that could be altered but the ISP says they can't. This plan will cost me $30 a month.

All I ever do anymore is just stream YouTube, sometimes Hulu/Netflix/Tubi. Occasionally I'll download a game or two, multiplayer gaming is non-existent.

Edit: There's been a lot of good responses replied to this and I appreciate it.

I'm leaning towards on downgrading with the volume of people that suggest that it isn't that bad, but it boils down to preferences and habitual behaviors when using the internet. With so many games already downloaded and being left to just streaming/Second Life, I think it warrants the change.

I just wish that my ISP would've kicked up the cap to 500GB because that'd sweeten the deal much more but this ISP is not well known and these kind of ISPs operate on different worlds than the big names.

Furthermore, people have suggested going 5G Wireless but the problem with that is that my apartment management is stingy as fuck so it's not an option for me nor does Verizon say that they can offer a plan in my current location. Fiber connections such as Google Fiber, MetroNet .etc aren't an option.

Century Link seems to only offer $70 for...10MB in my location (Fucking awful)

Mediacom says they can't even service my area (then how come I see your vans around where I am with other customers?)

(page 2) 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

I'm at 70 Mbs. That's enough for 3 people streaming on various devices and one kid gaming.

350 GB for $30 sounds terrible. I'm in the EU but we get unlimited plans for that amount.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

It depends… you say several times “I”. So yeah if it is just you, 55 is likely fine.

If you are the only one, watching something, then yeah likely you’ll be fine

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

A single 1080p Netflix stream will consume about 4Mbps.

If you just stream music and media and browse the net, that's an easy way to benchmark. If you're gaming, higher speeds will not increase performance of online gaming - this requires quite little and depends more on latency (satellite/star link vs cable/fiber etc). The higher speeds will only help with more concurrent users or game/media downloads (if you pirate media, for example).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

I'm not an expert but I think you should be fine on the lower one. My understanding is that most plans wildly overemphasize what you need for an activity. Like they'll say the most expensive one is for gaming but in reality the cheap one would work completely fine for a single person.

I used to have 55mbps and I never had any issues. You won't be downloading huge games in minutes but just plan ahead and you'll be fine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

55mbps down will be enough when lower cost is most important. it's about the download speed we have at the office (55mbps), and at home too (faster but network gear is slower than the pipe coming in, so 55-60mbps is what i get on the main pc).

we can have a remote desktop going with multimedia coming through that (for work; low bitrate but latency matters), 2-3 hd streams, a couple screens on web sites, something downloading a huge batch of updates, an online 'shooter' game being played, and still not worry about loading up something else to use some more.

for straight downloads from servers and cdn that can handle it, expect 2-4 minutes for a typical linux iso download, and for big downloads about 25 gigabytes per hour max.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

You'll be fine on 55mbps. That's what I was on for the last decade in Denver. Has no issues with bandwidth in my household.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

hoping to start a community intranet as the internet sucks and is shit nowadays

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I started on a 50Mbps plan which was a massive upgrade from what Comcast offered at the time, so I was pretty pleased with that. At one point I noticed something dragging down my connection, and found signs of people attacking my servers. That was easily dealt with, however what surprised me was the speed of the traffic I was seeing. After blocking the attack I pushed up my torrents and realized I had been upgraded to a 100Mbps connection and didn't realize it (I really do love my local provider!).

So yeah, for general web browsing you probably won't notice any difference between those two speeds. If you are downloading specific content then of course the downgrade will take twice as long, and as others mentioned it shouldn't affect your streaming speeds at all.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I don’t think it’s necessarily horrible but with slow WAN speeds it might be worth it to set up a DNS caching server and potentially caching proxies for whatever services you use (this used to be easier for generic HTTP before encryption).

For example, macOS has Content Caching for caching Apple software updates. You can also cache repositories for several Linux distributions, Docker, stuff like that too.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›