Resolved Upgrading to Fibre - Router upgrade necessary?

I intend to upgrade to fibre in the near future as my ISP is advising that my line capacity is inadequate at peak times - and, yes, it does seem slow and video streaming often pauses.

I am offered a straight upgrade to fibre and optionally a new router at a very favourable discounted price (router offered is Best Buy from respected UK consumer group Which).

Currently I use a Netgear N300 ADSL2+ router which has performed well over the years, but I wonder if it is capable of handling the higher data transfer rates of fibre.

My computers are all connected via CAT cables and I have no need for WiFi which is turned off at the router. The only time I use WiFi is to update my Asus Netbook once a month and to check out the WiFi on my laptop prior to a trip.

So the basic question is will my Netgear router which is ~8 years old handle the enhanced data transfer rates of fibre or should it be replaced?

 

Depends solely upon the bandwidth provided by fiber. AFAIK, the netgear has ports with throughput of 100 mb/sec. If the fiber bandwidth is more than that then you'll want a router with gigabit ports. If your video streaming gets choppy then you're probably getting less than 5 mb/sec. 3 mb/sec is the minimum required for smooth hd video.

I recently switched from cable to FIOS and still use my older Buffalo router. My bandwidth is 100/100.

 

ISP says fibre speeds between 32 and 40Mb and data on Netgear box says Speed up to 300 Mbps so I guess that the Netgear router is up to the job.

Thanks

 

Agreed that the streaming woes are due to the service. But definitely not the router. You don't need gigabit for high definition streaming, nor do you need 80211a/c. HD streaming only requires a minimum of about 3 megabits/sec per stream. A router with a 100 megabit built-in switch is more than enough.

I've setup many networks and live streams too and found the absolute minimum for clear, smooth, unbuffered 1080p video with audio streaming is 3 megabits/sec.

Also, where one has limited bandwidth or many devices on a LAN, one can use the router QoS to give priority to devices such as TVs for streaming services.

 

Thank you both - I understand basically what you are saying, but am not sure what action, if any to take. As Bill noted it may all be marketing hype - the essence of the email received from TalkTalk is reproduced below - what do you make of it?

It has also crossed my mind that TalkTalk may have throttled my line to encourage me to upgrade (and pay a little more). Ran a couple of speed tests this afternoon and both gave 5.3 Mbps download and 0.8 Mbps upload - those values are on a par with dsimilar speed tests in the past.

 

I don't think it's hype. They are using the term "line capacity" instead of the term "bandwidth". The actual line, if it's copper, can only handle X amount of bandwidth per the technology they have implemented. For example, ADSL with modern telco routers and switches are limited, and depend upon one's proximity to the telco headend. While fiber has seemingly unlimited bandwidth capabilities (recent lab tests of 43 gigabits/sec).

5.3 mb download is near the borderline for streaming, especially if have more than one device using the Internet at the same time. That's only about 10x faster than dial up!

Fibre speeds between 32 and 40mb? Get the fiber. Keep the netgear.

 

Bill, he's not using wifi at all and likely won't for whatever reasons he has now. His netgear may be considered slow in comparison to newer models, but he'll never need more than 100 mb/sec wired rates because his ISP only can provide a bit less than half of that. If the Internet rate is 50 mb/sec then a gigabit LAN is only beneficial if transferring very large files between LAN computers. And who cares if smart devices other than TVs, tablets and phones are using slower 80211 rates, devices which he doesn't have nor likely wants in the future.

Other than devices such as tablets, phones and streaming devices, most smart home devices are using LAN bandwidth, not Internet bandwidth, and the Internet bandwidth they do use is used sporadically, not constantly as in streaming.

80211ac routers won't give one faster WAN rates than 80211g if one's Internet bandwidth is only 40 mb/sec down and 10 mb/sec up.

 

Bill – I very much appreciate your concerns over my ‘smart’ future and for the sage advice given, but I must tell you that I am a bit of a dinosaur in many respects. I have no smart devices, not even a smart phone and no intention to go smart in the foreseeable future. My new fridge acquired recently is simply plug and go – the only smart thing about it is it’s appearance! I rarely watch television – my main TV is an old 34in cathode ray tube model and I don’t remember when that was last switched on and the TV I watch on a daily basis on my main PC is exclusively catch-up from the likes of the BBC, Channels 4,5 and Quest. I do not have, nor do I want, TV services from my ISP.

Yes, I have more than one computer, but the second desktop (Windows 7) is only booted up when required to give guidance to a distant friend running Windows 7 who is very computer illiterate to put it kindly. And as I said earlier in the thread I only use Wifi to update my netbook monthly and check out the Wifi on my laptop prior to travelling with it. Range is not an issue as both devices are ~4 feet from the router.

The only smart device on the horizon is a smart gas/electric meter which I will decline. I read my meters weekly and keep a spreadsheet of consumption so I know exactly where I am re. power usage and am more than happy to pass on the current readings when requested over the internet.

Tony – your last post came through while I was drafting the reply to Bill. I appreciate you getting your teeth into this and you have convinced me that, for the foreseeable future at least, my existing Netgear router will suffice, but I will transfer to fibre – it’s only GBP 5 extra per month and should be worth it.

Thanks to you both and to retiredlearner for chipping in. I'll mark this thread as resolved once I am up and running satisfactorily on fibre.

 

My ISP offers tiered fibre speeds, faster is more expensive, of course! The figure I quoted is for the lowest tier which should be 8x faster than my present set up..

 

I didn't get my first computer at home until fibre and broadband was installed in the building (around the turn of the millennium). Initially it was 10/10 Mbps which subsequently was upgraded to 100/100 Mbps. That was a significant improvement!

Next, there was a change of ISP and we got 1000/100 Mbps. There was a fractional improvement but it became even more obvious that the servers feeding the line are the limitation. Downloading large files from e.g. Microsoft, such as creating installation media for Windows 10 using the Media Creation Tool, saw no speed increase.

Now, I have moved home and from different ISP:s I could choose speeds from 10/10 Mbps to 1000/1000 Mbps. I choose 100/100 Mbps which I believe is the sweet spot when it comes to cost/performance. Anything above 100/100 Mbps for a normal home user is just "bragging rights"!

 

I've been on a 5/2Mbps connection (wireless) since 2009. Just now I'm thinking of upgrading. I have several options, but I'm preferring to stay with my business class ISP. I'm contemplating changing from wireless to their lowest cable connection 60/5Mbps for €35/mo ($40).

I've survived pretty well on 5/2 for all these years, but running my own WSUS server is a bit of a struggle when downloading the updates takes a full 2 days and I'll have to restrict the download speed for the WSUS server to be able to see YouTube movies.... New W10 insider builds also take a bit of time, so it would be nice to have the extra speed...

 

Costs from my ISP without limitations on GB's:

A 10/10 Mbps connection > SEK 199 = EUR 19 = USD 22 / month.

A 100/100 Mbps connection > SEK 269 = EUR 26 = USD 30 / month.
(900 % performance increase, 35 % cost increase, CI/PI = 0,04)

A 250/250 Mbps connection > SEK 469 = EUR 46 = USD 52 / month.
(150 % performance increase, 74 % cost increase, CI/PI = 0,49)

A 500/500 Mbps connection > SEK 579 = EUR 56 = USD 64 / month.
(100 % performance increase, 23 % cost increase, CI/PI = 0,23)

A 1000/1000 Mbps connection > SEK 899 = EUR 87 = USD 100 / month.
(100 % performance increase, 55 % cost increase, CI/PI = 0,55)

The connection in bold is the one I choose and it clearly is the sweet spot in terms of cost/performance.

Compared to Aries 60/5 Mbps connection, it seems like Sweden finally is cheaper in one department!

 

Well, residential prices are as follows:

Cable:
30/1.5Mbps = €20 ($23)
50/3Mbps = €30 ($35)
100/6Mbps = €33 ($38

Package which includes basic TV + Fixed telephone line:
250/15Mbps (incl. 10GB WiFi data) = €40 ($46)
1000/20Mbps (incl 10GB WiFi data) = €58 (66)

We have 2 major providers here, this is the competition:
Free fixed line included
35/5Mbps = €30 ($35)
70/10Mbps (incl free local calls) = €45 ($51) (*temp available for €30)

Package which includes 90TV channels + unlimited free calls mobile/fixed line on same network:
70/10Mbps = €40 ($46)
200/20Mbps = €45 ($51)
500/20Mbps = €70 ($80)

I've always had a business connection. A bit more expensive but better quality (lower ratio of customers sharing bandwidth) and slightly better support