I've had the displeasure of upgrading two accounts to the Gigabit package.
I understand the marketing gimmick of the term up to, but it's getting a bit ridiculous.
Here is a snapshot of a speedtest done downtown by Bay and College. Straight lan, bridge mode.
As you can see, the speeds are a far cry of true gigabit. I understand fully the limitations and expectations of the Docsis 3 technology. I would even deem constant speeds of 750-800 acceptable.
I also have the package in Richmond Hill, where the speeds are about 80% of the above posted numbers.
Service agents have showed up to both locations, followed by visits from their supervisor.
The Richmond Hill service team advised me the maximum speeds that they have ever seen in the area is about 600Mb/s whereas the Downtown Toronto team advised me the the maximum they have personally seen is in the 650Mb/s range that was sustainable. To me, upload speeds are more important. The comparison between the two is full 50 as seen above to mid 30s in Richmond Hill.
If the agents are reporting that to the customers, knowing that the network cannot achieve anywhere close to their advertised speeds, why bother selling them as Gigabit. Should have rolled out publicly as 500u instead!
Spoke to the management team who advised me, since we are already on a highly discount bundle, there is nothing they can do. The analogy they gave me was you get what you pay for.
So my frustration spikes, just because Rogers offered the 63U package and I take advantage of the deal, they have the audacity to justify the slower speeds because I'm on a "discounted" plan? In my opinion, that's disgusting.
I would advise anyone considering upgrading to the Gigabit package to steer clear until their systems can actually handle the traffic.
I need to ask all those having gigabit speed issues. Do you have fiber to the home (FTTH). The reason I ask is that newer neighborhoods now have fiber optic cables right up to the house. And it seems only Bell and Rogers can/will install service there - so there is no love from guys like Teksavvy, Start of VMedia. That means I am stuck choosing one or the other (which I do when the 'deal' of the ips I am with expires).
My current round is with cheap 500u service from Rogers. I am leaving Bell's symmetrical 300/300u service which had consistent 330u 310d speeds on speedtest. I would like to hear from those that are using Rogers' 500u and gigabit service on FTTH to see if they are consistent with Rogers' advertised claims.
First question is, why are you leaving Bell's Fibre service, understanding the billing issues that Bell customers hate.
As far as I know, the TPIAs are locked out of the fibre systems for the foreseeable future, unless the CRTC decides that Bell and Rogers must provide access to the fibre.
Rogers fibre service is RFoG, which in a nutshell replaces the copper cabling that typically runs from the home to the local tap to the local node. That cabling is replaced with a fibre system, with an Optical Network Terminal in the home. The output of that ONT is fed to a modem via copper RG-6 cable, in this case the CODA-4582 modem which is the same modem that is used for 500 Mb/s and gigabit service. Customers still have to put up with modem and CMTS issues as is typically found in the network today. Only real benefit is the gain of what should be a reliable fibre connection versus the frequency and signal issues over copper.
Bell's system is symmetrical as you pointed out, 300 down, 300 up in your case, or higher if so choose. Rogers can only provide 500 down / 20 up or 1 Gb/s down / 30 Mb/s up, realistically over the traditional copper path, 930 - 950 down / 33 Mb/s up.
The CODA-4582 is currently running DOCSIS 3.1 down, which provides the higher download speeds, and DOCSIS 3.0 up, which is where the bottleneck is. No ISP is running DOCSIS 3.1 upstream other than possibly for a limited real world test. Rogers is probably several weeks to several months away from running DOCSIS 3.1 upstream, which would or should allow higher upload rates. I don't know if or when Rogers will be able to match Bell's symmetrical data rates. Note that Bell has also indicated its plans to go to 5 Gb/s download next year. DOCSIS systems can actually match that, but, its going to be a while before we see multi-gig DOCSIS systems employed by the ISPs. I'd be pleasantly surprised to see that happen sooner rather than later.
In terms of routing, from the complaints that I've seen, Bell routes thru Chicago and in many cases ends up with Comcast carrying a good portion of the traffic in the U.S. Rogers uses Cogego for data carriage and as a result, much of the traffic ends up routing thru the U.S. as well. There are complaints for both companies when it comes to data routing.
So, hope this helps. Personal opinion, if data upload rates are a concern, you're better off with Bell. Routing wise, its a toss up, not sure which is worse. Latency, I think that Bell wins, hands down. It will be interesting to see what happens to the system latency when DOCSIS 3.1 upstream happens.
Edit: Also note, running VPNs thru the Hitron Puma 6/7 modem is problematic, as is streaming to services such as Twitch, Youtube and any others that use RTMP as a streaming protocol.
Thanks for the response. In order to get the best and cheapest services you have to switch providers at the end of each discount term and either go to the new provider or accept the old provider's 'loyalty' offers if they are palatable. I understand the differences between symmetrical and asymmetrical services. I don't run servers on my internet connect so a downgrade on the upload side is no problem - though for those times when I am uploading to my webhost I really liked having the high upload speeds. What it comes down to is what am I going to pay for that service. My bell service jumped up from $130/month to $225/month - time to find something cheaper. At the present Rogers is offering me their 500u + premier tv & (unnecessary but needed to get the bundle discounts) home phone for about $120/month - taxes in. When that discount runs out I will be looking back at Bell. Just the kind of things us retired guys have to do to save a few bucks per month. The reason for my question is that I have seen a lot of complaints about Rogers gigabit service not living up to anywhere near their claims. I will need this info for when the Bell's retention agent calls and tyries to keep my business - Bell's 300 service does indeed live up to their claims - at least in my FTTH home. I am looking for the same reality vs claim performance from Rogers when dealing with FTTH. I do know there are differences in demarcation (ONT) - Rogers is at the utility entry point in my wall going to a ONT->coax adapter, while Bell's goes straight to their modem that has a built in ONT.
If that's the offer from Rogers, Bell should be willing and able to cut Rogers grass whenever and wherever possible. Same in the other direction as well. Won't know until you ask the question.
Edit: check your inbox for a message. Select or click the number shown on your avatar at the upper right hand corner of the page when you're logged into the site. Follow that link (number or avatar) down to your message inbox.
Totally agree , I did complain about the speed for a few time , on a good day I am 700 max , usually just sitting around 400 - 500. Although I don't usually check the speed but what is the point of gigabit if I don't get gigabit speed.
Bell offer FTTH rather then FTTN and similar price with rogers but I am with rogers for a long time and don't want the hassle of change.
OFDM multi-profile support should (theoretically) improve service consistency by allowing Rogers to deliver 1Gbps no matter what, however what angers me the most is that they can only deliver 30Mbps upload, meanwhile Bell is delivering a whopping 940Mbps upload.
Also, what happened to OFDMA? D3.1 has been in service for close to two years now, but it looks like the industry is taking too long to deliver D3.1 on upload. Why?
Bell will definitely have a huge lead when they introduce 5Gbps next year, and I'm hoping they carry their momentum by making a huge commitment to bring FTTH to more customers in Mississauga, Brampton, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, and Markham.
If Rogers plans to compete with bell by adopting FDX DOCSIS, would it really be worth it? FDX DOCSIS field trials are expected to start next year, and realistically, we'd be looking at the year 2020 when it would be first available to the consumer. Bell would have a commanding lead by then. Rogers could try to compete by using D3.1 and by using frequencies up to 1.2Ghz (as in the D3.1 spec), but that would require new nodes, amps, and splitters. Rogers won't be close to competing in terms of upload speeds, because there still would be a lot of customers on Digital TV, which would be using precious spectrum that would rather be used for OFDMA.
Some extra information about node splitting said by CEO Joe Natale during the Q2 earnings call:
"So we're saying right now across our footprint at about 300 homes per node. We're working very well to on a case-by-case basis, success basis to really do nodes of segmentation splitting as appropriate. In some cases, we are completed that activity in some neighborhoods, other neighborhoods we are not. We're just kind of working our way through it, it's very evolutionary, very success based."
Internet is not what I'm paying for.
We've been with rogers since 1973. Yup that's a long time. Rogers has always told us to upgrade our services to get more. We also have to pay more. We had 150 internet and rarely got the 150mbps speeds. Upgraded recently to 1gbps and now we are getting on average 300mbps. We are being told that's an improvement and we should be happy. Im not happy. Why am I paying for that service if you cannot provide it. The worst part if i go to the 500mbps I know it will drop to 250mbps or less. I'm going to the CRTC about this. It's called false advertising.
Welcome to the Rogers Community Forums!
Not getting the speeds you are paying for is never a good feeling so we definitely want to look into this for you to see what could be causing the speed issues.
Firstly, we'd like to thank you for your loyalty to the Rogers brand for 45 years, that is quite an accomplishment! From what you've described its possible there could be a signal issue on your line and we'd like to troubleshoot this for you to find a solution and get your speeds back up to where it should be.
We look forward to hearing from you!
You may or may not have noticed, but perhaps more significant than Bell increasing their top speed to 1.5 Gbps earlier this week was that they *significantly* cut prices. IMHO Rogers needs to respond to remain competitive.
Bell now charges (regular prices, ignoring new customer promotional discounts) $100 per month for their 1 Gbps service - Rogers currently charges $153 per month for same. Plus Bell's offering is in fact far superior as they offer 940 Mbps upload whereas Rogers can only offer 30 Mbps on their current network.
It used to be that upload speeds didn't matter much. Those days are long gone, at least for heavy cloud users (of which I am one) so it seems to me that Rogers needs to *undercut* Bell's prices to make up for their lesser product.
I've been on Rogers Internet for about 4 years now, on the 250/20 plan. To date I've been very pleased with it, and I'm not really looking to switch. But I'm not going to pay more for less. So I plan to give Rogers a couple of weeks to consider their response, but depending on what I'm told when I phone it might be bye bye Rogers Internet hello Bell Internet/FTTH for me.
Can anyone get higher then 300mbps on this modem wirelessly? What are your speeds wirelessly and wired? I think Rogers is not being truthful with there advertising. I cannot get 1gbps and I cannot surpass 300mbps wirelessly with my brand new $1500 I7 8750, 16gb ram, 128ssd laptop.
@Den03 drill down into the laptop's Device Manager to see the wifi adapter name. Copy that name and run a google search so that you can eventually find the specs for the adapter. There is a very good possibility that your brand new very expensive laptop has a cheap 2 antenna wifi adapter onboard. If so, then yes, it will severely limit the data throughput on wifi. Unfortunately we keep running into this situation, again and again, brand new expensive laptop built with a cheap 1 or 2 antenna wifi adapter. Not saying that's totally applicable here, but, given what we've seen in the past, I suspect that plays a large part in your disappointment.
A couple of items to note:
1. The 4582 only runs a maximum 80 Mhz bandwidth for 5 Ghz wifi channels.
2. If you look at the following Modulation and Coding index, http://mcsindex.com/, down the right hand 80 Mhz column, you can see the maximum connection rates available with a 400 nano-second guard time between broadcasts. If the adapter doesn't support 400 ns guard times, then you're looking at the left hand 80 Mhz column.
3. Look specifically at the spatial streams column. That column basically translates to 1, 2, 3, antenna, etc, etc. Depending on how many antenna your wifi adapter supports, that will determine where on the chart the wifi adapter will run, in terms of the connection rates.
4. To determine the actual transfer rates, multiply the connection rate by the fraction indicated in the Modulation and Coding column.
5. To determine what connection rate your laptop is using, right click on the wifi icon at the lower right and select Open Network and Internet Settings. Select View your network properties in the pop up Status page. The link speed will show the wifi speed for a wifi pc/laptop, or, the wired connection rate for an ethernet connected pc/laptop. Using that connection rate, and knowing how many antenna are installed in the laptop, you can then calculate the theoretical data rate that you will see. As you walk around your home, that connection rate will change, based on the signal levels and signal to noise ratios.
That data rate will be the result of the modem settings, the signal levels and signal to noise ratios at both the modem and laptop. Its up to the end user to optimize the modem settings and select the best operating channel based on who you're competing with. Have a look at the following post, which contains settings that I recommend for modems and routers:
I need to update that post, but one addition that will be useful is another wifi scanner from Lizard Systems, which can be downloaded here:
You can get a freebie personal licence by following the get licence link for the wifi scanner on the following page:
Ok, so, give that a go. Determine what you have onboard for a wifi adapter and see if its causing major limitations for your wifi performance. Then, adjust the modem's wifi settings as suggested and change the operating channel to 149 or higher. In this modem, there isn't much choice. When you select the 80 Mhz bandwidth, the only selection for the higher channels is 149-153-157-161. Select that channel group. With third party routers, you would have a choice of the base channel, here, you don't, unless the modem automatically uses 149 as the base channel. You really need to look at the channel usage with a wifi scanner to see whom else your competing with. If you are competing with your neighbours that can cut your throughput rate rather drastically. I've been keeping an eye on what channels my neighbours are using and running speed tests to see what differences there are. Running an Asus RT-AC86U and a laptop (ultrabook), with my neighbours using a different channel, best I've seen recently is 650 Mb/s. That laptop is most likely a two antenna laptop. With my neighbours using the same channel, I'm down to just over 300 Mb/s. Ugh..... So, despite my efforts to maximize the wifi throughput, and practically sitting beside the router, that same channel usage is a killer. Only way around that is to buy a laptop with more antenna, or possibly use ubiquity access points. From what I understand, Macbooks have three antenna, and from what I've read, I believe the only laptop with four wifi antenna is a gaming laptop which was released this year. Other than that, its slim pickings.
So, hope this puts the situation in perspective. Despite spending a lot of money, and doing the most that one can do, you can still end up with less than expected wifi performance. But, if you do some research, you'll understand why, and possibly what you can do to change that for the better.
Also note, beamforming is not enabled on the 4582. Beamforming might not make a huge change, but, if it was enabled, it might result in the modem - laptop connection rate running at one level higher, maybe even two if you're lucky. Every little bit counts. Multi-User MIMO? No one really knows, other than the engineering staff. So, if your laptop does support MU-MIMO, see if you have to enable that, and look for any improvements when it's enabled.
When did Rogers get so Bad?
I am not a Rogers Tech but this is what I know. We have been paying for Rogers 1GB for the last few years. We have never had a steady connection, not even close. Over the years we have had numerous Techs sent from Rogers even a Supervisor. They all give different answers. Last week I was talking to one that reset our modem and said use fast.com to test the speed, on a GB internet connection we average 350 - 400. After the reset we hit 1.4GB, it lasted about 2 mins then back to the usual 350 - 400. Then we had a Tech come and test everything and he said there is absolutely nothing wrong with anything in your house it is Rogers Lines in the street feeding the house. His test showed interference coming from houses that were using 3rd party providers that rent the Rogers lines. He said they have told Rogers for years that the lines in this neighborhood had problems. He would send a maintenance request. He also told me not to use Fast.com he said to use the speed test on Rogers.com/customer/support.... Rogers called 2 days later and said they sent a maintenance team and was checking to see if anything improved. Ummm Noooo! So they sent another Tech Yesterday. Now this one came and ran a whole bunch of test "Again!".. And I was looking at the screen and there was a lot of Red, he said they were fine. They meet Rogers "Standard". Excuse me? Tech explained "Let me tell you something Rogers will never tell you or admit." They advertise speeds but you will not get them! (The tech I spoke to on the phone actually asked "If we can get your speed to 700 would that be satisfactory?" ) Which is pretty much what the tech in front of me was saying. They can not provide a steady GB connection and as long as the numbers on his computer "pass" which means 600-700 of the GB connection they will not do anything else. And this tech said the others were wrong, use speedtest.net as it is more accurate. (it is also run by the same company as the one on Rogers.com/customer/support....) both are Ookla. This tech said everything in our house was fine, then explained that when we factory reset your modem you got your GB speed, then once you started connecting other devices the internet starts splitting which makes sense, 1 device = 1GB (for a few minutes anyway. LoL), 2 devices = 500 etc.. But once you connect other devices the connection stays split even if the other devices are not connected. Over the last few years I have had to spend countless hours on the phone with Rogers, countless hours waiting in the house for Rogers. Everyone keeps saying the others don't know what they are talking about, the majority of them that came out said there is issues with the actual cables supplying the neighborhood and that Rogers knows but will never admit it or fix it because it would be to costly. So to the best of my knowledge and I am not an expert but I also went to school for computer programming so I am not an idiot. And according to countless so called "Rogers Techs" It really doesn't matter which speed test you use, they all ping from different locations, and to many variables will effect those tests. This morning our internet dropped again, it just went down and came back up when my daughter was online doing homework (internet drops randomly from time to time). The speed test on ALL these test sites showed 200-300. I give up. If I have talked to everyone from the Office of the President down to the techs at the door and not one of them can actually fix the problem and give us what we pay for then it must be True. Rogers false advertises. I was very angry but reserved to the fact that the best I will get is 700 on a 1GB. (If you have 500 like my neighbor then you get about 250-300) But even those speeds are not even close to consistent. My actual average is less then 350. It is not the places your testing it is Rogers. And it has become actually pathetic. Rogers at one point in my opinion actually cared about service and its customers. Those days are clearly gone, when they offer better deals and charge new customers less then what they charge long time loyal customers, it's all about getting more to replace the ones they lose. I could point out a dozen things but it will not matter. And unfortunately it wouldn't make a difference if you switch providers because from what I hear the others can be just as Bad. The only people I know that actually get any kind of quality service are the people that live in new houses where everything running to them is the latest and most current. So the only thing to do, the only thing anyone can do really is keep a running log, a paper trail of how their service runs, how many calls to Rogers they make and techs have come out. Sooner or later it's called Class Action.