do virgin block vpn
- Thread starter RobTi
- Start date
Man of Honour
Yes mate. SH3 here.
VM publicly committed to not throttling. It’s much more likely that the VPN provider’s node is over subscribed/maxed or the device at your end isn’t capable of using a suitable encryption standard via hardware offload.
That is a lie I have seen so many people on VM being throttled not just vpn but other things like usenet as well
I'm afraid you are wrong on that one. They may have publicly committed to anything but I can assure you they throttle like crazy. My BT 80/20 offered at least x4 the performance whilst downloading through the same VPN compared to VM.
I have found the same as @Type_R, used to get better performance through Nordvpn and Tiger on my old Plusnet 80/20 connection than I do on Virgin Vivid 350.
Your two statements clearly contradict each other. We have other members reporting near line speed with suitable hardware/settings on VM. Unless they are specifically picking on you (seems unlikely) it simply doesn’t add up. You may have a localised capacity issue, be using something inefficient like OpenVPN without hardware AES-NI or TCP rather than UDP/an inefficient encryption standard or poor hardware, but I strongly doubt you are being throttled. See example below.
I know people maxing our vivid 350 near enough 24/7 via news, pretty sure that proves the opposite.
Perfect example of a VPN speedtest on VM: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/t...ussion-thread.17923446/page-894#post-32694850
Last edited:
Not at all...as I am sure you realise speeds vary hugely especially when you add a VPN to the mix. But on average the BT connection 80/20 (with same VPN server) will allow downloads at between 4-5 Mb/s compared to VM 350 stuck at 1-2Mb/s. If people on VM are able to download using a VPN at 45 Mb/s (max rate on 350) then I want to know what VPN they are using!
Man of Honour
Tbh, TypeR you just sound unlucky, something somewhere must be your bottleneck... Even on my pixel2 I just fired up Nord, connected to the first UK server and am getting over 200mbps on WiFi.
I'm sure if I tried another server I could get better, I've never had a problem tbh.
I'm sure if I tried another server I could get better, I've never had a problem tbh.
The example I posted a link to has a detailed write up earlier if you read the post history of @Rainmaker short answer is wireguard is a lot more efficient than OpenVPN. That’s not to say you can’t get OpenVPN to do gigabit, my R210-II running Pfsense on a Xeon 1270 manages quite nicely, but that’s obviously not everyone’s idea of a router and being honest some of my low end DC kit is lower spec.
Also you need to consider routing to the VPN provider (VM aren’t the best), the load on the hardware at the other end, the onward peering from the VPN reviser to wherever you are downloading from, it’s not as simple as slow speed = throttle.
Also you need to consider routing to the VPN provider (VM aren’t the best), the load on the hardware at the other end, the onward peering from the VPN reviser to wherever you are downloading from, it’s not as simple as slow speed = throttle.
Last edited:
If I was unlucky I was unlucky in two distinct areas on the VM network....started off in Nottingham and moved to Bham. Same problem in both locations!
Also contacted VM technical support at the time...as well as NordVPN techinical support..tried loads of different software tweaks, to no avail.
EDIT - Not to put too fine a point on it..have just done a quick test. Downloaded latest Nvidia drivers through their Geforce app.
With IPVanish VPN on (UK server) - Peak download speed 775 Kb/s
Without - Peak download speed 20.0 Mb/s
I'll leave you to decide whether VM throttle or not
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Strange, well, in that case I consider myself lucky :shrug:
OK, VM 500 meg service - and bear in mind I'm not the only one online in the house atm. First connected to 'only' a UK WireGuard VPN node:
Now *also* connected to a ProtonVPN node in NL over OpenVPN UDP (so, double VPN):
As @Avalon said, it doesn't seem like VM throttle to me. I got curious after doing these two, so here is native VM with no VPN at all (WireGuard on the router disabled, no OpenVPN on the local machine):
And now with plain VM + OpenVPN (ProtonVPN NL again) to check whether VM is targeting OpenVPN but not the WireGuard protocol:
As I said, there are others on the network here atm and it's smack bang in the middle of peak time. So, a little variability but still not seeing anything close to what you'd call throttling.
Edit: Also, @RobTi here's a more easily digestible speed test result over VPN on Virgin:
I can do 500+ Mbps on OpenVPN also, using my usual provider (not Proton, they're slower). Even with TCP instead of UDP, provided one tweaks the tunnel MTU and the other end supports it (as my provider does) I'll see basically linespeed over OpenVPN. WireGuard's even easier, and uses far less CPU, across all cores instead of just one.
Trust me, it's your end. Try with a beefy i7 on Linux and don't use the SH3 as a router.
I've decided...
Code:
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 548 MBytes 460 Mbits/sec 2315 sender
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 542 MBytes 455 Mbits/sec receiver
CPU Utilization: local/receiver 10.3% (0.8%u/9.5%s), remote/sender 0.2% (0.0%u/0.2%s)
rcv_tcp_congestion cubic
iperf Done.Now *also* connected to a ProtonVPN node in NL over OpenVPN UDP (so, double VPN):
Code:
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 497 MBytes 417 Mbits/sec 3227 sender
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 491 MBytes 412 Mbits/sec receiver
CPU Utilization: local/receiver 14.9% (1.4%u/13.5%s), remote/sender 0.8% (0.1%u/0.7%s)
rcv_tcp_congestion cubic
iperf Done.As @Avalon said, it doesn't seem like VM throttle to me. I got curious after doing these two, so here is native VM with no VPN at all (WireGuard on the router disabled, no OpenVPN on the local machine):
Code:
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 506 MBytes 425 Mbits/sec 3173 sender
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 502 MBytes 421 Mbits/sec receiver
CPU Utilization: local/receiver 27.6% (2.3%u/25.3%s), remote/sender 0.4% (0.1%u/0.3%s)
rcv_tcp_congestion cubic
iperf Done.And now with plain VM + OpenVPN (ProtonVPN NL again) to check whether VM is targeting OpenVPN but not the WireGuard protocol:
Code:
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 465 MBytes 390 Mbits/sec 2519 sender
[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 459 MBytes 385 Mbits/sec receiver
CPU Utilization: local/receiver 16.6% (1.8%u/14.9%s), remote/sender 0.4% (0.0%u/0.4%s)
rcv_tcp_congestion cubic
iperf Done.As I said, there are others on the network here atm and it's smack bang in the middle of peak time. So, a little variability but still not seeing anything close to what you'd call throttling.
Edit: Also, @RobTi here's a more easily digestible speed test result over VPN on Virgin:
I can do 500+ Mbps on OpenVPN also, using my usual provider (not Proton, they're slower). Even with TCP instead of UDP, provided one tweaks the tunnel MTU and the other end supports it (as my provider does) I'll see basically linespeed over OpenVPN. WireGuard's even easier, and uses far less CPU, across all cores instead of just one.
Trust me, it's your end. Try with a beefy i7 on Linux and don't use the SH3 as a router.
I'll leave you to decide whether VM throttle or not
I've decided...
Last edited:
OK, VM 500 meg service - and bear in mind I'm not the only one online in the house atm. First connected to 'only' a UK WireGuard VPN node:
Code:[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 548 MBytes 460 Mbits/sec 2315 sender [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 542 MBytes 455 Mbits/sec receiver CPU Utilization: local/receiver 10.3% (0.8%u/9.5%s), remote/sender 0.2% (0.0%u/0.2%s) rcv_tcp_congestion cubic iperf Done.
Now *also* connected to a ProtonVPN node in NL over OpenVPN UDP (so, double VPN):
Code:[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 497 MBytes 417 Mbits/sec 3227 sender [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 491 MBytes 412 Mbits/sec receiver CPU Utilization: local/receiver 14.9% (1.4%u/13.5%s), remote/sender 0.8% (0.1%u/0.7%s) rcv_tcp_congestion cubic iperf Done.
As @Avalon said, it doesn't seem like VM throttle to me. I got curious after doing these two, so here is native VM with no VPN at all (WireGuard on the router disabled, no OpenVPN on the local machine):
Code:[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 506 MBytes 425 Mbits/sec 3173 sender [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 502 MBytes 421 Mbits/sec receiver CPU Utilization: local/receiver 27.6% (2.3%u/25.3%s), remote/sender 0.4% (0.1%u/0.3%s) rcv_tcp_congestion cubic iperf Done.
And now with plain VM + OpenVPN (ProtonVPN NL again) to check whether VM is targeting OpenVPN but not the WireGuard protocol:
Code:[SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 465 MBytes 390 Mbits/sec 2519 sender [SUM] 0.00-10.00 sec 459 MBytes 385 Mbits/sec receiver CPU Utilization: local/receiver 16.6% (1.8%u/14.9%s), remote/sender 0.4% (0.0%u/0.4%s) rcv_tcp_congestion cubic iperf Done.
As I said, there are others on the network here atm and it's smack bang in the middle of peak time. So, a little variability but still not seeing anything close to what you'd call throttling.
Edit: Also, @RobTi here's a more easily digestible speed test result over VPN on Virgin:
I can do 500+ Mbps on OpenVPN also, using my usual provider (not Proton, they're slower). Even with TCP instead of UDP, provided one tweaks the tunnel MTU and the other end supports it (as my provider does) I'll see basically linespeed over OpenVPN. WireGuard's even easier, and uses far less CPU, across all cores instead of just one.
Trust me, it's your end. Try with a beefy i7 on Linux and don't use the SH3 as a router.
I've decided...
I’m starting to think it is the SH3 (although they gave me a new one when I moved to Bham!) with its routing...I’ve been upgraded to vivid 500 only managing 300 on any Speedtest at any time!