1Gbps internet not reaching 1Gbps in speed tests, is that normal?

GoogalyMoogaly

GoogalyMoogaly

GoogalyMoogaly

Soldato
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Posts
8,661
Location
Cornwall
So I've just upgraded my internet to 1000/200.
When I run a speed test (e.g. https://www.speedtest.net/) I'm not seeing 1000Mbps. It varies from run to run, but it ranges from about 940Mbps to maybe even as low as in the 750Mbps region (although probably more likely to be in the 800Mbps range).
Is this normal?

Previously I had 500/100 and my speedtests would always come back a little over 500Mbps (when I had 400Mbps they would usually be a little over 400Mbps).

I'm wondering if because all my routers ports are ethernet and there'll be some overhead that I'll not see 1Gbps with this router.
Would it help if I got a router with 2.5G ports (my network is mostly 2.5G after the router)? I'm thinking 2.5G WAN port just in case I could get a fraction more and 2.5G LAN so that should eliminate any overhead issues.

Has anyone tried this and did it help or is it not normal to have this issue in the first place?
 
I'm with Wildanet.

Yeah different hosts on speedtest.net can make a difference although it's not super consistent with any of them (I think there's even a Wildanet one in London). Never seen over 940Mbps.
Fast.com gave me 980Mbps one time and 650Mbps another.
 
That's a good point about the ONT box, hadn't thought of that.

Well that's disappointing, sorta wishing I hadn't bothered with the upgrade now, doesn't feel like I'm getting what I paid for (cuz I'm not).

I don't feel Wildanet made it clear that you wouldn't see the speed they advertised.
 
Glanza said:
Looking on their FAQ:
Click to expand...
I did see that, couldn't see any actual figures in there though. If it fluctuated between 980Mbps and 1020Mbps I don't think I'd have minded.

It does of feels like those days when they'd advertise 8Mbps internet but then you end up getting 3.5Mbps and people complain so they added "up to" in extremely small text.
But I don't see them advertising it as "up to 1Gbps". I doubt they'd be happy if each month I paid them "up to" the amount shown!
 
I think I'm going to have to contact their customer services to get this sorted out. If they'd advertise 900Mbps and I was getting 940Mbps, that's be fine, but they advertised 1Gbps. And I'm not getting that in a vest case scenario, it can be far worse and Wildanet don't seem to specify a minimum guaranteed speed (which I think they legally have to).
 
Orcvader said:
What's the ONT and router model? As others mentioned I suspect the connection between the two is limited to 1gb, and/or the router itself only provides 1gb LAN ports.
Click to expand...
The router definitely only has a 1Gbps WAN port (some Adtran model) not sure about the ONT box it looks pretty plain so hard to get much info.

Caged said:
Are you American? You make a complaint, they then try to put it right. You've suffered no real loss so there's nothing to sue for.
Click to expand...
Yeah a complaint is the first step obviously but if they can't fix it then maybe it's the next step. They advertised 1Gbps and I'm paying for 1Gbps (which they apparently guarantee).
 
I just checked the ONT box, apparently the LAN port on it is a 10Gbps port, so if it's a hardware issue my end I guess it'll be the router. The gigabit Ethernet port possibly explaining the 940Mbps cap, but I don't imagine that's the cause of the dips into the 700Mbps range.
 
My speed tests are all done wired.

So, the ONT box is an Adtran with a 10Gbps LAN port and I'm using a TP-Link AX72 router (which only has 1Gbps WAN and LAN ports). There is a new firmware for it though, which I'm tempted to try.
Wildanet sent me an Adtran 854-v6 router which has a 2.5Gbps WAN port but 1Gbps LAN (how does that make sense?), so I might give that a try and see if it at least help the stability. I tested at lunch time and got speeds between 900Mbps and 500Mbps.

I've tried 2 different PCs, one with a 2.5Gbps USB ethernet adaptor and a Gigabyte B650 Gaming X AX V2 with onboard 2.5Gbps port. Using iperf3 both seem to be able to achieve over 2Gbps.
 
Still seems pointless to me to only have Gigabit ethernet of the wan port is 2.5G, but I suspect like most ISPs it's the cheapest possible device they can get away with.

I've tested during the evening yesterday and around midnight and then around lunchtime today. I think it was even worse at lunchtime today.

I'm not sure how many people here have it, I know it neighbours do. As for contention, I can't imagine that would account for 400Mbps+ of the guaranteed speed (1Gbps). They do say they're could be some slight variation but I think 40% would be stretching the term "slight".
 
not, turned off any wifi on the PCs. Tried in Chrome and Edge but get basically the same thing (just over 800Mbps at the minute).

Wildanet list it as 1Gbps and guarantee their speeds, so I'd hope to get 1Gbps (with some slight variation).

A bit later I'll try restarting the ONT and also I'll try the supplied router. After that I'll probably have to contact customer support.
 
jaybee said:
If you complain and end up leaving to go elsewhere, the best result you will get is still likely to be 940mbps, but it might be advertised "correctly" at say 900 and then over provisioned by a bit.
You would win mentally, but perhaps not financially.
The 60mbps you feel you are missing is very insignificant and is lost via overheads.
Click to expand...
That's the trouble, they're the only FTTP player in the area so if I get out of the contract I'll end up having to go with them again anyway.
But best case would probably be that they discount my bill. Failing that I'd just have to rejoin them on the 500/100 plan which I know they can actually deliver. When I was on that plan I was getting just over 500Mbps not 450Mbps, not 400Mbps.
Maybe I could look at seeing if there's any other legal action I could take, they're smallish (just the local area not national) and already have a pretty poor reputation so they probably wouldn't want any more bad publicity. I don't think most people would touch Wildanet if there was another option in the area.
To be fair the 60Mbps is annoying because I'm paying for 1000Mbps, that's what's on the paperwork they sent me. If they'd sold it as 900Mbps and I could get 940Mbps I'd be happy, but they didn't. Also, really, it's more that I'm not even getting 940Mbps most of the time, I'm not getting 900Mbps very often, I'm usually in the 700s or 800s and since they guarantee their speeds I would expect a darn sight closer to what is advertised.

Armageus said:
It's not pointless - the whole point of connections with more bandwidth is to be able to use multiple devices (e.g. a mix of wired and wireless) at once without contention, rather than just a single device maxxing out the bandwidth.

Realistically the difference between a 1Gbps and 2Gbps won't be noticeable for the majority of people - games downloads are still a decent speed on both, and are often limited/restricted by the content servers
Click to expand...
Yeah that's a fair point. I'd like to re-phrases that as "Still seems pointless for me to only have Gigabit ethernet if the wan port is 2.5G".
 
My last 3 runs on my "Guaranteed" 1000Mbps internet:


11/27/2025 5:47 PM
ping: 13
download: 539.57
upload: 216.76
server/location: Gosport / Iomart


11/27/2025 5:46 PM
ping: 10
download: 532.17
upload: 202.72
server/location: London / Wildanet


11/27/2025 5:45 PM
ping: 10
download: 750.65
upload: 216.71
server/location: Andover / Cilix Limited


So please I paid the extra to upgrade from 500Mbps!

11/26/2025 2:37 PM
ping: 10
download: 521.82
upload: 107.85
server/location: Andover / Cilix Limited
 
ChrisD. said:
Honestly, you sound like the type of customer ISPs don't wish to have. Just accept that residential broadband connections are based on shared bandwidth/contention ratios and be happy you you have fibre to the house - there are many far less fortunate than you and would bite your hand off for 'just' 50 Mbps. Consistent tests above 6/700 Mbps is decent. If you're that bothered, ask them what their guaranteed bandwidth is and go from there, rather than trying to get money off?

You're free to go and spend 5 figures possibly 6 to have a dedicated fibre to your house, followed by well north of £100 per month payments if you wish. Pays your money and all that.
Click to expand...
Surely they shouldn't guarantee 1000Mbps if they're not going to deliver it though?
 
Also as I understand it there's a legal requirement for them to state a Minimum Guaranteed Speed and the only speed they state for my package is 1000Mbps.
So either they're not meeting the minimum Guaranteed Speed or they've not specified one (which is illegal?).

I just ran a speed test and got 375Mbps. That's worse than when I was on 500Mbps, it baffles me that they're allowed to charge me more for 1000Mbps and then give me 375Mbps and there's nothing wrong with that.
 
OK, you know what, I'm big enough to admit that this may mostly have been a PEBKAC problem...

I plugged in the router they supplied (which in typical Wildanet fashion is pants) because of two things. Firstly it has a 2.5Gbps WAN port and secondly it has a built-in speed test. The speed test running on the router was hitting 1022Mbps-ish every time. Now I'm not sure if this is because there are no Gigabit ethernet ports in the chain or if the built-in speed test might be a little generous, but since I've always had slightly over the rated speed in the past I'd say there's a 50% chance that that figure is accurate.
So then I had to try to figure out why that is so consistent. I think the issue is that the PC I was mostly using to test is an old B350 AM4 motherboard that only has a Gigabit ethernet port built-in. So when I updated my home network to be 2.5Gbps I bought a USB 2.5Gbps ethernet dongle. It seem to work well, decent speeds between PCs and decent speed to the NAS. iPerf3 seemed reasonable. However I tried another PC that only had a Gigabit ethernet port and that was getting 920Mbps-ish consistently in speed tests. So I tried the AM4 board using the Gigabit ethernet ports and all of a sudden 900Mbps+ every attempt. Started to worry it was some of my 2.5Gbps hardware (I didn't get the most expensive options/brands) so decided to try a PC with an AM5 motherboard that uses a built-in 2.5Gbps ethernet port. 940Mbps-ish every time so far.

So now it's looking like it was the bloody USB to ethernet adaptors! If the router's in-built speed test is anything to go by I might even be able to get over 1Gbps if I get a router with at least 1 2.5Gbps LAN port.

While I'm still not a massive fan of Wildanet, I will admit that this might not have been their fault.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom