Do I Really Need 1Gbps Internet?

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Is a 1Gbps internet connection worth it? You guys who are lucky enough to have that level of service can tell me. While websites and services aren’t set up to utilize those speeds, I would love to try out a 1Gbps upload.

I simply opted for the 1Gbps package to see what it would be like to have that speed in my own home. I’ve only had the service less than a week, but I’ve honestly struggled to witness the differences between nearly 100Mbps speeds and the impressive 1Gbps connection. Streaming 4K content seems just as reliable as before, and web pages for the most part aren’t noticeably faster. The big difference is the huge 1Gbps upload. I can send large files to OneDrive or Dropbox in what seems instant, and even sending files to friends and family is a lot quicker. When I switched from 56K to ADSL, or from ADSL to a fiber connection, there was a powerful and noticeable bump in speed. I honestly haven’t felt that yet with this connection.
 
Gigabit really comes in handy once you have 2 kids streaming netflix and a wife who is uploading pictures to facebook. Before, I would get lag, now I can't tell. Also, the upload speed is incredible.
 
I don't need it but I want it. Funny, though. I had at least 3 ISP serving my street with 1Gbps a few years ago but not a single one last time I checked a few months ago. Lack of consumer interest? I am not sure but it's real and it sucks. WTF
 
Would you believe I've already made this choice? I have the great fortune to live in an area with not one but TWO fibre to the home providers. I currently pay $45 (CDN) a month for 100GBps (no usage limits). I could have up to 1GBps for $100/month. Why don't I? I'm never going to use it. I'd rather just keep my $55 a month.
 
I'd love to have it, but I'm pretty happy with my current 180/25.
I get the feeling that the things that bog down now aren't speed related to begin with.
I've gone from 28/8 to 68/15 to 180/25 over the course of 5 years and the difference hasn't been that big of a deal. We have pretty lousy internet at work and it's still good enough for just about anything short of streaming video.
 
For me, AT&T offers 1gbps for about what I was paying for 45M/6M U-verse; so it was a no brainer. I would probably be just fine with 100M symmetric, but I'm not going to complain at 1Gbps. I also didn't try to get the 2gbps comcast plan, because $300/month didn't pass the wife test.
 
I pay 10€ for 1 GBPS. Is ok at this price. It is nice to download with 100 MB. :)
 
I wish people would stop asking about "need".

The only things humans need is air, food and water. Everything else is a luxury.

How USEFUL is 1GB internet compared to slower offerings? THAT is a good question.

Every time someone asks "Why do you need...", I want to belt them across the forehead with a sharpened entrenching tool.
 
toast0 said:
For me, AT&T offers 1gbps for about what I was paying for 45M/6M U-verse; so it was a no brainer. I would probably be just fine with 100M symmetric, but I'm not going to complain at 1Gbps. I also didn't try to get the 2gbps comcast plan, because $300/month didn't pass the wife test.
Click to expand...

Doesn't AT&T have data caps! What good is that bandwidth when they charge you for data usage after you hit cap.
 
Quix said:
Funny story, I live in downtown Toronto too. With my fiber.
Click to expand...

Who are you with? I'm looking to change but it has to be cable because my condo is locked into a 10 year agreement with Telus and they want $100 for 100Mbps...

I'm assuming you're with Beanfield?
 
The vast majority of people do not need it. Even in households with a lot of video streaming. This is especially true on people only using wireless devices. Even the best AC router can't take advantage of the bandwidth.
 
I continue to use my 50/50 FIOS instead of upgrading, because aside from the occasional Steam install, I'm not waiting on it for anything.

I don't upload much either.

And it seems I have a habit of buying games during Steam sales, when they're so overloaded I can't even get my 50 Mbps download speeds out of them. So why would I pay for faster?
 
I got it for free for the last few weeks, Century Link screw up, and it was nice but noticed no real difference over the 100/50 I had previously and will go back to.

During the summer I typically have 2 users streaming, one machine gaming and 2 remote users on the NAS with no issues with 100/50.

Not worth the extra $100 IMO.
 
I've got 150/150 Fios, and honestly, there's close to nothing that makes use of it. If you rule out usenet/torrents, there's very little that can actually use the download. Steam does pretty good, but it still doesn't get much above 110mbit at peak. The upload is nice with backblaze, as that averages about 90mbit up. I'd rather providers fix their long haul connections - my friends states away and in other countries are lucky to pull 4mbit from me, even thought they have 50+mbit connections even to test servers next to me. If they use segmented FTP they can get much better speeds, but things that matter (like plex) aren't segmented so I need that single connection to go faster.
 
defaultluser said:
I don't upload much either.
Click to expand...
That is another thing they never talk about, is how the upload speeds are often capped crazy low. Sucks when you have a bunch of high definition internet enabled video cameras, but have a super low upload speed.
 
This completely depends on what you're doing from home, but for 99% of the users they won't need it. The big thing is pricing. If you can get a faster service for the same or lesser cost, why wouldn't you upgrade?
 
and lucky me I just got out the 1mb DSL about a year ago. 24/2 now and it will be that only for the foreseeable future figuring it took an act of god and who knows how many years to get Frontier to upgrade their shit to offer this.
 
Bigbacon said:
and lucky me I just got out the 1mb DSL about a year ago. 24/2 now and it will be that only for the foreseeable future figuring it took an act of god and who knows how many years to get Frontier to upgrade their shit to offer this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the last time I REALLY noticed the speed increase was when I upgraded from 512k DSL to 4Mbps cable. THAT was nuts!

I couldn't tell the difference between (by then 10Mbps)cable and 15/5 FIOS, aside from it being massively more reliable. I bumped up to 50/50 two years ago to satisfy my Steam download wants and give more room for multiple video streams, but I just don't see the need anymore. I'd take it if it were free, but I'm not paying more.
 
I got Google Fiber.

It's like I'm LAN'd to the entire internet. I never want to go back, and it makes me reconsider moving.
 
I have a 1gb/1gb unlimited fiber connection to the Internet. Honestly, anything over 100mbs is just bragging rights. I rarely see my bandwidth usage increase over 100mbs doing anything...
 
I have 1000/100.

The answer is yes. Especially in multi gamer families, streamers, etc.
 
Been using symmetrical 1000/1000 for years now at work and I find it really difficult going back to cable//DSL at home. Remote resources simply work as if connected to the computer. I'd even wager that 1gbps isn't enough to usher in the next age of media consumption and cloud computing we are going towards.
 
10gbps at work, I couldn't imagine using that at home I don't think my desktop hard drive could even max it.

When you have thousands of users it's a must though.
 
I pay about $100/mo for 8mb/800k, but then I pretty much live in Mexico and probably could bury people in my field and no one would bat an eye so there are trade offs.

Hell I would like even just regular high speed that some people bitch about, let alone 1g.
 
I could really use that at the office, but a 1gb business line is way to expensive.
 
toast0 said:
For me, AT&T offers 1gbps for about what I was paying for 45M/6M U-verse; so it was a no brainer. I would probably be just fine with 100M symmetric, but I'm not going to complain at 1Gbps. I also didn't try to get the 2gbps comcast plan, because $300/month didn't pass the wife test.
Click to expand...

Same here. Although, I doubt 100MB would have been enough. I was saturating 45M hard. Recording two three shows at once left it so that my girlfriend and I couldn't play games online with any consistency or reliability. If anything, we stream more than we did back then while gaming or whatever. I suppose I could get by with less, buy why?
 
I have 300/20 TWC internet. I noticed a difference going from 50 to 100 to 300. The article is pretty misleading the person lives by themselves and on wireless sounds like they have 1 connected device or at least very few "Wi-Fi is also a bottleneck with a 1Gbps connection. I can manage around 400Mbps max " Try streaming 4k on 2 tvs while you have kids on there tablets and I am trying to game. Then tell me 1gig wont make a difference.
 
bloodhawke83 said:
do you really need DSL? 56k is enough.
Click to expand...

I know you're joking, but until we find another "killer app," there's little demand for faster internet. As a typical user, you can only spend so much time backup up files online, or broadcasting your Twitch channel. Aside from that, gaming uses very little bandwidth, and justifiable video quality increases are approaching a wall after 4k HDR.

I mean, Dan_D saturated 45Mbps, but his was a corner cases because AT&T use IPTV over DSL. The vast majority of TV viewers have dedicated broadcast bandwidth (Cable and FIOS), so this sharing isn't an issue.

I think most people would be perfectly satisfied with 100/100 for a very long time. That's enough for three "4k" 25mbps Netflix streams, plus leftover bandwidth for smooth user experience.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top