Steam installieren
Anmelden
|
Sprache
简体中文 (Vereinfachtes Chinesisch)
繁體中文 (Traditionelles Chinesisch)
日本語 (Japanisch)
한국어 (Koreanisch)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarisch)
Čeština (Tschechisch)
Dansk (Dänisch)
English (Englisch)
Español – España (Spanisch – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (Lateinamerikanisches Spanisch)
Ελληνικά (Griechisch)
Français (Französisch)
Italiano (Italienisch)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Ungarisch)
Nederlands (Niederländisch)
Norsk (Norwegisch)
Polski (Polnisch)
Português – Portugal (Portugiesisch – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (Portugiesisch – Brasilien)
Română (Rumänisch)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Finnisch)
Svenska (Schwedisch)
Türkçe (Türkisch)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamesisch)
Українська (Ukrainisch)
Ein Übersetzungsproblem melden
That right there will create a big latency in itself. It's physics. If your local home devices create higher latency between them on 5Ghz wireless vs two devices linked through your home Ethernet connection, and that's just a few meters of wireless communication, imagine what happens in 10 km. Other wireless devices interference, the weather, they all play a role in the latency over wireless, physical obstacles or not. It's not wireless in the void of space.
As you can see from your own tests, you have a huge ping to your first hop. I'm on Gigabit fiber Internet + Gigabit local network (Router's PPPoE WAN to LAN speed of ~950Mbps tested before my ISP capped the upload speed lower than 1Gbps). To my local ISP server listed on speedtest.net I have 0ms Idle Latency, 1ms Download Latency and 4ms Upload Latency. Using the ping command, I have a constant 37ms ping latency to the same Google server IP address you pinged (216.58.209.46), and I'm ~1500km away from Milan (where that server seems to be). As someone mentioned, consistency is also important. Just a spike every 10 seconds can ruin your gaming experience. I could play a game with that Google server at 37ms and I'd be just fine.
You don't have to change anything on your PC. You have 1 ms ping to your own router. The problem doesn't seem to be your network, but the ISP infrastructure. Some routers tend to have lower WAN-to-LAN speed than advertised (especially on PPPoE where there's some extra work to be done), but the latency shouldn't be an issue even on those. Microtik is a well known brand, I really don't think that the router could fix the phisical limitation of the antenna transmission. One thing that comes to mind you could ask the ISP technical engineer is to increase the power of the dish, if that's possible. I think there are some regulations regarding wireless, you can't just have "Unlimited Power" Darth Sidious style.
Your old ADSL numbers were jawdropping high, I guess the ISP offering that service had the same infrastructure since 2000. The "Wireless fiber" does look like an improvement, but the latency is still high and clearly not consistent.
Try testing VDSL, find someone who has VDSL and ask them to do some gaming tests for you. Consistent low latency, that's what you are after. If you can get VDSL from an ISP in your area, I think you will have a better gaming experience than this "Wireless fiber" nonsense.
This wikipedia page seems to have a list of ISP providers offering VDSL:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_VDSL_and_VDSL2_deployments
Scroll down to Italy and contact those providers (it looks like they offer VDSL2 which is more than enough and better than your "Wireless fiber" numbers).
"Wireless fiber"... marketing at its finest.
You are likely getting whats to be expected due to using Wireless
Modern Intel/Realtek Gigabit NICs are actually pretty good, so unless you have a config issue somewhere its likely being on wireless is the issue and not your NIC.
I think I will play with lower level players then, since my connection doesn't 'suffer' certain players (maybe higher level ones because they move faster and too much?) when it comes to gaming. Or I can still play RTS or online board games, which have different netcode, so it doesn't really matter if your connection is wireless.
Now I don't mean to contraddict you, I want to point out two cases of improvements compared to what I had in the past. I saw improvements in bad weather conditions or in internet usage.
For example, during the last few months, my ADSL connection dropped for 5 mins as soon as some rain started falling or in case of very strong wind. This dish at least keeps internet connection going and still gives me ~29 Mbps in download at the very least, I've ran tests during windy and rainy nights a few days ago, with the mountain in front of my house covered by clouds. As per internet browsing, I can upload videos on YouTube (2GB-sized videos are uploaded in less than 2 hours; with my old ADSL not only they took forever to upload, but the upload itself often failed) now and I won't congest line usage for other devices connected. Huge Steam games and updates also download at reasonable times compared to before, when I had to keep my PC running for entire nights to download games such as DOOM 2016/Eternal.
This could have led me to get wrong the purpose of the new connection I have.
I must specify however, that the dish is mounted on the same pole as TV antenna, but below it. This can cause other interference I guess.
And I want to ask you: does the sea matter? I live on an island, so my signal must go across Tyrrenian sea to reach the northern Italy IP of my first hop. That also could add delay, but what bugs me is that on the game I play, some years ago, one dude from South America always won on italian servers despite pinging 212 ms with his inputs that had to travel from his continent to Europe, and there's Atlantic ocean in between. Yet, I always saw his previous actions when I reacted to his attacks (but I had still ADSL at the time). I understand if a russian from Siberia gets stability on german servers because of FTTH and no sea. But signal across the sea should travel on radio inputs or satellite, aka wireless. Pretending he had FTTH, does fiber work regardless of the sea?
On a last note, my ISP can offer 100/20 speed for additional € 8 per month (about € 96-100 more yearly). But if wireless is inconsistent, I think I won't upgrade my plan, as it wouldn't solve gaming problems at this point.
Yep, I think I'll mark this thread as solved. Thanks everybody for the feedback, much appreciated.
Outside your router, latency is an ISP issue.
Note built-in is almost always PCIe connected via your chipset.
As for the fiber, Internet between continents and large islands is usually connected through fiber optics, but it's not like the "normal" terrestrial fiber cables with 10-20 whatever small fibers inside you might have seen hanging in a city, imagine a huge tube full of other cables with fibers inside, looks more like a big pipe. They must resist pressure, corrosion, hooks or animal teeth, they are meant to be way stronger than the normal terrestrial ones, because you can't just go at the bottom of the ocean and fix them. They do some repairs, but just to a certain depth, and even those are more costly than fixing a connection over land.
212ms seems like a high ping for an FPS game, but I don't know. For example, in CS, there are some few optimizations people can do to get better feedback from the server like changing the tickrate, updaterate, I don't remember exactly the name of the settings. If they had 212ms and you had 50ms and they've got their shot registered before yours, it might be all the other settings. With Valve's Source games you can see more regarding your connection using net_graph. You can have a better ping, but 50% packet loss, that's terrible.
You don't need those VDSL speeds, but you need the consistent latency, and I think the VDSL can offer that. I don't think the VDSL goes through the same old infrastructure the ADSL goes through.
i dont want to be offensive.
byebye
Or buy an internal PCIE card with a decent chipset.
1Gbps via USB is plenty.
Most consumers do not have access to an ISP speed plan above 1Gbps anyways.