Computers |
|
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Junior Techie Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59
| I have been playing counter-strike on dialup for sometime now and have been getting an average 250 latency... I live in the country and the next upgrade i can get is satelitte internet... So i decide to do this i spend about $780 to put this in and now im getting a latency of about 900 - 1400??? wtf ? i need help |
| | |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| Wizard Techie Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,222
| satellite is very slow (the download might be an improvement over dial-up, but the upload sucks, probably on par with dial-up if it's one-way satellite) satellite has very bad latency as well; 900-1400 should be what you should be getting; sorry, you should call your local cable provider or dsl provider to see if they can wire to your house (i doubt it) |
| | |
| | #3 (permalink) | |
| Newb Techie Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 48
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| Lord Techie | Calculate the amount of time it takes a wireless signal at the speed of light to reach a satalitte and come back down in perfect circumstances. 56K > Satalitte for gaming, but you could also possibly look into ISDN which is around doubble the price of 56K and offers 112K |
| | |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| Monster Techie Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,577
| Well let's see, if light travels at 300,000,000 m/sec, and a sattelite in geostationary orbit aroudn the earth is 35,800,000 m high, then to go one length it would take: distance/speed = 35,800,000/300,000,000 = 0.11933333333333333333333333333333 seconds. So that's already a latency of 119 ms. Multiply by 2 and that's 238 ms. I think it's there and back as well, so multiply by 2 again and that's 476 ms. That's the absolute quickest path. Remember the sattelite is in use by other people, and there's lots of other circuitry that the signal has to go through as well. So sattelite does have higher latencies than 56k. |
| | |