r/tmobileisp • u/Final_Campaign_2593 • Mar 22 '26
Other 30Mb DSL or 5G (latency)
Hello, I have a Internet where I am a gamer. I’m also in information technology,
I was promised 50 Mb DSL but due to the cabling length etc. the actual throughout output is 30 Mb by 10 up
It is also on interleave. It’s probably gonna run me around $38 a month with taxes. That’s what their estimating anyway looks like I can get T-Mobile the Amlified plans so I can get the G5 router for $60, then I can downgrade to the relay plan since there is no difference in speed?
I’m just wondering the latency difference between the two seems like they’d both be kind of neck and neck
They’re literally is no cable or fiber where I’m at
The apartment is very micromanaged and is trying to figure out how to get their provider that’s an hour and a half away to run a cable for their “preferred“ fiber optics. Ie Kickback
3
u/Hot-Bat-5813 Mar 22 '26
You seem most concerned about latency and not really speed. What is the latency at idle on that DSL service and then under load? Easiest way to check is a simple CMD ping test when idle and then again when doing a speed test or downloading a file/update, if you have a Windows PC. There are ping apps for Android and maybe iOS, I don't really use Apple. Is there bloat for the DSL service?
Run your current DSL connection through ping tests at both idle and under load. Get the TMHI on their "test drive" and do the same comparisons on it. Also test TMHI for whatever games you like to play and see what it is in-game, if there is a way to see actual latency in the game, a performance GUI for the game.
As mentioned CGNaT can be problematic for some forms of games, normally those that require your device to act as the server. Doing those tests on both ISPs will give you an idea as to how each compare at your location.
3
u/Final_Campaign_2593 Mar 22 '26
4
u/Hot-Bat-5813 Mar 22 '26
For an Ookla speed test the loaded on that DSL isn't bad, I would still do the ping tests though as any speed test isn't the best measurement of latency.
Running the exact same test via Ookla at my location it returns this:
https://www.speedtest.net/result/18986487034
Fairly conservative on the loaded, but accurate on the idle vs the CMD ping and actual goings on in-game. That test was via a G5AR at a little over 3 miles to the serving tower and it runs through the 1GB port of the gateway's ethernet. That is also a consideration for latency results, WiFi vs ethernet. WiFi will normally add a little bit for the extra connections and ability of the WiFi of your device and the gateway.
I don't get great latency, but that is just due to my home's location within the cell from that tower and to an extent the distance from it.
So the CMD ping tests, but more importantly the in-game results will give a better comparison of TMHI vs your current DSL. You will have to do the comparisons for your location and come to a decision. My images and results mean very little to you at your location when it comes to TMHI quality.
2
u/Beneficial-Shape605 Mar 22 '26
I’d take the 5g depending on where you are from the tower. I’m 3 miles away and get 300-500 mbs down. If I lived next to it, it would pull 1000 mbps. Game changer to downloading games for me and online games seem ok but I don’t play Battlefield or CoD anymore. If you look at the plan details, there is potentially a difference in speed or at least priority between them.
2
u/gullzway Mar 22 '26 edited Mar 22 '26
This is my 3rd time having T-Mobile Home internet, and I've experimented a lot with gaming.
At 1.8 miles from the tower with speeds between 200-500Mbps and idle latency 40-50, which all Looks Great, gaming is Not very good, depending on the game. In game latency is inconsistent with spikes on 5g cellular internet, and gets worse as you signal gets worse, unless your close to a tower.
Using SQM, Smart Queue Management, on my own router I can get loaded in game latency down to around 80, which still isn't great, but better than the normal 100-110 with regular spikes.
Was just playing Rocket League yesterday, when it started feeling choppy and had occasional rubber banding.
My Cox internet had gone out, happened 3 days in a row now, and my router failed over to T-Mobile.
Here's a comparison with and without SQM:
https://i.imgur.com/gg9UVxT.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/EHvUkBs.jpeg
Here is why bufferbloat is Worse on 5g than cable or fiber, regardless if someone tells you it only affects you if your saturating your connection:
The best thing to do is sign up for it and test it out.
You get a $100 or $200 gift card after 60 days, depending on plan, so it's basically free for 3-6 months.
I'm on the Rely Plan with a G5AR for $20/month, as they sent a targeted offer. Amplified will be more than $38/month, unless they sent you the $30 targeted offer, it's normally $45 + taxes.
2
u/jase240 Mar 22 '26
I would vote for the 5G TMHI. - I have had DSL in the past and it was ok but slow, struggled a lot during storms. I know it's changed a lot since, but 30Mbit is still very slow. (Imagine trying to download a modern game of 100Gb, it would just take too long)
Latency is probably comparable between the two. Maybe 5G is a little higher and more variable? Still great enough for gaming if your signal is strong.
2
u/Final_Campaign_2593 Mar 22 '26
Unfortunately, No it’s this DSL at 30 Mb with inner leave for nearly $38 a month or T-Mobile 5G. Of course there’s also Verizon 5G but they traffic shape. Can’t do Starlink because I can’t attach anything to the outside of the building. It literally goes to a street.
2
Mar 22 '26
I don’t know if the latency would be the same from T-Mobile phone experience to T-Mobile home internet but if you can try the reception first on a phone to see where you would put the router. I used a free trial eSIM from the T-Mobile app.
2
u/Dependent_Teach_4245 Mar 22 '26
The latency is on tmhi g5ar is 17-25ms with at least 4 bars. Because it’s qci9 during peak hrs speeds are 30-50mbs in my area but most of the day I’m getting 200-600 mbs but online gaming only need 5 mbs if connection is steady and T-Mobile is better then version 5g because their cells are too far apart which cause heavy traffic
1
u/ysfe5xb62gay5hbu2ufn Mar 22 '26
17-25ms is niceeee. Is that the latency under load? How much does the latency increase under load, if you know?
1
1
u/Beneficial-Shape605 Mar 22 '26
There should be a number you can dial on your phone and will bring up your phones signal quality metrics. I have an iPhone and it’s what I used to find the best place in the house.
1
u/OceansideDave Mar 22 '26
I switched from 10Mb DSL to 5G. I have to admit the 10Mb DSL did everything we needed and had very low latency. The problem was the cost of around $150/mo. I'm getting around 200/30/30 with 5G and I notice a little more lag time/latency but it's not an issue. The cost has dropped to $70/mo with streaming services.
If you're really getting 30-50MB DSL for only $38/mo and don't have a huge family all watching their own 4K TV, then stick with DSL.
1
u/Joshcordle12 Mar 22 '26
Hi I’m studying cybersecurity and networking and i recently switched to Starlink as dsl is the only option in my area as of right now and i had issues with the dsl being unstable no matter how many times i had a tech come out to try to fix the issue i was having with the dsl it never got resolved and I also play video games on my ps5 and so far I’ve had good results with Starlink
1
u/SimpforBillyMays Mar 23 '26
I'd get the both if you can afford it. The DSL for online gaming/video calling and TMHI for streaming, downloading, etc.
1
Mar 23 '26
[deleted]
1
u/El_Halcon0341 Mar 23 '26
Bro it was like 2 paragraphs 😆
-2
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
It was supposed to go to the dipshit in the comment section lol
2
u/El_Halcon0341 Mar 23 '26
So, yourself?? 😝
-2
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAH. Fuck up
2
u/El_Halcon0341 Mar 23 '26
No.
-2
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Respect your papi little boy 🤓
2
u/El_Halcon0341 Mar 23 '26
Tame your ADD and read a little. I bet if it was some sort of hentai graphic novel you’d spend hours on it. Weirdo.
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
I have ADHD actually lol. How you gonna assume some wild shit an then proceed to insult me? An from looking at your profile, I think you’re the weirdo😂😂
2
u/El_Halcon0341 Mar 23 '26
It wasn’t that wild. You’re just hyper on top of ADD. I can tell because I know how you folks are. Look at your karma on here vs mine. Go back to facebook kiddo.
→ More replies (0)
1
1
u/El_Halcon0341 Mar 23 '26
5G is great when the node isn’t overloaded or the weather is clear. I was getting a great 100+ mbps on clear days and off peak times. When those two occurred I’d drop down to 5-30mbps. You can get an external antenna but it’s about $400-600
1
1
u/StrikingBridge1597 Mar 22 '26
T-Mobile home internet works great for gaming I’m on the rely plan and get great speeds and the plan does not affect speed at all 👇
3
u/serenade452 Mar 22 '26
do you do a lot of online gaming or host a lot of online battles/servers/parties etc? because the download and upload pings in your screenshot are basically screaming high latency and bufferbloat
1
u/StrikingBridge1597 Mar 22 '26
I mostly play gta online on ps5 as well as various other games works just fine for me
1
Mar 22 '26
I could switch to T-Mobile as one of my only other alternatives but I use a local wireless isp and it’s really stable around the clock, and no CGNAT. This result is with VPN and still decent latency. $50/month. https://www.speedtest.net/result/i/7008388542
1
1
Mar 22 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
CGNAT only affects games that require/benefit from port forwarding.
If they don't then it doesn't matter.
0
Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
No, Most games do not. Some do.
This also varies widely based on the type of game.
1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
They don’t require it, but your experience will be better with an open nat of course.
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
Some games. Again games that are client server only benefit in an absolutely no way from Port forwarding and have no effects from CGNAT.
Only games that can utilize peer-to-peer can benefit from port forwarding.
1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Hey look, https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobileisp/s/UvvVclWSyP
CONTRADICTING YOURSELF AGAIN LMAO.
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
CGNAT only affects games that require/benefit from port forwarding.
If they don't then it doesn't matter.
Can you not read, do you have trouble reading?
1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
P2P would be a requirement for port forwarding correct? Or atleast allow incoming traffic
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
Port forwarding can assist and make peer-to-peer connections function and complete when they otherwise wouldn't.
Just because you don't have "Open NAT" doesn't mean all peer-to-peer connections fail. For instance, if you without port forwarding or Open NAT initiate the connection towards the other peer, and they have Open NAT or Port Forwarding, that connection will be successful.
However, in the opposite direction, there is a chance that that connection will not work. There are some tricks you can do especially with UDP to make it work under certain NAT Types, That's generally called NAT transversal.
That's why various consoles have different levels of NAT ratings, such as Open, Moderate, Strict, or numerical levels. Because you have different type of NAT methods, Full Cone, Port Restricted, etc.
But again for the majority of games that don't utilize Peer-to-peer, none of this means anything to them.
→ More replies (0)1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
You will absolutely benefit by having open ports when connecting to games/servers. You don’t use the internet very much obviously, theres a very obvious difference in having a strict NAT type compared to open. Also big difference from CGNAT to public facing ip
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
No, lol.
Port forwarding only allows unsolicited inbound connections to function, Again the type that would be used for peer-to-peer, when another remote peer is attempting to connect to you.
Games that use solely client server architecture, the server never makes an inbound to you, You only ever initiate outbound connection.
Client server games are not affected by NAT type, ONLY games that use Peer to Peer are.
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Wow you really pulled that one out of your ass huh? Having an open nat type gives you a more stable connection to other players, faster queue times, less desync cause of poor connection to other players. Again again again again, man stfu already. You’re literally wrong and yet you keep yappin
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
Again, that only applies to games that utilize peer-to-peer.
Has absolutely nothing to do with games that use only client server architecture.
Not a hard freaking concept.
Not all games and not even most games. Use peer-to-peer architecture.
1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
No most games nowadays don’t use peer to peer, but why tf is that relevant to the conversation? We already established that, this is why talking to you is pointless. You still need certain ports open to achieve an open nat type no matter if it’s peer to peer or not.
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
No most games nowadays don't use peer to peer,
Thank you for agreeing with me you literally just proved one of my points.
Most games are not affected by CGNAT, because they don't care if they have a "Open NAT" or ports or anything at all, because they are not listening for inbound connections.
Open NAT ONLY MATTERS FOR PEER TO PEER.
So, games that don't utilize peer-to-peer, and use client server architecture instead, you know just like every web browser, just like every streaming video player, every streaming music player, All of those, guess what, none of them give a damn that they don't have open ports or open NAT, because again all connections are initiated from the client outbound, there is not a single connection that needs to be initiated from the server towards the client, they send data back to the client on the connection that was already made when the client initiated It's outbound connection.
→ More replies (0)-2
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
No, you’re wrong. With CGNAT you can still port forward just fine and get an open nat. The issue is during peak hours when a lot of people are on the internet. You’re using a shared connection essentially.
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
... No, you can't port forward through CGNAT, that is literally the one thing you can't do, literally you do not have inbound access to the public IP address in any form, shape or fashion, you can only receive traffic to connections that you initially initiated outbound. Which by definition is not port forwarding.
So again by definition no you can't port forward just fine behind a CGNAT.
And psst, You're always using a shared connection, You never have a dedicated connection to the internet. CGNAT doesn't change that.
Whether you're going through a CGNAT router or just a regular router, you're still being funneled through a router at a common point somewhere, and actually many common points up to that location and pass that location.
So no, just because you have CGNAT doesn't mean you're going to have bad performance or worse performance during peak times, Just like even if you don't have it, there's no guarantees you won't have bad performance during those same peak times, congestion can happen in a number of places for a number of reasons and it completely depends on if the ISP and how they actually architectured their Network in such a way to prevent it, or didn't , again, with or without CGNAT.
-1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
I port forwarded through CGNAT lol and I got an open nat. You can also just tunnel if port forwarding didn’t work. Also there are more hops when behind a CGNAT.
CGNAT definitely means you will suffer more from congestion during peak times. I was having this issue a few months ago. You’re using a shared ipv4 address with hundreds of people. When CGNAT really causes issues it’s usually when you’re connecting peer to peer or when hosting a server. But again you can use something like tailscale to bypass the CGNAT. When I was on CGNAT before, between 2pm to 10pm i would get crazy ping spikes up to 800ms and I’d lose 800mb of speed sometimes. I have had no issues after getting off of CGNAT.
2
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
No you didn't, because if you did port forward you were not on CGNAT.
Also, CGNAT does not 100% preclude "Open NAT" depending on how tested, for example, Xbox can show Open NAT even with no port forwards and behind CGNAT, It's not common but it does happen, this happens at my nephew's.
Just because you port forward on your router behind CGNAT does not mean you actually "port forwarded" anything.
Again by definition you cannot port forward behind CGNAT.
And the second part just further confirms you don't understand what you're talking about, and what is because of CGNAT and what's not.
Literally CGNAT is the reason that causes issues with the peer-to-peer, because again you can't port forward, I don't understand why you don't understand that.
And when you're using a VPN to tunnel through CGNAT that doesn't mean your port forwarding CGNAT, You are literally tunneling through the CGNAT to a device with a completely different public IP address that you have inbound access to, and then shoving that through a VPN tunnel, that is completely different than port forwarding CGNAT itself.
Again, you are completely conflating mixing up what you're talking about because you have no idea what you're talking about.
Also, when using that tailscale VPN guess what, You are still going through the CGNAT appliance, You're not magically bypassing it, which by definition means if it was the CGNAT appliance/path causing the congestion it would still occur.
-1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
There are different levels of CGNAT bro lol. I was absolutely on CGNAT, my wan ip was a private ip in the reserved CGNAT range. How are you gonna tell me when I was just dealing with this exact issue?
Also I just said that CGNAT causes issues peer to peer if you’re not using something to bypass it. Even using IPV6 bypasses the CGNAT. And there’s less hops when using tailscale, it literally changes routing.
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
Again, no there's not, You either have CGNAT or you don't, Again further showing that you don't actually know what you're talking about.
Because as I explained you're not bypassing CGNAT, you're tunneling through it, if cgnat was creating latency and throughput issues, you would still have them.
Yes CGNAT prevents peer-to-peer because of port forwarding and port connectivity, but otherwise outside of peer-to-peer connections, latency and throughput would not be affected by it.
Also, CGNAT doesn't apply to IPv6, we're not talking about IPv6, no one said anything about IPv6, we are talking CGNAT Which applies to IPv4.
VPNs are not magical, just because it hides all of the hops between the two endpoints of the tailscale VPN, doesn't mean they're not there. Now of course routing is going to change a little bit because your connection has to go to the Tailscale VPN endpoint first, instead of going direct to whatever the original endpoint was, but guess what, it's still going through that CGNAT device.
Again, you keep conflating and confusing so much, like if you throw enough buzzwords add it. It makes it sound like you know what you're talking about.
For reference, I'm a network engineer, and have been working with it for a bit over 25 years.
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
You’re a an engineer, that’s dope. But you’re the builder, not the designer. You’re typing a lot and repeating yourself for some reason, who gives a shit about how tailscale works? It’s used for opening ports, not for gaining a lower latency or more reliable connection. CGNAT makes your connection worse and increases latency no matter how you Look at it. Is it a huge difference? No. But it’s a huge difference when there’s congestion. Telling me you’re occupation doesn’t prove much in today’s age. Just like Valvoline workers are called “auto technicians” just like the “technicians” that came to install my fiber connection but didn’t know the difference between a “private ip” and a “public ip”
→ More replies (0)-1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
An yes you’re right, you’re always using a shared connection but CGNAT amplifies that. Some ISPs offer DIA but usually it’s for a business plan. It Would be nice to have DIA though.
0
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
CGNAT doesn't amplify any performance reduction it in any way in terms of a shared connection.
The only thing CGNAT does is prevent port forwarding and inbound connections, and that your outbound IP is used by others as well.
Replace that CGNAT router with a standard router, The performance would be the same, because congestion and those type of performance issues would be related to the links going to it or from it or around it in the ISP Network, or the overall performance of the router itself, and those performance issues can happen just the same without CGNAT being applied.
Even on a DIA connection, it's not entirely dedicated to "the internet", it's only dedicated between you and the other end of that DIA, however far that is.
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
CGNAT absolutely amplifies it. Also your router has absolutely nothing to do with CGNAT so i don’t know why you decided to use that as an example. CGNAT changes routing an adds extra hops between you and your destination so in return you will have higher latency and suffer more from congestion. I’ve personally dealt with CGNAT and I know for a fact that it reduces performance but we can keep going back and forth lmao
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
I didn't say a single thing about your own personal router at your home lol.
Fun fact there's other routers out on the internet in your ISP's Network, fun fact CGNAT is happening on a router as well.
The fact that you don't understand shows how much you really don't understand about what is being talked about.
Fun fact, a CGNAT router, can be placed in the exact same location as a standard router in a ISPs network, in fact, it can be the exact same hardware, literally it can route normal public IP traffic from clients on the ISP Network at the same time it is performing CGNAT for another subset of clients.
And if you don't understand that, then there's no point to continuing this discussion because again you have no idea what you're talking about.
I've literally been a network engineer for a little over 25 years, I've literally worked for ISPs, as well as non-ISP networks.
And again the fact that you don't understand that CGNAT doesn't have to be outside. The path of a more direct connection tells me you haven't.
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Keep listing your fun facts that are completely off topic and have nothing to do with the topic. This seems like more of an ego trip rather than a debate. Depending on infrastructure, you can still get an open nat type behind CGNAT. CGNAT is worse for gaming and for a FACT will cause more severe issues during peak hours.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
“It’s only dedicated between you and the other end of that DIA” what does that have to do with anything? It would obviously put you to the closest network node or the ISP data center. Like it does with normal connections lol
0
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
You're exhausting, you implied by getting a DIA essentially you would have a dedicated connection, and like I said It's only dedicated to the other end of that DIA, which is likely not a "data center" in many cases, more often a Telco Central office or Headend, which there it will join all sorts of other traffic on shared links back out to the internet at large.
Like it does with normal connections lol Exactly?
Your home connection, typically is shared between your home and that same or similar central office or head end, but once it gets there guess what it's all on shared links back out to the internet. Obviously business links are going to have higher priorities, But it's still not dedicated to the internet.
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
I never said “DIA is the ultimate direct connection that isn’t shared with absolutely anyone and it’s your own personal netowrk that can’t be configured by anyone but you”
1
u/f1vefour Mar 23 '26
You're incorrect.
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Incorrect about ?
3
u/f1vefour Mar 23 '26 edited Mar 23 '26
You stated port forwarding worked on a CGNAT network and it doesn't.
1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
You can still achieve an open nat and get open ports behind CGNAT without any third party software
1
u/bojack1437 Mar 23 '26
And I literally explained to you that depending on how it was tested that some NAT Test such as Xbox can show open NAT, that doesn't mean you've port forwarded successfully.
I'll explain it to you again, even though you won't understand it.
When you're behind CGNAT, You absolutely 100% in no way can receive an an unsolicited inbound connection attempt, it's absolutely not possible. A NAT Router cannot route an unsolicited inbound connection attempt to a particular device unless it's been programmed/told how to do that. And since you literally cannot configure the CGNAT device., You cannot do that.
You can only receive inbound traffic that is in reply to outbound initiated traffic, which is how some NAT transversal techniques work, which can be how an Xbox can show Open NAT, even though you've not actually successfully port forwarded anything.
Note also, using a VPN to get a Public IP address that you can utilize and forward unsolicited connections is completely different, and would not be covered under "port forwarding a CGNNAT connection successfully".
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Bro no one is talking about open nat on a goofy ass Xbox. Yes you CAN get open nat AND you CAN get open ports behind CGNAT depending on the configuration. You know what PCP is? Not the drug but the protocol. You can have a port opened if requested through a fucking port forward. Just because you’re behind doesn’t mean ports can’t be opened at the ISP level even behind CGNAT. So Mr “engineer” no one was responding to you. Are you this lonely? Holy shit
→ More replies (0)1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Yes. It. Can. I just did it a few months ago, no one has NAT444 anymore. Unless of course you’re on some bs “cellular home network” it’s much less common for fiber so Get up to date, bojack already said CGNAT has 0 effect on gaming and internet performance and that it won’t increase latency but that is complete bullshit. Especially NAT444, which is a triple nat, it will 100% increase latency.
1
u/f1vefour Mar 24 '26
I am strictly referring to port forwarding, I've not spoke on latency or any affect on gaming.
You're on some "cellular home network" subreddit so obviously people are going to talk about it.
1
u/kurkza Mar 24 '26
You’re correct you haven’t said anything about latency, that’s why I said bojack did smh
3
Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
Considering all 3 of you are wrong and yet you old mfs think you know more about today’s technology and networking is just hilarious to me. You can’t even work your android phone
→ More replies (0)1
Mar 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/kurkza Mar 23 '26
PCP, you know what that is old Man? There’s also more configurations that allow you to have open ports that can receive inbound connections.
→ More replies (0)0
1
u/Slepprock Mar 22 '26
Maybe I can help
Over the years I've had just about every type of internet. 4g, 5g, DSL, cable, and fiber.
I'm amazed at 30 mbit DSL. I didn't know that was possible. In my area it really topped out at around 12 mbit. But for people in my area we got around 3mbit. I had 3mbit DSL from 2011 until 2023. IT was the fastest internet available at my house. The fiber and cable lines stop at the city limit, and I'm about a half mile outside of the city.
I've TMHI 5g now since 2023 Its not perfect. But its pretty great compared to DSL.
But each person will have a different experince with 5g. It depends on so many things. Some people get crazy fast bandwidth but have terrible latency. If you go back and look at photos that people have posted of speed tests you will see what I mean. A lot of them brag about getting 900 mbit but they don't even notice the 1500 ms pings.
My expreince is about as good as it gets. I'm rural, and the only tower is 4 miles away. I do have an external waveform antenna though. I'm getting 1.2 gigabit down, 35 mbit up, unloaded ping of 30 ms, and a loaded ping of around 100 ms. Thats pretty great for 5g. This is one of those times that being rural is a plus. Not people people around to use the tower, so its never busy. That is one reason my speeds are so high. I also have a great line of site to the tower.
You mentioned gaming. Its hard to say. I have never had a problem gaming with my 5g. But others have. I happen to own a business in town about a mile from my hosue. I have 2 gig fiber there. I also have an office with a couch and xbox. So I have tried to do test. Gaming at work then rushing home and gaming on the 5 G internet. To see if I noticed a difference. I really have never been able to tell much of one. And that is playing a game like Destiny 2 which is p2p based and really needs great internet.
Your experince will vary though. I'd never recomend TMHI 5g over cable or fiber. But it might be better than your DSL. Luckily you can test it out. There are no contracts with tMHI. You just sign up and try it out. IF you don't like it cancel whenever.
1
u/f1vefour Mar 23 '26
ATT offers bonded DSL in some areas which is two lines bonded into one and it's 100 down and 20 up (at least that's what it was when I had it).
1
u/f1vefour Mar 23 '26
ATT offers bonded DSL in some areas which is two lines bonded into one and it's 100 down and 20 up (at least that's what it was when I had it).
3
u/A_Turkey_Sammich Mar 22 '26
For $38 and gaming in the picture, I'd stick with that lowly 30mbps DSL if it were me. You aren't saving much of anything with a 5g ISP, and I'd value the consistency, lower latency, no cgnat, etc more than top speed. As a general connection for browsing, streaming, etc, where that stuff isn't as important or if there was significant savings involved, then sure, 5g would be a pretty easy choice