Speed Tests of VividWireless’ new network offering

Recently I got my hands on a juicy new device from VividWireless and as promised I have now done some testing so that you might get a better idea. These tests were all done from Concord NSW and are obviously indicative only. If there is anything you would like me to test please let me know!

In the coming weeks I will try to get some tests from other locations closer to the CBD. The modem’s are not designed to be ultra portable¬†(i.e. for on-the-go use) but as long as you have a power point and are in coverage, you can move them around.
Speed Tests:
All around a solid 9.5+ Mbits down 1.2+ Mbits up (which is better than my ADSL). That was at 7:30pm (i.e. during peak) which is REALLY impressive, and the great thing is, being on Optus’ network, if the capacity starts to drop, they will have to increase backhaul as it will affect everyone.

Oh latency was minimum 25ms to Sydney servers, max 40ms which (for a wireless connection) is pretty good as well.

Ping to Google:
PING google.com.au (216.58.199.67): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=0 ttl=57 time=43.034 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=36.329 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=36.929 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=95.825 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=48.156 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=46.453 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=46.295 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=86.664 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=8 ttl=57 time=38.985 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=9 ttl=57 time=90.676 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=10 ttl=57 time=41.184 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=11 ttl=57 time=51.356 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=12 ttl=57 time=51.094 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=13 ttl=57 time=45.356 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=14 ttl=57 time=45.770 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=15 ttl=57 time=42.470 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=16 ttl=57 time=46.336 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=17 ttl=57 time=82.122 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=18 ttl=57 time=51.616 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=19 ttl=57 time=89.515 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=20 ttl=57 time=56.448 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=21 ttl=57 time=78.328 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=22 ttl=57 time=87.604 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=23 ttl=57 time=85.792 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=24 ttl=57 time=41.673 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=25 ttl=57 time=57.311 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=26 ttl=57 time=77.987 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=27 ttl=57 time=71.153 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=28 ttl=57 time=37.018 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=29 ttl=57 time=36.622 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=30 ttl=57 time=55.370 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=31 ttl=57 time=50.308 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=32 ttl=57 time=49.839 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=33 ttl=57 time=53.784 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=34 ttl=57 time=39.506 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=35 ttl=57 time=43.988 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=36 ttl=57 time=66.147 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=37 ttl=57 time=67.601 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=38 ttl=57 time=53.858 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=39 ttl=57 time=44.125 ms
64 bytes from 216.58.199.67: icmp_seq=40 ttl=57 time=62.543 ms
^C
google.com.au ping statistics —
41 packets transmitted, 41 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 36.329/56.907/95.825/17.595 ms

If you have something you would specifically like me to test please let me know.
Cheers,
Stuart