Revealed – Prices for UK ISP Virgin Media’s 1Gbps Broadband UPDATE2
Credible sources have revealed to ISPreview.co.uk that ISP Virgin Media’s new DOCSIS 3.1 powered 1Gbps broadband package, which is due to go live in Southampton first before becoming available to all 15 million of their UK premises by 2021 (here), is expected to cost from £62 per month standalone. Further details follow.
The current rollout plan states that more than 1 million UK premises should be able to access the new speeds by the end of 2019 (starting with 100,000 in Southampton), which will be made available across both Virgin Media’s existing Hybrid Fibre Coax (HFC) network and their latest Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) based lines.
Customers who take out the new package will also be sent a new DOCSIS 3.1 compatible HUB 4.0 (TG3492LG-VMB / Gigabit Connect Box) router and we’ve attached a recently leaked picture of the new device above. We’ve actually covered this router quite a bit in our earlier article from July 2019 (here) and the official specification sheet is expected be published soon.
Advertisement
However so far we’ve been in the dark about how much this service will actually cost, at least until now. According to our sources, Virgin Media will unveil all of the details sometime this week (possibly today) and we’ve been able to get a look at what they’re expected to announce.
Virgin Media’s Gigabit Pricing
The Gigabit package is expected to be advertised alongside an average download speed of 1104Mbps and an average upload of 52Mbps, which is in keeping with the operator’s history of setting a max profile speed above the headline rate in order to ensure they can deliver on what is advertised. At the time of writing the standalone (solo) version of this service is expected to cost from £62 inc. VAT per month or £67 when bundled with phone.
The tier will also be offered as part of an “Ultimate Oomp” style bundle with TV, which we understand should cost £119 per month. Take note that we don’t yet know if this is discount (i.e. first contract term) or post-contract pricing, which should become clear soon (hopefully today – we’ll update accordingly).
At launch you won’t be able to take their gigabit package on a 30 day term like you can with the others, which means it’ll only be available via an 18 or 24 month contract. Likewise those who take this service won’t be eligible for Virgin Media’s “QuickStart” self-install option (i.e. you’ll need an engineer visit and the £35 setup fee still applies).
Advertisement
The engineer visit will include a check for WiFi blind spots and they may issue you with a free signal booster if one is needed (the same sort of format as Virgin’s Intelligent WiFi approach). Obviously poor WiFi performance can become a big problem for packages of this speed and hence the engineer (i.e. consumers do blame broadband for slowdowns, when it’s often the wireless network’s fault).
Jeff Dodds, Virgin Media’s COO, said:
“By launching our hyperfast Gig1 services in Southampton today, we’re marking the start of next-generation gigabit connectivity across our entire network at a speed and scale unmatched by anyone else.
This service is more than 20 times faster than the UK’s average broadband speed, meaning that households can do everything they want to do online, at the same time, without delay and are well set for whatever comes next.
The Government has called for nationwide gigabit connectivity and we’re helping them leap forward to reach this ambition.”
Overall we think the pricing will be very competitive, particularly when you consider that at the time of writing Virgin Media are charging £52 per month for their 350Mbps tier (standalone) and £59 when you add a phone to that (note: the phone bundle is currently discounted to £37 for the first 12 months). In general this isn’t a million miles from what some alternative network FTTP providers charge, although those tend to offer faster uploads.
We’ll update again once the official details are published. As usual the launch will initially focus on Southampton – where a trial has been running for the past few weeks – but it’ll quickly spread to other cities and towns (e.g. Reading, Manchester, Basingstoke and Bracknell are predicted to be next in line or very high on the initial list).
UPDATE 7:16am
Advertisement
Virgin Media has now added a general information page about their 1Gbps launch in Southampton to their website, which confirms the average speeds stated above and says the service is live but doesn’t add a lot of extra detail (prices not yet showing and no router spec). We followed the associated link and tested several postcodes in the city where Virgin is present but all returned this: “Sorry, Gig1 Fibre Broadband isn’t available in your area.”
As such you should take Virgin’s claim that “Services are already live in Southampton and will launch in other UK cities over the coming months” with a pinch of salt, since at the time of writing it doesn’t yet appear to be available across their entire network patch. We’re unsure whether this is just an ordering system issue (most likely somebody hasn’t flipped the final switch yet) or a network one.
We haven’t yet received the full details but will update once they arrive (i.e. when Virgin’s PR team get into the office this morning).
UPDATE 8:51am
The official press release has dropped, which appears to confirm everything in our earlier leak and we also get some extra details. In terms of those extra details, we now have a full price list and Virgin Media says they will adopt a “guaranteed price freeze for at least 24 months.”
The PR also confirms that the Hub 4 router is powered by an Intel Puma 7 chipset and supports the wave 2 802.11ac WiFi standard, including 3×3 MIMO on the 2.4GHz band and 4×4 MIMO on the 5GHz frequency.
Nicky Morgan MP, Secretary of State for DCMS, said:
“I am pleased Virgin shares our ambition to boost the UK’s connectivity by investing in the fastest and most reliable broadband speeds. This will mean people can really take advantage of the digital revolution.
It is fantastic Southampton will benefit from Virgin’s investment and progress is being made to get gigabit-capable connectivity right across the UK.
We are also investing heavily to make sure the whole country can capitalise on next generation broadband and are committed to creating the right opportunities for industry to push ahead with nationwide rollout.”
| Bundle | Monthly price |
| Broadband only | £62 |
| Broadband and phone | £67 |
| Big Bundle (Mixit TV, broadband, phone) | £72 |
| Bigger Bundle (Maxit TV, broadband, phone) | £89 |
| Bigger Bundle + movies (Maxit TV + Sky Cinema HD, broadband, phone) | £99 |
| Bigger Bundle + sports (Maxit TV + Sky Sports HD+ Sky Sports HD, broadband, phone) | £105 |
| Bigger Bundle + sports and movies (Maxit TV + Sky Sports HD and Sky Cinema HD + Sky Sports HD, broadband, phone) | £109 |
| Ultimate Oomph Bundle (All the TV, Ultimate Oomph broadband, phone and a truly unlimited SIM) | £119 |
UPDATE 12:55pm
Finally, we have the full Hub 4 specs.
General
• LG tower style casing (205 x 116 x 91mm)
• CE certified
Interfaces
• F connector
• 4 x LAN Gig Ethernet (10/100/1000 Base T)
• 2 x FXS ports (3 REN each)
• Low voltage power connector
• On/Off switch
• WPS button
• Factory reset button
• Indicator LEDs (multipurpose LED “ring”)
WAN
• 1 x RF DOCSIS 3.1 2×2 with switchable diplexer
Wired LAN
• 4 x 802.3ab LAN switch ports (without LED activity indicators)
Telephony – 2 ports
• EuroPacketCable 2.0
• UPC-SIP
• VM-VTP
Routing
• QoS support
• Ability to provide no routing/no NAT
Wireless LAN
• 2.4GHz & 5GHz concurrent
• 2.4GHz – 802.11n – 3×3
• 5GHz – 802.11ac Wave 2 – 4×4
• EIRP to regulatory maximum
• Wi-Fi Alliance certified
• WPS, WMM, WPA Enterprise
GUI & Features
• Firewall
• UPnP
Power supply
• External 100V-240VAC; 12VDC, 3.33A
• 40W continuous load maximum
Software
• RDK-B
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook, BlueSky, Threads.net and Linkedin.
« Boris Johnson Splurges £5bn on UK 2025 Gigabit Broadband Target UPDATE3
Latest UK ISP News
- FTTP (6024)
- BT (3636)
- Politics (2718)
- Business (2439)
- Openreach (2404)
- Building Digital UK (2330)
- Mobile Broadband (2142)
- FTTC (2083)
- Statistics (1899)
- 4G (1812)
- Virgin Media (1762)
- Ofcom Regulation (1581)
- Fibre Optic (1467)
- Wireless Internet (1461)
- 5G (1402)
I’m aware that it’s a built-in limitation of how their network functions, but 52Mbps upload on a 1Gbps service is a little bit ridiculous.
It’s more likely to be closer to 60 with the overheads (if I’m correct). That isn’t bad at all and it’s significantly faster than any other current provider with national coverage.
Agreed.
I get 50MB upload on G.Fast, ISP’s seem to neglect it. Surely 100MB should not be impossible to offer.
Totally agree Jonny. While 50Mbps would be a welcome upgrade it’s still far short of what we need. VM is a dead end if that’s the best it can do.
Archie, doesn’t really matter how good it is compared to current competition. It’s still a dead end. We need to be aiming higher otherwise the use cases are limited and the whole point is to open up the use cases not just loosen the noose a bit.
There are less upstream channels available (4 but might be 8 on new box) on docsis compared to downstream (32)
Just be nice if they roll out docsis 3.1 out sooner so get more capacity on down and upstream
It’s to bad that the hub 3 does not support 3.1 docsis (a lot of routers to replace)
A lot of people including me thought that it’s only a matter of time that M500 with speeds of 516/36 would be available as broadband only. But M350 (362/36) is £52 and if 1Gbps with 52Mbps upload is £62, then M500 would have to be somewhere in between. There would then be questions such as why bother to go for M500 when it’s got the same upload as M350, should M350 be replaced with M500.
I’m really glad to hear this. Been waiting ages. Thankfully it seems many of us will be able to access this early next year. Am I correct in thinking that the overheads will mean we’re looking at a max of 1,267/60?
I will NOT order this because 1104Mbps/52Mbps are rather poor upload rubbish and rip off at £62 a month for 18 months or 24 months contract while other get 1000Mbps/900Mbps for £45 a months with no contract (with Hyperoptic)
Virgin Media 1.1Gbps/52Mbps
£62 x 18 = £1,116 plus £35 setup fee total £1,151
£62 x 24 = £1,488 plus £35 setup fee total £1,523
Hyperoptic 1Gbps/900Mbps
£45 x 1 = £45 plus £20 activation fee total £65
If you have the option to get a better service then go for it. Most of us can’t get Hyperoptic. It doesn’t matter how good a competitor’s service is if you can’t order it.
I’d expect OR 1gbps FTTP to cost similar when you order it from an ISP considering all the costs.
Hyperoptics £45 price increases to £64 after the offer period (if you take the monthly no commitment deal) and £63 after 12 months (if you take the 12 month contract option) so you need to rework your maths if you are going to compare over a 24 month period.
Or the short Version over 24 months (12 months at £45 and 12 months at £64) it works out APPROXIMATELY to £1,300 which no matter which package you choose puts it roughly in the middle of the 2 VM prices YOU quoted…… SO NO not a “rip off” a term you stupidly seem to use on all VM news pieces.
If you are going to stay up late and do maths do it right based on like for like and full costs.
As Mark says in the news piece “this isn’t a million miles from what some alternative network FTTP providers charge”. Heck an Openreach based 1Gb home product is likely to be similarly priced from numerous ISPs. As for the upload argument i doubt many home users will need or use 1Gb down let alone up so that old chestnut is also boring.
You also can’t afford this and can’t receive any ultra fast services other than VM and G.fast which also plays into things.
Your fixation with Virgin Media isn’t healthy, chap.
Actually with Hyperoptic, after 12 month contract is up you can just renew the contract to continue paying £45-48/month for another 12 months.
I think the best I paid for my 1Gb with hyperoptic was £36/month a couple years ago.
Still, at least now (next year) I have another reason to move out of the city and back to my home town that I’ve been missing lately. At least with virgins you can get a probable average speed of 1Gb (1.1 max) compared to hyperoptic average of 800Mb. And 5b upload is plenty for me, even my sisters household of 5 people who just watch streaming TV and 2 gamers… even for gamers these days hardly anyone hosts a multiplier online match these days.
Meant 50Mb upload not 5.
Ferrocine. I’m paying £240 a month for 990/216 on BT FTTP but it’s through cerberus as BT don’t do it directly
Oh gawd its ADSLmax and his illiterate rantings again.
@Sally Bullsh*t. If you were paying that much you’d have better things to do than argue with the denizens of the ISPR comments section.
I’ve just left Virgin Media after 20 years by not switching since they took over from my original supplier. The experience of having to go through different price rises throughout the year isn’t fun, the annual price increase, the customer loyalty expiration, inflation rise and whatever else. Yes I can call up to negotiate a new contract, but why? Isn’t 20 years a customer enough loyalty? So, call them up and unless a customer actually sets the 30 day notice in motion, they won’t get the best deal which is usually only as good as a new customer gets. Anyway for 10 days in a row I’ve had no service for large parts of the day, the automatic compensation scheme doesn’t apply unless you register for it, when you do, they fix it for a few hours only to return the next day which automatically resets the no service counter, this is since handing in my notice. If you ever have to call their technical department, ask them what the difference is between broadband and WiFi, at least 2 different occasions, they’ve said WiFi is slower and broadband is a wired connection to the router. I can’t get Hyperopic where I am, but I’d rather be limited than treated the way I have been. Maybe I’ll just bridge 2 seperate services.
I’ve been with VM for about 14 years, phoned up and got shoved on their Ultimate Oompf bundle a couple of months ago. It was a chore (each individual aspect of it had to be added manually to my package) but it worked. Saved me a fortune as I cancelled my Three sim only package on top of the save in actual cost with VM itself. Think I’ll be about £70 a month better off during the 12 month discount period, which is nice as it’ll pay for a new phone for me and the missus
@excustomer
If you can not be bothered to ask for a better price, why should they automatically give it to you?
Do you use this logic in daily life for your other bills such as gas and electric, or only shop at one supermarket and expect them to automatically price stuff lower than every other supermarket just because you are too lazy to go elsewhere?
@AnotherTim Do you really need to download the entire dataset or would incremental downloads and SaaS services work?
Seems a very backward point of view downloading the entire dataset to work on it. Are there not more elegant options?
@beany, it takes talking to 2 or 3 people to even try to get a better price, that better price is only a small discount and far from the introductory prices new customers get. If someone goes the giving notice route, it still takes 2 or 3 calls to get through to the actual cancellations department who then try and offer you a slightly better than before deal but still not the best deal. Once the notice is handed in they call from 03450450592 but don’t initiate the call, it’s a robot dialer listing or for the called person to talk first before putting you through to someone, if you don’t speak, the line goes dead and they try again asked again. If you call on the 033 number they say there’s no record of someone trying to call and that the 0345 number isn’t a Virgin media number, if you ask not to be contacted again, they’ll still call from the 0345 number, if you call the 0345 to ask them not to call you, they say, well you called us. The best offer they have is to match the new customer deal. No thanks.
listing or = listening.
Btw, the dead calls keep happening if you don’t speak first, it’s borderline harassment.
Look up 03450450592 with a simple search and see what other people have to say about it.
Complete BS… You can cancel your VM service online, you do not even need to ring anyone.
This is my honest and truful experience with recorded calls to prove it!
But, it wasn’t just my ethic but now my honesty that got slandered here. Yeah, VM PR Pros?
Apparently it’s easy everyone, it’s not late for you. Just be aware that the 0345 number will call asking you to stay.
You can make whatever excuse you want. Frankly i do not care if it is easy or difficult to get a better deal with any ISP. If you can not be bothered to put in the effort you do not deserve it.
As for cancelling entirely that is a very easy process and that does not require multiple phone calls at all. In fact even if you are deaf VM have a text service and a Sign Language service. Stop just making rubbish up.
1gig speed. Why would anyone need this?
Please stop. It’s because of people like you this country is so far behind when it comes to internet connectivity.
Look at video games for example those can be between 50 and 100GB in size these days so with one gigabit connection you don’t have to wait for hours but just minutes for those to download.
There are many other use cases which I rather not discuss on here.
Well that’s the point isn’t it? All those mysterious use cases sound a bit less than wholesome. Why should the taxpayer pay for that?
“Less than wholesome” use cases aside, there are plenty of legitimate ones. For instance, multiple clients in a household streaming 4K video, while video calling someone, uploading backups of files or photos etc.
Back 10 years ago nobody would have envisioned use cases for 200 to 300 meg services, 5 years before that people would have scoffed at the notion of needing any more than 10 megs.
This is like the Bill Gates statement of never needing more than a few megabytes of RAM in a home computer. It’s short sighted. An individual not being able to contemplate a use case for high bandwidth doesn’t mean there won’t be one and with this kind of thing there has to be future proofing. The groundwork and early adopters are required now so that service availability is ubiquitous in 5 to 10 years when you’ll need it.
The internet is so content rich now that if you’re trying to simply browse the web on 512k or less, it’s a horrible experience. 15 years ago 512k would be considered super quick. It’s basically not enough for base line functionality nowadays.
@FibreBob, I need a good connection – I work exclusively from home, and regularly need to download very large datasets (some can max my current connection out for 10-12 days). Why should the taxpayer pay billions for roads and rail for others to get to work, but absolutely nothing for homeworkers?
FibreBob, are you suggesting speeds are kept low because it might be used for something dubious, doesn’t that seems a bit ridiculous.
@AnotherTim – fair enough, but you are in the minority. Businesses have always had the option of leased lines. The issue is of subsidising consumer connections so they can get 1Gbps and spend all day playing computer games or filling their minds with torrents of videos.
@SymetricalAccess
I don’t think I suggested that. I am trying to cover the genuine wholesome use cases.
If someone wants to play video games all day on 1gbps what does it have to do with you? They would be paying for it so what’s the rumpus?
@Anothertim
If your work is that important buy a lease line.
I suspect your work is not that important though and you just want a cheap connection which you have not got thus far from Gigaclear. Though no doubt despite all your bashing of them you will rush to take their 1Gb when it does arrive as it will be cheaper than any other ultrafast connection you could get.
@AnotherTim Do you really need to download the entire dataset or would incremental downloads and SaaS services work?
Seems a very backward point of view downloading the entire dataset to work on it. Are there not more elegant options?
@beany, unfortunately I can’t justify the cost of a leased line, let alone the ECC involved. I did get quotes, and the cheapest was over £300pm+VAT for a 30Mbps line with significant up front costs. BT Business refused to quote as the ECC was such that they weren’t prepared to waste their time preparing a quote.
If Gigaclear do build FTTP in the next few years, I’ll take a decision whether to take a connection or not based on the price at the time – currently the cost of a business line is on special offer at only £87pm for a 100Mbps connection on a 24 month term. Hopefully it will be a little cheaper in a couple of years time (or whenever they get to my area), but at that price I would take it.
@CarlT, the nature of the data is such that incremental downloads are not always possible, although I do of course only download what I need. I also download what I can when I’m away from home if I’m somewhere with a faster connection (such as a VM business 350Mbs line).
You can typically get a 50Mb lease line a little under £200 per month, a 100Mb for just over £300. No idea who was quoting you those prices for a 30Mb line.
£200 a month if you are a business or are a vital link in a companies business is peanuts, especially if it is as data centric as you claim.
Lets be honest eh, you are just p!55ed at any provider that does not provide to you. hence the moans about Gigaclear, Voda, Talk Talk, VM and anyone else that chooses not to supply to the middle of nowhere for kids pocket money like prices.
@GoAway, I’m aware you can get a 50Mb lease line for a little under £200 per month in many urban areas. You can’t in rural areas. It also depends on whether you pay the ECC up front, or have it built into the monthly price. Of course in urban areas there probably isn’t any ECC, which helps a lot.
Also I’m not annoyed at companies that don’t provide a service – that’s their choice (oh, apart from TalkTalk who use the tag line “For Everyone” when it isn’t, that does annoy me!), but I am annoyed at a regulatory system that allows or even encourages that choice.
So basically you would like a 1Gb service in the middle of nowhere, where nobody currently provides one in any mass availability and you want to pay under £100 quid for it for business use and you think because you do not have that option you are hard done by? Welcome to the same situation as 90% of the country.
@beany, I don’t believe I’ve said I want a 1Gbps connection, or that I want it cheaply. This thread started by a question of why anyone would want 1Gbps other than to download dubious content, and I commented that as a home-based worker a good connection is useful.
I’d be quite happy to have the option of a superfast connection (an average FTTC line would be nice), although I’d take an ultrafast connection if it were available.
I don’t need a business connection, but some ISPs don’t allow home-working on a residential account even though I download less than many residential users who binge on Netflix etc.
Business use does not always equal high data use. I am not sure exactly what you want require from a service.
FTTC is unlikely to be a solution given where you are based unless you are very lucky and a cabinet is installed close to you. Lease line as you say costs too much.
You seem to need to download and/or upload a high amount of data and want a line with speeds that will make this easier and its use will be for business but have an issue because nothing like that is available for you at a reasonable price, which again applies to most of the population.
I have no idea of your data requirements but if it is several hundred Megabytes or more of files which is what you imply you are downloading/uploading throughout the day then even though FTTC would be an improvement i would assume unless you are lucky enough to get that at full speed you would again soon become frustrated with that also.
The only solution to meet heavy demands is to pay for them, you and most people will be very lucky to get anything significantly under £100 to come anywhere close from any provider of meeting high data use.
@beany, FTTC will never be available for me as I have an EO line. I download 400-600GB a month, which is a little above average but not excessive these days. Apparently the average broadband speed in the UK is now over 50Mbps. You are correct that to get anything like that I would have to pay hundreds of pounds a month (the only choice would be a leased line), and I’d also have to commit to a 3 year term. So I don’t have much sympathy with anyone that complains about their VM connection.
“Apparently the average broadband speed in the UK is now over 50Mbps.”
Dunno where you got that stat but would not believe it. Most ISPs are still flogging a 38Mb FTTC option. If that stat is based on every provider and every connection it certainly is not FTTC that helps it reach that figure.
Virgins prices are disgusting and only getting worse people cannot afford this get with the programme virgin media
Max is that you?
No the sentence makes sense so it can’t be
It would make sense, but as usual he forgot to use punctuation.
Seriously? You think £62 for a GB product is expensive? Are you insane!?
Sure it might not be Toot or Hyperoptic cheap but they haven’t sunk Billions into their network – which I am sure Virgin Media have. Got to pay for it all somehow and even then I would question if they are or not.
I get more upload I grant that but I pay nearly 4 times as much for 1Gbps!
£62 seems dam good value to me!
Virgin media announcements always make me chuckle. Especially as their service is only available in a third of the country. I would love 1Gbps instead 20Mbps but you are not here Virgin! You’re not in my arrest because you abandoned a million install and never completed your fibre install. What a waste.
I think the state of broadband in this country is terrible. The government should be fining BT on a weekly basis for not starting their fibre install sooner. And virgin is no different.
I thought they covered roughly half of the country
Mk by any chance?
That’s where I am and no virgin here. 20Mb baby. Stormin’
Lol, MK by any chance?
So firstly VM is available to over half the UK population.
Second get stuffed you tool. We aren’t going to fine private companies for spending their money as the state sees fit. North Korea is to our east if that’s what you crave.
Kids let this be a lesson stay in school, or you will not understand services which are available to half the country.
@beany, talking about education, do you know the difference between what a country is and what a population is?
Well, let me help you, populations are largely within a country, these populations can concentrate in things we call cities and urban areas.
If you’re not sure what these words mean, look them up in a search engine with the word define before it for example you can use define population.
LMFAO… So you now want to argue semantics. Oh goodie.
Lets address your bash at me and your logic shall we.
NO PROVIDER has a service which is available to ‘half the country’ Im entirely wrong with my statement.
Yet you seem to only take issue with one provider, which has its top 2 fastest products available to 50% of the ‘population’ where as NO OTHER PROVIDER does.
There does that make you happier now you having a problem with VM who is the only provider that can give 500Mb and faster to 50% of this countries population.
Good, good, glad we cleared that up.
@beany I merely explained my experience with VM. I’m not taking issue with VM but this is a public forum where people can express themselves relevantly. My experienced mirrors that of many other people and is obviously valid not only as one of many ex-customers but also for those considering taking up this service without any knowledge of what they have ahead. If they choose to take up the service full in the knowledge of what other people have experienced, then they’ve made an informed decision.
It’s easy for you to come here blindly defending something you obviously value higher than your regard for other human beings.
You appear to have the need to respond to every poster and attack them personally. Is your actual personal life that empty?
For anyone that reads the entirety of comments on this page, they’ll see what I’m saying as well as how you give differing stats about VMs coverage.
You actually come across as if you’re blagging and obviously have a superiority complex.
I don’t care that you don’t care, I’m calling you out as the worst human being to comment here.
I hope you can find enlightenment and freedom from the ordeal it must be to be you.
He, like VM has really triggered you. Get help lad and lots of it.
He is my new ‘special’ friend, all the cool people have one.
How can they advertise 1104Mbps average speeds unless the new router has 2.5/5/10GbE?
5ghz WiFi is the only way you can get the full speed on one connection with that router.
I doubt you’ll be seeing 950mbps+ since with TT UFO, Vodafone or Hyperopic (& others) the speed test result is normally around 700-900max in the top 1% of the 1gbps package.
That’s the speed the modem will sync at. You may not be able to see that speed with one machine on the network, but two machines downloading at full pelt should be able to see that speed.
Some of us run CABLES around the house, to create a 1gbit network. WiFi is great for open-plan offices, but not very good for a house. Older houses have brick internal walls, and newer houses are constructed with plasterboard internal walls, which are legally required to have to have an aluminium backing.
Easy. Suppose two clients are connected to the device (LAN) all downloading at 525mbps.
When they advertise the average speed, that’s what people are meant to get (on average). Wifi isn’t going to deliver 1104Mbps and neither is Ethernet, so how can they advertise this? Surely the average will be around 900Mbps like most Gigabit ISPs?
@Mike Virgin can advertise it because it’s true, but a supporting 10Gb card and a Cat6 cable and you’ll most likely achieve it.
Virgin uses SamWise (Ofcom use them for speed verification) software inside their Hubs 3 & 4 which is what they use to measure speeds, hence why when VM faults claim you’re getting a speed. You probably are and it’s a configuration issue.
The claims are valid and it’s how they can advertise it, they overprovision it (hence why 500Mb can achieve max of 575).
@A
But they can’t really claim to provide a service if it’s unachievable.
Let’s say they delivered 10Gbps to the modem, and then had 802.11n and 100Mbps ports, how could they claim to provide that service if it’s impossible to get it due to hardware limitations?
LOL @it now not comprehending how top speeds can be achieved.
@ Ferrocene Cloud
They can legally advertise it as it is achievable should you have the proper hardware.
As long as Virgin can prove it syncs then it’s legal.
Most servers worth their stuff – even HP’s Gen8 MicroServer – have at least two Gigabit Ethernet ports. You’d have to have it use both of them but the speed could be achieved with one device.
You could also do this on upload if Virgin pulled its finger out with IPv6 – have one A record associated with one port and one IPv6 for the other. That’s what I do to load-balance Virgin and BT.
More realistically you could have two clients downloading at the same time. Virgin themselves position such packages for use by many devices at once.
If you are running only a single ethernet connection why would you put the thing in Modem only mode?
Also you would need you own hardware if in modem only mode, as he has pointed out already the Virgin hub would no longer do the routing when in modem only mode, you would have to connect some kind of other router/switch to it, just like his diagram shows.
If the entire argument is (or trying to be) the VM hub on its own is limited to 1Gig speeds then thats also wrong as the device also has “concurrent” wifi built in with 4×4 on the 5Ghz that on its own willl do 800-900Mb PER DEVICE.
Also if the argument is this is terrible because the ports are only 1Gig then nope that would not be the limit the device can handle 1Gig per port, so all you would do is connect a second port to your external equipment. Hell you could also leave the device in its regular mode add external equipment, assign a secondary IP range and run equipment over 2 different LANs.
People commenting clearly have never done more that connecting a 10 quid switch to their modem/routers.
Virgin mobile load of crap spent hours and hours pissing about my wife phones me in HOUSE on Vodafone works rings me on virgin dies not signed crap I use Gifgaf phone to ring out in HOUSE works try my virgin phone crap going to phone them for the last time today they can piss right off
Virgin Mobile has literally got nothing to do with this. Virgin Mobiles runs on EE’s network.
Well done. More illiterate, non-punctuated, swear ridden, brain dead garbage.
GET A LIFE!
Nicky Morgan’s statement is concerning..
“I am pleased Virgin shares our ambition to boost the UK’s connectivity by investing in the fastest and most reliable broadband speeds. This will mean people can really take advantage of the digital revolution.”
Completely ignoring the fact the upload speed is still very low, you can’t really “take advantage of a digital revolution” with one hand tied behind you back! I despair.
Try quoting the full thing and the word “Ambition”
Will the new Hub 4.0 be able to run in modem only mode?
Nope. Definitely not. They’d never allow it…
Then answer is very likely to be yes.
As of the “UPDATE 12:55pm”:
Spec states “Ability to provide no routing/no NAT”, which is basically modem mode.
The real question is if they will allow 3rd party modems on DOCSIS 3.1 now. I highly doubt it, they never have, but it’s the only feasible way to be able to reliably utilise the max 1.14gbps bandwidth available. otherwise we’re capped at 1gbps/0.94gbps. Might not sound like much there, but technically you’re losing out on upto 200mbps!!
There are multiple gig ethernet ports on the router. Even if it doesn’t allow them to be bonded together, it still means two clients can be downloading at an aggregate speed over more than 1Gbps.
There are certainly chipsets out there which have 2.5Gbps between the CPU and the switch – I don’t know if Puma 7 is one of them.
@NE555,
Everything you’ve stated is correct, but now put it all together to form a solution and you’ll see the problem that I’m getting at…
The parent comment is about modem only mode. Therefore, we’re looking at a solution where you can use your own router and utilise the total bandwidth.
As you’ve stated, it probs doesnt support bonding, in which case, you’re left with a single 1gbps ethernet connection to your own hardware.
Finally, yes, there are definitely other chipsets that support >1gbps switches, but as i said, this is useless if VM doesn allow thirdparty modems containing these chipsets.
In conclusion, you’re missing out on upto 200mbps of bandwidth if you dont want to use their router and/or using it in modem mode.
“in which case, you’re left with a single 1gbps ethernet connection to your own hardware.”
NO the speed which you can go at will be determined by the router or switch you connect to the VM hub when it is in modem only mode.
Your router or switch will have multiple ports. Your swicth will handle what traffic goes to which port.
The limitation will be the last link in the chain not the first.
Oh who am i kidding you already have shown elsewhere with another name you do not understand.
If it’s like their current implementation of modem mode, which realistically it has to be, he’s right.
When you enable it only one specific port can be used as an uplink to your own router, which limits you to 1Gbps (~900Mbps real throughput). Two, twenty, two hundred clients won’t, in aggregate, be able to go beyond that because you only have a single gigabit link to the Superhub.
The hub would not be doing the routing, the device you have connected to it would. The hub would be in NO routing/NO NAT mode.
You just still do not understand.
Beany… it is you who don’t understand.
The issue is that if you have only *one physical port enabled*, running at, say, 960Mbps link speed, you cannot push 1100Mbps through it – any more than you could get a 100Mbps service over a single phone line that only supports 50Mbps. It is a bottleneck.
Now, if Virgin wants to enable IEEE 802.3ad link aggregation on two or more ports, that’d be swell, and potentially a reasonable solution to the problem, as most switches and servers worth their salt have a pair of Gigabit ports capable of bonding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_aggregation
Without this it does not on the face of it look to be possible to use the full bandwidth in modem mode. Of course Virgon could legitimately point out they never promised that in the first place.
In Modem only mode the only link between the Virgin modem and your router is a single 1Gb Ethernet port.
You will NOT be able to push the full speed in modem mode regardless of the number of ports on your router.
Using the Virgin Hub in normal mode you can achieve over 1Gb over WiFi to a single device or over 1Gb by using multiple devices over multiple Ethernet ports on the Virgin Hub.
As modem mode uses a single 1Gb Ethernet port this is a bottleneck that will limit throughput to a little over 900Mb.
It’s entirely the users choice to use modem only mode though.
“In Modem only mode the only link between the Virgin modem and your router is a single 1Gb Ethernet port.”
Oh god, no no and NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
This is one example of how you could set things up…
https://i.ibb.co/PTn5ZMW/multigig.jpg
That is you and your VM 1g connection at the top.
Oh forget im not going to educate what LANs, WAN, Multi Gig etc is…….. Stick to your 4 port networks. and your mbps comments on here.
You have misunderstood the entire issue. To quote with clarification of the subject: “a single 1gbps ethernet connection [from the Internet via Virgin Media’s hardware] to your own hardware”.
You’ve been arguing that a person’s own router can do more than 1Gbps to other customer hardware it’s connected to. But we all know that. That’s not the point.
The point is that we will not be able to use *all of the downstream bandwidth of a Virgin Media network connection to the Internet* (which is > 1Gbps) if using the Virgin router in Modem mode, unless the parameters of Modem mode change.
Posted elsewhere also… If you are running only a single ethernet connection why would you put the thing in Modem only mode?
Also you would need you own hardware if in modem only mode, as he has pointed out already the Virgin hub would no longer do the routing when in modem only mode, you would have to connect some kind of other router/switch to it, just like his diagram shows.
If the entire argument is (or trying to be) the VM hub on its own is limited to 1Gig speeds then thats also wrong as the device also has “concurrent” wifi built in with 4×4 on the 5Ghz that on its own willl do 800-900Mb PER DEVICE.
Also if the argument is this is terrible because the ports are only 1Gig then nope that would not be the limit the device can handle 1Gig per port, so all you would do is connect a second port to your external equipment. Hell you could also leave the device in its regular mode add external equipment, assign a secondary IP range and run equipment over 2 different LANs.
People commenting clearly have never done more that connecting a 10 quid switch to their modem/routers.
@Laurence
I have not misunderstood anything. If what you are saying is true then please explain how here…
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/02/virgin-media-uk-trial-8mbps-home-broadband-in-cambridgeshire.html
QUOTE”Meanwhile the peak download speed of 8.465Gbps (Gigabits per second) and upload of 8.14Gbps was tested and independently verified by Ofcom’s technical partner, SamKnows, who fast tracked the development of a new speed testing tool specifically designed to test multi-Gigabit connections.”
When the device in that trial only had
1x 5Gb Ethernet port
and
1x 1Gb Ethernet Port
Yet some how they got over 8Gb DOWNLOAD and UPLOAD through that device.
PS that is also where i got the diagram and it is also another example of how people on here have tried to explain your misconception before. NO doubt Ofcom, Samknows, and myself are wrong still though.
@Go away
Right on most things in principle at least, particularly about why would you put the device in modem only mode if you are only using one connection/device to it.
Wrong of the capable wifi speed though (although your argument regarding it is still correct)
The wifi on this device is ‘technically’ capable of at least 1.3Gbps just on the 5GHz bands…
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/07/a-look-at-virgin-media-uks-future-hub-4-gigabit-connect-box-router.html
QUOTE” theoretical WiFi peak speed via 5GHz and 2.4GHz combined is over 2100Mbps (not yet confirmed but we know the 5GHz band alone can do 1.3Gbps+ at peak).”
So yeah still no idea why he thinks there is no way this could not do over 1Gb to a single connection/connected device…. No doubt will try to change the argument now.
@Go away: You have it the wrong way around: *if* you put the thing in modem mode, you *have* to use only a single Ethernet connection *to the Hub*. That’s how modem mode works: only the first Ethernet link is enabled; and wireless interfaces are disabled entirely. Which of course makes sense because there is only one external IP address to delegate to your own hardware. Try it yourself.
Of course you can leave it in the gateway mode and hopefully get the full capacity of the Internet connection. But we’re talking about the case where you *want* to use your own hardware, avoiding any Hub routing (for whatever reason; perhaps to reduce latency, increase configurability, or decrease Virgin’s ability to snoop on your network), while *also* using the full capacity of the connection.
Previously this wasn’t an issue because no speed Virgin offered came close – a 1Gbps port was sufficient for Virgin to argue that modem mode is equivalent to what you could get with any third-party cable modem. Now it won’t be – you won’t see the advertised 1104Mbps in modem mode, but 1000Mbps. (In fact you won’t get that either, but closer to 950Mbps: see https://www.cablefree.net/wireless-technology/maximum-throughput-gigabit-ethernet/ )
The test hardware had a 5Gbps port, but apparently the release one won’t, just 4x1Gbps. I totally *get* this; it’d use more power, cost more, and most people won’t use it anyway. But it is a limit.
My proposed solution is link aggregation – teaming/bonding two Ethernet cables into a single logical connection – although a 2.5Gbps (or higher) port would also work for this purpose. The best part is there’s no need for new hardware, just new software, and it’d work up to 4Gbps – by the time *that’s* insufficient for real consumers, there’ll probably be 2.5/5Gbps ports aplenty.
@beany: I can’t say how SamKnows tested. Maybe they used an endpoint combining high-speed Ethernet and Wi-Fi connections – or multiple devices. That’s fine – but it’s not what *this* thread is about: usable bandwidth *with the Hub 4.0* (not a test device) *in modem mode*. The 8Gbps you linked is a different service, with different customer equipment, used in part for promotional purposes.
[It’d be also possible for Virgin to run a bandwidth test via a program *on* on the Hub. It doesn’t matter what mode it’s in because all it has to deal with is the external interface (the cable side). They almost certainly do somethinig similar when you request them to test the connection right now.]
The Hub’s Wi-Fi is disabled in modem mode, and so it is irrelevant for the purpose of this thread. We could go into questions of full-duplex transmissions or reliability of a wireless connection; but it doesn’t matter *when talking about modem mode* unless and until Virgin enable it in that mode. It’s fine to say “it can do over 1Gbps in another mode”, but that’s not what we were talking about.
“Of course you can leave it in the gateway mode and hopefully get the full capacity of the Internet connection. But we’re talking about the case where you *want* to use your own hardware, avoiding any Hub routing (for whatever reason; perhaps to reduce latency, increase configurability, or decrease Virgin’s ability to snoop on your network), while *also* using the full capacity of the connection.”
You would not avoid the Hub 4.0 routing be it in modem only mode or regular mode. The hub 4.0 will assign the IP Address and default Gateway address for VM no matter which mode you set the device in. External equipment you connect to the device is part of the LAN not the WAN. Or in short. You dunno what you are talking about.
Oh nope, enough of your ill informed waffle, come on explain, right here you state…
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/09/revealed-expected-price-of-virgin-medias-uk-1gbps-broadband.html#comment-211381
“The issue is that if you have only *one physical port enabled*, running at, say, 960Mbps link speed, you cannot push 1100Mbps through it – any more than you could get a 100Mbps service over a single phone line that only supports 50Mbps. It is a bottleneck.”
I pointed to a trial service that destroys your theory and a device that only has
1x 5Gb Ethernet port and 1x 1Gb Ethernet Port, according to your theory even with both those in use you would not be able to do more a link speed more than 6Gb as that would be the “limit” of the ports. Yet the trial with that device used managed over 8Gb down and up.
The reason on many 1Gb services you see around the 960Mb you mention (its actually more like 940Mb) in many speed tests is nothing to do with the port on the device it is because the service is provisioned at 1Gb but after data over networks is broken into packets. Packets contain headers such as where it is from, where it is going, what port its destination is, etc. Each packet in a network will normally have multiple headers like an Ethernet header, IP headers, TCP or UDP headers. A typical speed test uses TCP headers so you get 940Mb instead. Thats why VM over provision all their products and it is also why on say FTTC you may sync at 80Mb (or even slightly above) but will likely never achieve anything significantly above 76Mb.
How VM did it in that trial and how you can record that with any device as long as it is the initial device in the chain (which both that device in that trial and the HUB 4 in this 1Gb ‘service’) and not in the middle or last device, i understand entirely… Ive already shown a diagram of one way it can be done. In fact with the 1Gb service from VM it will be even more simple as you do not have to deal with more than one Ethernet port. You would be able to see that FULL 1Gb Just by having a NIC in your device that is capable of more than that (because the service is over provisioned already).
What you need to do is explain how they did 8Gb when they only had 6Gb worth of rated ports in that trial and they were sending and receiving more that what port/s are rated at is not possible.
Or explain why it was possible in that instance but similar can not be done on this hub 4.0 device. So far you seem unable to do either, and have taken to nonsensical waffle .
I know exactly how it can be done on the hub 4.0 running in regular mode or modem only or any device for that matter, it makes no difference at all.
This statement you make is also BS
“[It’d be also possible for Virgin to run a bandwidth test via a program *on* on the Hub. It doesn’t matter what mode it’s in because all it has to deal with is the external interface (the cable side). They almost certainly do somethinig similar when you request them to test the connection right now.]”
Samknows when measuring using either their own hardware with custom firmware on it or they use their own software API or SDK installed on the device to measure what speeds a connection is doing. It is independant, VM are NOT running anything or manipulating anything when it comes to Samknows testing they either install their SDK on their device or they do not.
In short you can not show why i am wrong, you can not explain why Samknows testing blows away your theories, you can not explain why other posters have tried to explain how things actually work in the past to others which also could not comprehend how more data was going over a device/port/s which was rated lower than what was able to be transmitted either… The reason you can not understand is because you do not know how things work just like all the comments from those that did not understand on that VM trial story. Either way NEVER go near a proper network for the love of the worlds connections.
The funniest thing is this latest individual seems to only take issue with VM and his ‘1.15 Gb is bad because modem/router will only do 960 Mb’ fetish theory.
But is not so vocal on any other news item where the supplied gear is also only “gigabit” port in nature but will only be able to manage “960 Mb” even though the service may claim it is 1 Gb or faster. Well they or someone of similar posting style is but typically that is B4RN news items only at most.
I wonder will we see his same dribble as example on the numerous BT stories we will have on here probably in the next 6-12 months when their FTTP 1 Gb service becomes more mainstream and BT are still handing out only gigabit port devices?
I suspect – we will not – because – there is only one – person – who – comments on here often – and does not – use – a normal ansi hyphen, but does love to use them in most of their posts 😉
@Beany
In receipt of the new 1Gig service from VM but want to make the use of the full bandwidth across either a single or multiple clients.
SamKnows realspeed talks directly to the VM SH4 avoiding the WiFi and LAN connections so will always run at the full connection speed of around the 1.1Gbps. The same I am sure would have happened on the 8Gbps trial.
I am curious how the connection from a 1Gbps port on the SH4 to a 10gigabit switch would allow me to use the full connection speed either to a 10Gbps client or between multiple ones over a single link. The limiting factor surely is the 1Gbps port and due to TCP/IP overheads would max at around 940Mbps or so.
The paid for and measured bandwidth is after network overheads have been allowed for so in the same way as they advertise a 350Mbps you would expect to get that not a lower amount. The reason VM run it around 380Mbps is so that they do not get pulled up on advertising, in the same way as if you buy a litre of coke it will be slightly over a litre of coke to allow for measurement errors and not to undersell.
@beany and @Go away
I don’t normal post on forums like this but could see there was some confusion and misunderstanding on interface speed limitations. In modem mode the max throughput you will be able to achieve is 1gbps minus overhead. The advertised average 1104Mbps will only be achievable if using the modem in normal mode with multiple devices connected / using wifi.
To achieve 1104Mbps with modem mode it would require use of mgig interfaces or an etherchannel (this would still require multiple streams to utilise both interfaces)
Lets think about this more practically as might be easier for people to understand. If I drill a 10mm hole in a wall can I fit a cable through it that has a diameter of 12mm? No the biggest cable I can fit is 10mm, to fit a 12mm cable I would need to drill a bigger hole. So following on from this logic to get 1104Mbps over a single interface I would need an interface with a throughput higher than 1104Mbps.
Please also try and be sincere when replying to people as it can be easy for people to misunderstand each other over messages / get things a little mistaken. For example with your commend “I pointed to a trial service that destroys your theory” It did puzzle me how they managed to test the service to them speeds. So I looked into this test and it turns out the test wasn’t performed using the R730. It was actually performed using the ARRIS OLT plugged directly into a Whitebox X, this was also at the hub site not in someone’s home (the speeds should be the same between the hub site and home so was a valid test). The post for more detail on this test can be found here https://www.samknows.com/blog/arris-and-virgin-media-test-new-10gbps-speeds Ironically this same post explains throughput limitations in the first paragraph.
I hope this clears the waters a little. Hopefully virgin will also allow etherchannels when in bridge mode as this will allow them to push more than 1Gbps going forward in the future.
I don’t understand how virgin and other broadband companies will survive in front of 5G. Virgin is good broadband but it is very expensive. I was with virgin then got a Vodafone 5G unlimited deal for £14 a month, bought a 5G router now the speed is amazing, nearly 7MB per second ( not 7mbits ) .
I think all small broadband companies will die only big companies will survive after 5G.
What about you talking about? I get nearly 400 megabit (or nearly 50 megabytes) a second… 5G cannot stand-up to fixed line. Once people start taking up 5G you’re gonna start seeing your speeds drop significantly.
The very same argument was used when 3G was launched, then again with 4G. Guess what happened, the very same broadband companies you speak of are still here and will continue to be here when 5G becomes a full rollout in the years ahead.
7MBps is roughly 70mbps.
1. Virgin offers 7 different packages, 50/100/200/350/500/1000 (mbps). That 5g speed doesnt compare.
2. Try and download a couple of TBs on that vodaphone deal, and we’ll see how “unlimited it is”
3. I get 120mbps on 4G with EE where I live, your 5g example is pretty poor compared to what the tech can do.
As others have said, fixed line will always win. 4g/5g, future 6g will always have varying speeds and coverage, and fluctuate with location/conditions/otherUserContention.
70mbps is rubbish for 5G I get 370mpbs on EE 4G!
bits, bytes, dumb, dumber. Its so hard for ONE individual to understand it all.
@Beany If you can’t add to the discussion without thinking your superior. Best not to chime/join in at all.
@beany, was that aimed at me?
I hope not because if so I can assure you with 3 PhD’s and a job as a Battery Electrochemist for Dukosi I am far from Dumb! Can you tell me the maximum voltage a 91Kwh battery must not stray over? Can you tell me the cell arrangement and ION density?
No? then maybe you are dumb too – see the hole you’ve dug yourself? Do as advised and say nothing if that’s the best you can do.
Mind linking some papers you have published, Sally?
With three PhDs, a very special achievement given how rare double doctorates are let alone triple ones, I would expect your work to be all over the place.
Just as a general point, though, the plural of PhD won’t involve an apostrophe. Those indicate possessives not plurals.
This ignoring the random pluralisation and dodgy punctuation in the posting.
With that in mind I’m a bit dubious though I would welcome the opportunity to read this work given that, if it does exist, it will be publicly available as virtually all doctorate papers are.
Fascinating all these poster”(s)” can not manage a capital ‘M’ when talking Mb. Can manage to use a capital ‘K’ when talking Kwh.
I guess its easier to copy and paste stuff from a boring afternoon of google claptrap then it is to remember to press the shift key though.
beany every comment from you on this article seems to be really hostile. Having a bad day?
@Sally
“Can you tell me the maximum voltage a 91Kwh battery must not stray over?”
Nope i do not know what a “Kwh” is i only know what a “kWh” is so i have no idea what you are talking about, much in the same way when the term term mb, mbps and erroneous figures are mentioned i have no idea what they mean either.
I guess its because i do not have 3 PhD, but because i actually know how to type a form of measure.
@Mike
If you think pointing out errors, stupidity and not wanting to enter into delusions on reality (quite why anyone would want to enter a debate on batteries on an ISP forum or go on about fantasy PhD qualifications) is hostile, then i can only assume you enjoy reading and contributing piffle to a conversation.
As to having a bad day……. I expect anyone with an IQ higher than its shoe size has a bad day when they have to scroll through the same garbage from a SINGULAR INDIVIDUAL going on about false speeds they can not even type correct, daydream fantasies about being a customer for 20 years (the same S&*7 they have been doing year on year here in every VM story). As well as its other alternate dimension thoughts, then yep i guess that is a bad day.
A certain individual on here, and i mean this genuinely with respect and not any ill will, should spend time searching how to seek help for the issues they have rather than on here.
Or as CarlT put it elsewhere “Your fixation with Virgin Media isn’t healthy, chap.”
Whatever VM done to them has clearly long term affected them and their ability to just move on, its actually quite worrying.
“Nope i do not know what a “Kwh” is i only know what a “kWh” is so i have no idea what you are talking about”
Ouch burn.
Don’t think Sally is the person you think they are, beany, but another fantasist.
Said fantasist is the reason why I don’t bother with VM’s community forum / data mining exercise anymore.
You can only read so much BS for you start to feel like you can smell it.
Whoever he/she/them may be, a serious need to get some type of education about Internet and Networks before they ever comment on a site like this again would be more than desirable.
Thank god he/she/them are so challenged that their BS to anyone that has even half a clue on things, discussed on sites such as this can detect the lunacy a mile away. Perhaps like you VM just stopped engaging them in their fantasies and that is why they have the compulsive need to make up stories about them.
I just upgraded my trial connection to a contracted one, got it at 52 for first 6 months then 54 for remaining 6 months.
What’s the Speedtest results like?
https://www.speedtest.net/result/8636007546.png
To quote War Machine
“Yeah, Yeah Nice!” 🙂
Still stuck with 25mbps unreliable FTTC with 4 mbps upload. Best I can get at my property. I don’t think Virgin Media will ever offer services on my road.
You should consider that your good luck – you will be saved much anguish later on when you realise you don’t get the speeds you pay for, and a call to customer services may involve a one-hour wait.
millibit brain replies to millibit brain, how cute.
I advise anyone living in southampton to hold off signing long contracts with VM and wait a few months for Toob to go live. 900/900 for £25 a month. Cant see that being beaten anytime soon. And of course, its real fibre.
I’m in Sholing, but they ain’t doing out here till late 2020, so i will wait till my contract is up with VM before jumping ship.
In the device specs, the section on Routing, the second bullet point says “ability to provide no routing/no NAT”. That is a rather tedious way of saying “bridge mode”, which is what they call “modem mode”.
Well spot on Gordon
It would have been nice if Virgin Media had future proofed this router by adding faster ethernet ports on the rear, as this is only going to be good for this package over the DOCSIS system.
Saying that, i’d be one of those snapping up this package if i was still in the UK. As it is, i am paying around £100 for 20Mb/1Mb on a good sized Caribbean island.
When VM migrates from DOCSIS 3.1 to EPON in their FTTP areas there will be a new router.
Noticed its the same router as fsense will the fsecure LoT security features be built in with hub 4.0?
I’d like to see what latency and jitter is like on docsis 3.1 with the new router
The new hub has the Puma 7 chipset compared with the hub 3.0’s Puma 6, and it won’t be long before we get feedback on its performance.
I have a TTB setup on mine https://www.thinkbroadband.com/broadband/monitoring/quality/share/0531f98b1f1b1c9b5753f334fb196d1fa1799cf5.png spikes are the “hub built-in monitoring which polls on a regular basis”
Seconded
Well I’m with Vodafone in Aberdeen in there gigafast FTTP service £48 a month for 1000up and 1000 download also includes phone line rental so virgin media are shockingly over priced if for only a 1gb up and 50meg down with no phone line
Comparing VM services that aren’t available to services that are is pointless and it’d take more than cheap fast broadband to make me want to move in Aberdeen.
You’ve got your ups and downs mixed up, but if you’re in a town with a choice, good for you.
Bit fuggly isn’t it? Maybe it’s a selling point for new home developers… integrate into the internal skin of your builds?
On a side note, although the upload sucks, great to see 1Gbps download capability becoming more mainstream. Any idea when existing Croydon VM customers will be upgraded?
From what I can see, might not be until 2021.
But… Good News(hopefully).
Community Fibre is rolling out their 920Mbps DL & UL (YES Upload too) service called GIGAFAST for £50 month in the Croydon area.
Possible for 2019:
Manchester
Reading
Possible for late 2019 but early 2020 more likely (*):
Basingstoke
Bracknell
* Reading is a big area and if Virgin’s main hubsite were enabled then we could easily see Basingstoke and Bracknell being added to the initial launch list (no testing taking place directly in those, yet).
Taken directly from Mark’s post back in July.
Pity the new routers arnt WiFi 6 but i guess that would be pure dreaming.
NO provider i know of currently gives away 802.11ax capable routers. SO yes you are dreaming.
@beany No provider you know!
For anyone that wants a WiFi 6(ax) capable device.
Go for a 5G connection if you can get it.
The Specific Router is Huawei H112-370 and it also comes with a Tel port.
I did say “NO provider i know of currently gives away 802.11ax capable routers. .
Which provider GIVES you the Huawei you mention then? I assume it is free or just a P&P charge to make my statement inaccurate in some manner.
He probably means Vodafone but with them the device he mentions has a £50 or £100 (depending on what 5G package you take) upfront cost. Also not much use or point paying for a higher price plan unless you are one of the lucky few currently in a 5G area.
Short version yes another desperation attempt to prove you wrong.
Intel Puma ♂️
That’s meant to be a facepalm emoji after my comment. Please can ISP Review get emoji support?
Puma 7 shouldn’t be an issue.
The hardware issue you are about to go on about is only applicable to Puma 6 chipsets. The hub 4 as pointed out uses a Intel Puma 7 chipset. It is based on an Arris device that has been in use with other providers for a while including some in Eastern/East-Central European regions. One European country ISP has a quite toy looking bright orange version of the same device.
Oh and god no emojis, the stupid comments without them inserted randomly all over is more than enough thanks.
The Puma 7 faced the same issues as the earlier Puma chipsets – in many ways it is just a slightly faster Puma 6: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/14/intel_puma_modem/
The underlying Intel CPU architecture is Atom throughout the newer 6 and 7 series: https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Intel/Intel_Puma
Ultimately this is a firmware issue, although the underlying hardware may also be problematic; and in particular, susceptible to Meltdown and/or Spectre – working around that won’t help latency. The best you can say there is that the relative drop in performance was worse for higher-powered CPUs.
I’d hope they can take most of what has been learnt with the Hub 3 and apply it to the Hub 4 – and that they wouldn’t release it before it was ready. Of course, that might be being a little optimistic, but clearly there have been some trials of this earlier.
Different flaw entirely to the intel 6 ping issue.
https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2017-5693
The Hub 4 or its true name the TG3492 has been in use by other providers for over a year. I can find no record of it suffering any of the issues the Hub 3. I can find not record of any Puma 7 device suffering the same issue. If you have definitive proof of a device suffering please link to the exact device.