Does anyone have a preference for the best way to ping sites?
I tried a couple different places tonight, with widely varying results.
I could test one of my sites through AlertSite and it would show speeds from between 130ms and 225ms :eek:
I test the same site at SiteSpeed Meter (Cnet) and it checks out at between 14ms and 18ms. :agree:

What is a reliable ping test?

I'm also interested in hearing the answers to your questions. I would also like to know what is an acceptable test result.... 150ms - 200ms ? ? ?

What is acceptable ?

Speed is a relative thing on the net. If the testing centre is closer to your server. Then you will get a better result.

Hayes,

If you are just pinging from your machine it depends on your connection. For example pinging yahoo.com from a T1 I get under 100ms. When I'm on a dialup a yahoo.com ping can be 175-300.

Originally posted by David@Digisurge
If you are just pinging from your machine it depends on your connection. For example pinging yahoo.com from a T1 I get under 100ms. When I'm on a dialup a yahoo.com ping can be 175-300. Even beyond the complications brought on by varying connections, ping time tells you nothing other than how fast the given server responds to a ping. If you want to test, say, how fast a server will do a file transfer, the only way to do so would be transfer a file. A server that gives a ping request a high priority might look better, but wouldn't you rather be retrieving files from a server that gives a high priority to ftp requests?

Originally posted by JayC
Even beyond the complications brought on by varying connections, ping time tells you nothing other than how fast the given server responds to a ping. If you want to test, say, how fast a server will do a file transfer, the only way to do so would be transfer a file. A server that gives a ping request a high priority might look better, but wouldn't you rather be retrieving files from a server that gives a high priority to ftp requests?

Very true:)