pinot
02-09-2002, 12:25 AM
The difference between "actual bandwidth" and "95% percentile" means what in no-geek-speak? In most plans does that mean incoming AND outgoing? The reason I am asking is because ******** and ******** both have plans for 300 GB whereas other good hosts have around 32 or 50 GB in similar price plans???? Thanks folks. :confused:
BTW I did read other threads and I know there is a problem with calculating and that meters don't monitor ALL BW but mostly http BW. I gues my root question is how there can be such a disparity in comparable plans... how a couple hosts can offer 300 GIGS and lots of others only offer 30-50 Is there a difference in what's being advertised that I am oblivious to? Thanks again
Maybe I'm answering part of my own question here... LOL I found this at a host...
What is bandwidth? Basically, every browser that visits your site downloads all the text, images and files associated with each page. That download of content to recreate the page in their browser is bandwidth. So if your main page includes a total of 30k of content and 100 people download that page, you will have 3000k or 3 megs of bandwidth. Since the text portion of a website is very small, the main thing you need to be concerned with is image files, which can range from 8k to over 1mb in size. 1,000k equals 1 megabyte. 1,000 megabytes equals 1 gig. ******** charges on kbps monthly average, a conversion chart from kbps to gigs is shown below. The transfer rate is measured using the MRTG (multi-router traffic gopher) software, which measures total bandwidth (to and from) your server taking readings directly from our router.
----------- edited -------------------
The basic formula to help you aproximate your average daily bandwidth:
(Images) X (Image Size) X (Daily Hits) = Daily Bandwidth Total
----------- edited -------------------
Our estimate based on current client usage is that about 4,000-5,000 hits per equals 1 gig of transfer. THIS IS ONLY AN ESTIMATE!!
Is this accurate? If so I figure 300 Gigs has to be worth a minimum of $600 at $2 a Gig so how is it possible to offer 300 Gigs for $100 - $150 a month? Is that 300 Gigs calculated differently than as described above? Thanks again to any who respond.
BTW I did read other threads and I know there is a problem with calculating and that meters don't monitor ALL BW but mostly http BW. I gues my root question is how there can be such a disparity in comparable plans... how a couple hosts can offer 300 GIGS and lots of others only offer 30-50 Is there a difference in what's being advertised that I am oblivious to? Thanks again
Maybe I'm answering part of my own question here... LOL I found this at a host...
What is bandwidth? Basically, every browser that visits your site downloads all the text, images and files associated with each page. That download of content to recreate the page in their browser is bandwidth. So if your main page includes a total of 30k of content and 100 people download that page, you will have 3000k or 3 megs of bandwidth. Since the text portion of a website is very small, the main thing you need to be concerned with is image files, which can range from 8k to over 1mb in size. 1,000k equals 1 megabyte. 1,000 megabytes equals 1 gig. ******** charges on kbps monthly average, a conversion chart from kbps to gigs is shown below. The transfer rate is measured using the MRTG (multi-router traffic gopher) software, which measures total bandwidth (to and from) your server taking readings directly from our router.
----------- edited -------------------
The basic formula to help you aproximate your average daily bandwidth:
(Images) X (Image Size) X (Daily Hits) = Daily Bandwidth Total
----------- edited -------------------
Our estimate based on current client usage is that about 4,000-5,000 hits per equals 1 gig of transfer. THIS IS ONLY AN ESTIMATE!!
Is this accurate? If so I figure 300 Gigs has to be worth a minimum of $600 at $2 a Gig so how is it possible to offer 300 Gigs for $100 - $150 a month? Is that 300 Gigs calculated differently than as described above? Thanks again to any who respond.
