7 ms·

$ ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=47 time=214.866 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=47 time=1

• wakokueh 9y ago
  PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=2.099 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=2.073 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=1.963 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=2.089 ms PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=1.908 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=1.888 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=1.993 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=1.891 ms From SG too. Could it be... just you?
  • isatty 9y ago
    Just him. Starhub Fiber: ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=59 time=3.111 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=3.172 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=3.301 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=3.018 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=3.218 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 3.018/3.164/3.301/0.096 ms fwiw Google DNS is around the same, 2.942ms average.
    • sho 9y ago
      Interesting, mine is bad too. From singtel: Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1. 192.168.1.254 0.0% 75 1.3 1.6 1.1 14.8 1.6 2. bbXXX-XXX-XXX-XX.singnet.com.sg 0.0% 75 3.4 2.8 1.9 18.7 2.5 3. 202.166.123.134 0.0% 75 3.2 3.5 2.7 15.9 2.0 4. 202.166.123.133 0.0% 75 3.0 3.0 2.4 6.6 0.7 5. ae8-0.tp-cr03.singnet.com.sg 0.0% 75 3.1 3.3 2.8 6.9 0.7 6. ae4-0.tp-er03.singnet.com.sg 0.0% 75 2.9 3.1 2.6 6.7 0.5 7. 203.208.191.197 0.0% 75 7.8 4.6 2.9 18.3 3.6 8. 203.208.149.138 0.0% 75 3.0 7.5 2.7 67.2 13.4 9. 203.208.153.126 0.0% 75 182.8 186.9 174.4 327.7 20.5 203.208.172.226 203.208.172.178 203.208.158.50 203.208.152.214 203.208.173.106 203.208.149.58 203.208.149.30 10. ix-xe-0-1-2-0.tcore2.pdi-palo-alto.as6453.net 0.0% 74 201.4 190.5 183.9 210.1 5.9 11. if-ae-5-2.tcore2.sqn-san-jose.as6453.net 0.0% 74 181.4 184.7 179.4 197.9 4.6 12. if-ae-1-2.tcore1.sqn-san-jose.as6453.net 0.0% 74 177.8 177.3 172.0 190.0 4.8 13. 63.243.205.106 0.0% 74 179.2 184.2 179.1 196.2 4.5 14. 1dot1dot1dot1.cloudflare-dns.com 0.0% 74 191.9 184.7 172.4 202.3 6.6 Looks like singtel has some bad routing rules for Cloudflare and it's going through to the USA rather than hitting a local PoP. Might send CloudFlare a quick email as they'll probably want singtel to correct this.
      • chanux 9y ago
        What's the tool you used there? From MyRepublic 8.8.8.8 is 2 hops shorter and about a millisecond faster. Disclaimer: I probably don't know what I'm doing :D
        • sho 9y ago
          mtr aka mytraceroute. Available on homebrew if you're on osx
  • ValentineC 9y ago
    M1 Business: PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=3.57 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=3.30 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=3.31 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=3.21 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=58 time=3.21 ms PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=3.15 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=3.17 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=2.34 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=2.93 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=3.19 ms MyRepublic: PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=1.88 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=1.93 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=1.96 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=60 time=1.85 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=60 time=1.85 ms PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=1.86 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=1.66 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=1.40 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=1.38 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=1.60 ms Looks like Google DNS's still a little bit faster.
• bufferoverflow 9y ago
  I get roughly the same 45-48ms from the EU for both.
  • relyio 9y ago
    ~3ms average for both from Western Europe
  • agumonkey 9y ago
    EU, but my network setup is shitty as one can be: --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 23 packets transmitted, 20 received, 13% packet loss, time 22093ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 37.756/51.634/75.856/12.714 ms --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 7 packets transmitted, 7 received, 0% packet loss, time 6007ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 38.920/43.627/52.355/4.547 ms same same
• jjoonathan 9y ago
  Sorry man :( Things are a bit quicker in the US: 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=0.421 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=0.645 ms
  • olfactory 9y ago
    Just curious if that is from a residential internet connection.
• traspler 9y ago
  If pings are anything to go by I should probably stay with Google (or my ISP, they ping at 1ms): Pinging 8.8.8.8 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=57 Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=57 Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=57 Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=57 Pinging 1.1.1.1 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=57 Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=57 Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=57 Reply from 1.1.1.1: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=57 (Switzerland)
• therealmarv 9y ago
  Google's ones are also faster here by 8ms (Cyprus)
• veidr 9y ago
  Tokyo, Japan: [mason@iMac-Pro-No-5 fubastardo (master)]$ ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=56 time=2.310 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=2.287 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=2.103 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=2.785 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=2.276 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=2.646 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 2.103/2.401/2.785/0.236 ms [mason@iMac-Pro-No-5 fubastardo (master)]$ [mason@iMac-Pro-No-5 fubastardo (master)]$ [mason@iMac-Pro-No-5 fubastardo (master)]$ ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=56 time=2.217 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=1.837 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=1.838 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=2.010 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=1.827 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=2.056 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=1.807 ms ^C --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 7 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.807/1.942/2.217/0.145 ms [mason@iMac-Pro-No-5 fubastardo (master)]$
  • gizmodo59 9y ago
    How are you getting those single digit times? I can never get below 15 ms for both Google and CloudFlare. Any tips to improve this or its beyond my control?
    • zzzcpan 9y ago
      Big cities are within half a ms range of various PoPs and IXes on fiber. Makes it possible to go even below 0.5 ms.
    • r1ch 9y ago
      If you're using a cable or DSL modem, most of that latency is from the signal modulation between you and your ISP.
  • technion 9y ago
• osrpt 9y ago
  Both are not fast in China. :(
• zzzcpan 9y ago
  Anycast is not based on latency, so that's normal.
• staz 9y ago
  From Belgium, not much of a difference [:~] % ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=22.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=21.1 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=21.8 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=21.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=21.8 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=21.2 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5009ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 21.023/21.509/22.031/0.399 ms [:~] % ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=26.4 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=26.6 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=26.7 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=26.4 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=26.7 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=25.9 ms ^C --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5010ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 25.925/26.501/26.790/0.344 ms
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• smoe 9y ago
  From Bogotá, Colombia it is slightly faster than Google: ~% ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=11.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=10.9 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=10.5 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=10.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=13.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=10.1 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5006ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 10.037/10.953/13.052/1.010 ms ~% ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=14.7 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=14.5 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=13.5 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=13.2 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=14.0 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=14.8 ms ^C --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5008ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 13.260/14.151/14.823/0.585 ms
• Reason077 9y ago
  Here in London, Cloudflare seems a bit faster: $ ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=2.793 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=3.010 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=2.789 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=2.963 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=2.954 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=1.330 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.330/2.640/3.010/0.592 ms $ ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=61 time=6.531 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=61 time=5.956 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=61 time=7.300 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=61 time=7.457 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=61 time=6.796 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=61 time=6.785 ms ^C --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 5.956/6.804/7.457/0.494 ms
• cromulen 9y ago
  PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=19.6 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=19.9 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=19.8 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=19.7 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=19.8 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 time=19.7 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=7 ttl=55 time=19.8 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=8 ttl=55 time=19.7 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=9 ttl=55 time=19.8 ms PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=0.390 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=0.565 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=0.472 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=0.556 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=57 time=0.560 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=57 time=0.573 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=57 time=0.359 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=57 time=0.575 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=57 time=0.543 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=57 time=0.548 ms From Zagreb, Croatia. I guess that new cloudflare POP is paying off. Edit: formatting
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• jcims 9y ago
  Using ping to compare the two may introduce a skew based on how the two networks prioritize ICMP. For example, from my network google is averaging a faster response by ~.5ms $ ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=28.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=19.2 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=19.1 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=19.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=20.5 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=19.6 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5010ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 19.043/20.950/28.072/3.226 ms $ ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=54 time=19.1 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=54 time=20.1 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=54 time=20.6 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=54 time=21.1 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=54 time=21.9 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=54 time=19.4 ms ^C --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5008ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 19.114/20.414/21.922/0.988 ms However, if i do DNS lookups against a few major domains, google is actually slower by ~2ms $ for domain in microsoft.com google.com cloudflare.com facebook.com twitter.com; \ do cloudflare=$(dig @1.1.1.1 ${domain} | awk '/msec/{print $4}'); \ google=$(dig @8.8.8.8 ${domain} | awk '/msec/{print $4}');\ printf "${domain}:\tcloudflare ${cloudflare}ms\tgoogle ${google}ms\n";\ done microsoft.com: cloudflare 22ms google 23ms google.com: cloudflare 19ms google 22ms cloudflare.com: cloudflare 19ms google 23ms facebook.com: cloudflare 21ms google 20ms twitter.com: cloudflare 19ms google 21ms You'd have to run a bunch of queries to see if there is an actual impact vs. just an outlier (e.g. the first ping response from cloudflare), just wanted to point it out.
• gpm 9y ago
  Toronto - (ISP: Bell) $ ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=22.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=19.7 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=17.6 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=20.2 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=18.2 ms ^C --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 17.691/19.610/22.080/1.559 ms [normal@inspiron ~]$ ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=7.12 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=5.28 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=8.24 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=5.28 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=4.01 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=6.37 ms ^C --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5007ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.014/6.053/8.240/1.380 ms
• telesilla 9y ago
  Rome: about the same for me. PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=56 time=19.145 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=18.927 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=19.258 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=20.000 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=20.428 ms PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=53 time=21.351 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=53 time=18.606 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=53 time=19.451 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=53 time=19.084 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=53 time=18.989 ms
• myth_buster 9y ago
  Colorado, US 1.1.1.1 round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 10.984/12.221/14.909/1.239 ms 8.8.8.8 round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 11.022/12.702/15.102/1.317 ms
• guessmyname 9y ago
  Vancouver, BC, Canada $ ping -c 10 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=1789.957 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=19.620 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=9.372 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=11.585 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=60 time=20.660 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=60 time=11.808 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=60 time=12.784 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=60 time=11.908 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=60 time=11.373 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=60 time=11.992 ms --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 9.372/191.106/1789.957/532.962 ms $ ping -c 10 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=1308.156 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=17.557 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=13.043 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=16.217 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=60 time=15.033 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=60 time=15.132 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=60 time=14.157 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=7 ttl=60 time=16.100 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=8 ttl=60 time=15.600 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=9 ttl=60 time=13.837 ms --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 13.043/144.483/1308.156/387.893 ms
• manquer 9y ago
  Bangalore, India $ ping 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=59 time=13.8 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=59 time=14.6 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=59 time=13.7 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=59 time=14.1 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=59 time=13.7 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=59 time=15.3 ms $ ping 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=46 time=43.5 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=46 time=42.3 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=46 time=43.1 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=46 time=42.0 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=46 time=42.4 ms
• ramshanker 9y ago
  Comparison from EXCITEL ISP - New Delhi. Microsoft Windows [Version 10.0.16299.309] (c) 2017 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. C:\Users\ram>tracert 1.1.1.1 Tracing route to 1dot1dot1dot1.cloudflare-dns.com [1.1.1.1] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 6 ms 11 ms 5 ms 192.168.1.1 2 5 ms 5 ms 23 ms 10.4.224.1 3 * * * Request timed out. 4 15 ms 7 ms 10 ms 103.56.229.1 5 * * * Request timed out. 6 45 ms 56 ms 44 ms 115.255.252.225 7 86 ms 84 ms 87 ms 62.216.144.77 8 169 ms 173 ms 175 ms xe-2-0-4.0.cjr01.sin001.flagtel.com [62.216.129.161] 9 174 ms 174 ms 169 ms ge-2-0-0.0.pjr01.hkg005.flagtel.com [85.95.25.41] 10 173 ms 174 ms 170 ms xe-3-2-2.0.ejr04.seo002.flagtel.com [62.216.130.25] 11 171 ms 173 ms 170 ms 1dot1dot1dot1.cloudflare-dns.com [1.1.1.1] Trace complete. C:\Users\ram>tracert 8.8.8.8 Tracing route to google-public-dns-a.google.com [8.8.8.8] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 88 ms 305 ms 98 ms 192.168.1.1 2 13 ms 98 ms 102 ms 10.4.224.1 3 * * * Request timed out. 4 * 16 ms * 10.200.200.1 5 9 ms 3 ms 8 ms 209.85.172.217 6 11 ms 5 ms 9 ms 108.170.251.103 7 40 ms 33 ms 37 ms 209.85.246.164 8 * 90 ms 89 ms 209.85.241.87 9 89 ms 86 ms 89 ms 216.239.51.57 10 * * * Request timed out. 11 * * * Request timed out. 12 * * * Request timed out. 13 * * * Request timed out. 14 * * * Request timed out. 15 * * * Request timed out. 16 * * * Request timed out. 17 * * * Request timed out. 18 * * * Request timed out. 19 87 ms 82 ms 87 ms google-public-dns-a.google.com [8.8.8.8] Trace complete. C:\Users\ram>tracert resolver2.opendns.com Tracing route to resolver2.opendns.com [208.67.220.220] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 3 ms 7 ms 8 ms 192.168.1.1 2 12 ms 11 ms 41 ms 10.4.224.1 3 * * * Request timed out. 4 21 ms 21 ms 51 ms 103.56.229.1 5 * 62 ms 12 ms 115.248.235.150 6 * 408 ms 65 ms 115.255.252.229 7 43 ms 49 ms 40 ms 14.142.22.201.static-Mumbai.vsnl.net.in [14.142.22.201] 8 * 41 ms 57 ms 172.23.78.237 9 46 ms 32 ms 29 ms 172.19.138.86 10 73 ms 46 ms 42 ms 115.110.234.50.static.Mumbai.vsnl.net.in [115.110.234.50] 11 41 ms 64 ms 44 ms resolver2.opendns.com [208.67.220.220] Trace complete. C:\Users\ram>
• paxys 9y ago
  >5x improvement over Google for me ~ ping -c 10 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.15 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.15 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.06 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1.04 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=1.03 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=1.01 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=1.02 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=1.07 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=1.00 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.848 ms --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9009ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.848/1.042/1.153/0.086 ms ~ ping -c 10 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=56 time=6.82 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=56 time=6.72 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=56 time=6.39 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=56 time=6.73 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=5 ttl=56 time=6.55 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=6 ttl=56 time=6.14 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=7 ttl=56 time=6.24 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=8 ttl=56 time=6.22 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=9 ttl=56 time=6.19 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=10 ttl=56 time=6.30 ms --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 9011ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 6.149/6.433/6.826/0.248 ms
• tyfon 9y ago
  From Norway (fiber), seems to be a bit faster than google: $ ping -c 5 1.1.1.1 PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=1.606 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=1.562 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=1.540 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=1.574 ms 64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=60 time=1.564 ms --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 1.540/1.569/1.606/0.022 ms $ ping -c 5 8.8.8.8 PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=0 ttl=57 time=9.068 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=1 ttl=57 time=8.923 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=2 ttl=57 time=8.974 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=3 ttl=57 time=8.916 ms 64 bytes from 8.8.8.8: icmp_seq=4 ttl=57 time=8.931 ms --- 8.8.8.8 ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0.0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 8.916/8.962/9.068/0.057 ms
• ttsda 9y ago
  Near Lisbon on residential FTTH: ping dig ---------------- 1.1.1.1 3.2 4 1.0.0.1 2.9 4 8.8.8.8 36.5 40 8.8.4.4 36.3 42 These are only averages though, and by testing a bit more with uncached domains I found the first hit will take a lot longer with cloudflare than with google.