> which is more reflective of real world video conferencing use cases What's more reflective of real world use cases is a hot discussion topic. :) The "networ

> which is more reflective of real world video conferencing use cases What's more reflective of real world use cases is a hot discussion topic. :) The "networkQuality" tool on macOS and other implementations(1) of the "RPM" algorithm(2) are very good to see how an Internet connection behaves under high stress. But the real world is seldom high stress (100Mbps+ connections are rarely pushed to the limit, honestly). In your example, video conferencing indeed does simulataneous upload and download, but it's also low bandwidth (relatively speaking) and doesn't usually come close to saturating a connection. It can impacted by other traffic in the same connection though. Which can come from a single user, or multiple users sharing the same connection. And neither networkQuality nor Cloudflare's speed test measure how a connection behaves with multiple users stressing a connection. In the end, which tool you use depends on what you're trying to measure. For me, the Cloudflare speed test is closer to measuring what I experience in real world use. (1) https://github.com/network-quality/goresponsiveness https://github.com/network-quality/goresponsiveness (2) https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-cpaasch-ippm-responsiveness-00.html https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-cpaasch-ippm-responsiv...