Xfinity plant
Xfinity globe
Community Forum

Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

Frequent Visitor

Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

I have been getting pop ups for the last three months about my Arris sb6141 not being capable of my new 250Mbps internet speeds. Yet my modem is rated for up to 343Mbps on docsis 3.0. I finally got fed up with all the pop-ups and called customer service equipment department. I was advised that there was going to be a new signal being sent to the modem that my old modem may not be able to handle or just lose speed. The old signal was Mpeg-3 and being moved to Mpeg-4 now I dont know much about internet signals but that sound like a video file to me. I dont know if they are just trying to get me to lease a modem to make more money or if there really will be a signal upgrade that my modem is incapable of interpreting. I feel as if this is all just a ploy to get more money and I refuse to lease the junk equipment that Comcast sends out and if there truly is a problem I will buy one on my own but as of now I am having a hard time believing that this is actually neccessary. If anyone has any knowledge on this please chime in so I can get some more information from an unbiased individual.


Accepted Solutions
New Poster

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

Just a follow up.  After low conversation with tech people online who promised me for sure that a new

modem would fix my problems, I caved and replaced it - and it didn't fix anything....

 

In the end all of my problems were caused by my new IP address that had the wrong geographic location still attached.  My computer is in WA state, but my IP address was showing Minnesota.  Any web sites with major security wouldn't let me in - bank, mortgage,etc.  Tech guy came to the house and spent 2 hours trying to get things to work properly to no avail.  I got tired and let the whole thing drop for a couple of weeks - then magically it all started working one day - checked the IP - new number with correct location - internet works fine.  And as a little bonus Comcast charged me $11 to attach one of their modems for 5 minutes to see if that "fixed" the problem.  Which it did because it picked up a local IP address - but when my modem was put back on it actually locked back into the Minnesota address - which it shouldn't be able to do.... figure that one out. 


All Replies
Expert

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

The Arris 6141 is not capable of achieving full speeds on a 250Mbps speed tier. It has 8 downstream channels @ ~25Mbps per channel -- so 200Mbps ish max. Modem manufacturers state theoretical speeds, not real-world speeds. 

 

If you want to take advantage of your new speed tier, you'll want to upgrade the modem.  Visit https://mydeviceinfo.xfinity.com/ to see approved modems for your specific speed tier. 

Expert

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?


@RussMaf wrote:

The old signal was Mpeg-3 and being moved to Mpeg-4 now I dont know much about internet signals but that sound like a video file to me. .


Yep. This part has to do with the TV service / cable boxes, not the internet service.

 

Also, F.W.I.W., a current, single 256 QAM modulated, 6.4 MHz wide, 5.120 MSym/sec downstream cable channel supports a raw data rate of approximately 43 Mbps, and a real world throughput of approximately 38.1 Mbps.

 

Regardless of that, Comcast controls which modems will be compatible with the various speed tiers through the configuration files that they send to them no matter what the manufacturers state. It's Comcast's ball game.

Frequent Visitor

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

Im sorry 343 Mbps may be a theoretical number and trust me I understand how tech works. I also understand that my 250Mbps speed is currently being achieved with this modem so there is no way that is not capable of those speeds. So why is Comcast pushing to get me to buy a new one?

Expert

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

Yep. I get 265 down on the Blast Plus 250/10 speed tier with an 8 channel modem. 38 Mbps x 8 = 304 potential.

 

Re-read the part about "it's their ball game" 

Frequent Visitor

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

No I got that I havent got to replying to you yet. I was just replying to the other post stating that my modem was not capable of the 250 Mbps when indeed it was more than capable. Also I want to know why the rep I spoke with is lying to me stating that Mpeg4 upgrade is why I need a new modem that didnt make sense to me whatsoever. Also I can understand that with the 250Mbps it is getting close to the maximum of the modem capabilities. Also I understand Its "THEIR" ballgame but deceiving customers into thinking that they cant get the speeds they pay for when it is just fine is a deceptive practice and explains why this company is one of the lowest rated companies in America. Its just sad that I need this kind of speed and cant currently recieve from any other company in my area. I post these things in hope of at least 1 person seeing it and not having to spend their hard earned on buying or leasing a new modem when it is not needed. SO SAD.

Expert

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?


@EG wrote:

Yep. I get 265 down on the Blast Plus 250/10 speed tier with an 8 channel modem. 38 Mbps x 8 = 304 potential.

 

Re-read the part about "it's their ball game" 


 

This is what I'm seeing on a 250Mbps tier: 

 

speed.PNG

 

If your modem was really capable of delivering 38Mbps per channel, you'd be seeing about those speeds too. (38X8=304)

Expert

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

There are many variables that can come in to play my friend. I made my point. I stated "potential"..... At least I am getting what I am paying for.

Expert

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?


@EG wrote:

There are many variables that can come in to play my friend.

I made my point. I stated "potential"..... At least I am getting what I am paying for.


Which is why Comcast doesn't tell people they will get 38Mbps per channel -- because they won't. Nobody is going to complain if they get more than the estimated speeds, but they will complain if Comcast overstates performance. 

 

You might be getting "what you are paying for" but your modem still doesn't support the speed tier. 

Problem Solver

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

I recommned just buying a new modem - the SB6183, for example, will not only be enough for your 250 Mbps speed tier, but it will pay for itself in less than a year by saving you the $10/mo in modem rental fees. 

 

Also, I had a similar experience - I used to have a TM822G, but when Comcast upgraded my speed tier to 200 MBps, I was forced to upgrade for the same reason. Before the upgrade, my TM822G was bottlenecking at 170 MBps download speeds, but after the upgrade, it started to hit 240 Mbps.

 

You'll likely see improvement during peak hours too, because you'll have a few more downstream channels available to you, with overprovisioning. 


"Sometimes the best way to learn something is by doing it wrong and looking at what you did." - Neil Gaiman
Expert

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?


@nerdburg wrote:

@EG wrote:

There are many variables that can come in to play my friend.

I made my point. I stated "potential"..... At least I am getting what I am paying for.


Which is why Comcast doesn't tell people they will get 38Mbps per channel -- because they won't. Nobody is going to complain if they get more than the estimated speeds, but they will complain if Comcast overstates performance. 

 

You might be getting "what you are paying for" but your modem still doesn't support the speed tier. 


Are you talking about their advertised speeds of the speed tiers not accounting for their 20% speed over-provisioning. This is a dead end. I'm done discussing this with you. You have the last word if it makes you feel better.... My apologies to the OP for stomping on your topic.

Frequent Visitor

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

Well this escalated quickly all I know is that my modem is more than capable of the speeds that I am paying for wether it says on paper or not I am getting what I pay and more sometimes even pushing 300Mbps when only paying for the 250/10 tier. So the big reason I am bothered here is that I am being pushed so hard to go out and buy a new modem when in actuality I dont need it one bit. The other big problem is that I am being lied to by reps for the exact reason on why I need to upgrade because they have no idea either. That is why it seems so fishy to me as to why they are pushing so hard for new modems. I get pop-ups on my browser from xfinity saying your modem is incapable of speeds over 150Mbps so we say you upgrade right away. Then I constantly get emails saying the same thing. Now I dont care if technically an 8 channel modem is not completely reliable for over 150Mbps because mine is, and the problem is that I have told this to xfinity and told them to stop bothering me with all this and unless I see slow downs or any degradation that I will go out and buy a new modem. The whole point is how it is presented by stating information different from the manufacturer and different from my real world use case scenarios. Or lie to me about some signal being changed. Just say it clearly, in our opinion and tests we have seen that an 8 channel modem may not consistently give you the speed you are currently paying for. I just feel as if this is all a ploy to get more rentals now if you dont agree with me, that is fine I am just stating what I see and my opinion on how it is all being presented.

Problem Solver

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

I think the main thing Comcast wants is for people to have a modem that can go way over the advertised and the overprovisioned speeds being a possible reason for them to want you to update your modem. If you don’t want a new modem than keep ignoring them then. The decision is solely yours.
New Poster

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

They have been after me to buy their new modem for years.  A technicion that came to the house admitted to me that it was all about sales.  They want to expand their wifi hotspots service - which is built into the modems they are selling.  Everytime I call, no matter the issue - the problem is my "obsolete" modem.  One time when they insisted it was my modem - the cable was disconnected at the pole! Wasn't even a signal getting to the house. Funny thing is -now it is.  It is at least 25 years old and just now starting to fail.  

Regular Contributor

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

This got a bit interesting to say the least.  Anwyay @

 

 

 

 

New Poster

Re: Unnecessary upgrade or actual new signal?

Just a follow up.  After low conversation with tech people online who promised me for sure that a new

modem would fix my problems, I caved and replaced it - and it didn't fix anything....

 

In the end all of my problems were caused by my new IP address that had the wrong geographic location still attached.  My computer is in WA state, but my IP address was showing Minnesota.  Any web sites with major security wouldn't let me in - bank, mortgage,etc.  Tech guy came to the house and spent 2 hours trying to get things to work properly to no avail.  I got tired and let the whole thing drop for a couple of weeks - then magically it all started working one day - checked the IP - new number with correct location - internet works fine.  And as a little bonus Comcast charged me $11 to attach one of their modems for 5 minutes to see if that "fixed" the problem.  Which it did because it picked up a local IP address - but when my modem was put back on it actually locked back into the Minnesota address - which it shouldn't be able to do.... figure that one out.