This was posted 3 years 10 months 24 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Residential Gigabit nbn Plans on FTTP and HFC 1000/50Mbps $149/mth, 250/100Mbps $209/mth, 250/25Mbps $129/mth @ Aussie Broadband

7530
Residential Gigabit nbn Plans on FTTP and HFC 1000/50Mbps $149/mth, 250/100Mbps $209/mth, 250/25Mbps $129/mth @ Aussie Broadband
Go to Deal
hellohi on 26/05/2020 - 12:52 aussiebroadband.com.au (20647 clicks)
Last edited 11/11/2023 - 21:26 by 4 other users

Live now!

Website is slow right now but live chat and the sales phone number are processing orders.

1000/50 - $149 a month

250/25 - $129 a month

Check what speed tier your HFC can get

Source

Some things to be aware of:
Because this is a new plan, we don't yet know what the typical evening peak speed will be, so you'll notice that our Critical Information Summary and Key Fact Sheets for now just list the 250 plan peak evening speeds. We think the plan should achieve off-peak speeds of up to 80-90%, depending on the technology type.

Referral Links

Referral: random (388)

$50 each for referrer & referee apply afterwards.

Internet Broadband nbn

Related Stores

Aussie Broadband
Aussie Broadband

closed Comments

        • BooYa on 26/05/2020 - 22:58

          Ping to US will probably be the same or similar.

          Even at the speed of light/electrical signal speed is limited, so ping will always be much higher in Australia.

          I don't think we will ever be competitive on US servers.

  • WoodYouLikeSomeCash on 26/05/2020 - 15:05

    I’ve got FTTP but sadly the plans not available in my area :(

  • cuckchump on 26/05/2020 - 15:13
    +1

    man my street just got activated but its fttn, while the chumps on the same street across the road has hfc :(

    • raybies on 26/05/2020 - 16:50

      Everywhere around me is FttP, just my block is FttN.

      • AusNugz on 26/05/2020 - 17:22

        Cheap TCP :p

  • xtommyk on 26/05/2020 - 15:17
    +1

    Any news for FTTC connections?

    • CJ31 on 26/05/2020 - 15:47

      Don't expect anything soon. The NBN announced fttp and HFC quite some time ago and only just delivered. You are probably looking at 12 months.

    • Turd on 26/05/2020 - 15:47

      It should be possible, G.Fast should be upgraded on all FTTC DPU's.

      But they can not guarantee it due to the 'copper' from your home could be trashy or such.

    • Applause on 26/05/2020 - 19:36

      I have FTTC apparently they put G.fast in my suburb. Hope something results from that sometime…

      When it was installed last year on their first they couldn't use the phone socket in the wall. The second visit they dug up the driveway and put a pipe under the driveway up to the side of the house. Inside the box is a rope/string and it was left open. I'm not sure what happened or what the point of it was any ideas? The third visit they installed the nbn modem and it worked.

      • Turd on 26/05/2020 - 19:38

        Maybe your copper line was degraded so bad that they replaced the copper from the DPU to your first socket in the home.

        • Applause on 26/05/2020 - 19:58

          I am mostly sure they didn't make it to any socket in the house. The only one in the house the modem is connected to is in the middle of the house, no access from the driveway, they would've had to ask to get access near there, nor does or did it look like any cables were used.

          Image of NBN box one year later…

  • BooYa on 26/05/2020 - 16:01

    I don't see the other plans.

    I can see the 250/25 for $169 (not $129) when I click "Build your own plan".

    Where can I find the 1,000/50 and 250/100 plans?

    • BooYa on 26/05/2020 - 16:03

      Never mind, I can see an ABB rep on Whirlpool wrote that they were dropping the 250/25 plan from $169 to $129

    • BangkokBreakfast on 26/05/2020 - 18:25

      Interesting

  • y on 26/05/2020 - 16:02

    Is there a list which HFC areas / POIs can get 1000 mbit yet?

    • BooYa on 26/05/2020 - 16:07

      As far as I know ISPs can give you the maximum speed of your line only after you're connected.

      Or do you mean a map where the infrastructure has been built to handle the Gigabit speeds to the boundary point?

      • y on 26/05/2020 - 16:45

        I'm on AussieBB 100/40 HFC right now, I want to know if I can get 1000 or 250

        • theg00s3 on 26/05/2020 - 18:20
          +2

          It doesn't look like we can check until after the plans come out

        • BooYa on 26/05/2020 - 21:22

          You could ring them and ask I suppose.

          They may be able to tell you since they already have physical access to your line.

    • bdl on 26/05/2020 - 17:00
      +1

      If your plug your address into the AussieBB search box you can see what speeds are obtainable for an address' HFC connection - one of mine maxes out at 100, the other can get the 250

      • [Deactivated] on 26/05/2020 - 19:15

        Is this going to change? Max I can get is 100mbps.

      • xsacha on 26/05/2020 - 20:35

        If you see 250 right now, that's FTTP and not HFC under current plans.

        • y on 27/05/2020 - 16:15
          +1

          I have HFC with AussieBB right now and FTTP is definitely not available in my area, but I see 250 available to order

        • bdl on 27/05/2020 - 22:24

          Incorrect, both the addresses have HFC and it definitely said 250 when I checked. Interestingly enough I checked again just now and the highest is 100/40 (not sure if the 250 option is removed because it was in error or Aussie are waiting for the official product offering come Friday).

  • UDI on 26/05/2020 - 16:10

    my nbn speeds are capped to 50/25 i literally can't get a higher speed. WTF.

    • Jamiea on 26/05/2020 - 16:21
      +19

      "Just move house if you want better internet" - Malcolm Turnbull

      • KBZ on 26/05/2020 - 20:46
        +3

        "you don't need more than 25mbps" so consider yourself blessed
        - Malcom Turnbull

  • OzBerghainer on 26/05/2020 - 16:20

    I'm excited

  • raybies on 26/05/2020 - 16:28
    +25

    If I create a change.org pettion to restrict Malcolm and Tony's residents electricity to MAX 10Amps@240V, will everyone sign it?
    It's the only way for these idiots to understand what they did.

  • kgbhouse on 26/05/2020 - 16:31

    This won't speed up connection speed to US will it? e.g. improved ping for gaming.

    • AusNugz on 26/05/2020 - 16:43
      +2

      Only way to improve ping would be to use a provider who has better routing to the US.

    • OzBerghainer on 26/05/2020 - 16:50
      +3

      Not really - ping is unrelated to the down/up speeds, Sydney is the hub of outgoing international underwater wires so the best possible ping you'll have is if you live in Sydney

      • superforever on 26/05/2020 - 16:53
        +1

        I got 221 to Buffalo, NY from Sydney.

        • Top G on 26/05/2020 - 17:41
          +1

          What is in Buffalo lol

          • freefall101 on 26/05/2020 - 18:26
            +1

            @Top G: Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo

            (that's actually a gramattically correct sentence, English is weird)

          • scotty on 26/05/2020 - 18:33

            @Top G: Some cheap colo facility in Buffalo, NY. For example colocrossing.com — that's where some people got cheap VPS in US.

          • OzBerghainer on 26/05/2020 - 18:50

            @Top G: look its joe "spotify $100m" rogan

      • checkingthisout on 27/05/2020 - 09:32
        -5

        Ping is related to speeds. The higher the throughout the lower the ping. This 1000mbps in nz can have a ping of 3-4ms and 10,000mbps they were seeing 1-2ms.

        • Thunderstruck86 on 27/05/2020 - 13:09

          no its not, unless the link is congested and being shaped.

          • checkingthisout on 27/05/2020 - 22:23

            @Thunderstruck86: There was a 50% drop in ping times on Chorus trial of hyper fibre. It’s in their annual deck. From 2-4ms to 1-2ms.

            • Thunderstruck86 on 28/05/2020 - 09:21

              @checkingthisout: Yes that may be due to a number of factors. Bandwidth absolutely does not directly effect latency on a link except for when there is congestion.

              The change was probably due to equipment or moving from copper to fibre. Bandwidth is like the number of lanes on a highway. Latency is the speed limit. Only time latency is increased by bandwidth is when the network is congested.
              Latency on a non congested network is governed by the speed of light and the efficiency of network equipment in path.

              • checkingthisout on 28/05/2020 - 09:27
                -3

                @Thunderstruck86: No. Chorus said that the opened bandwidth allowed for lower pings to the data centre where the tests are done. You’re talking about latency which is outside of the ping to the point where the test is done. I am talking about the ping.

                They saw a 50% drop. The better the hardware and the higher the bandwidth to push data down with less resistance. The lower the ping.

                I never once said latency.

                • Thunderstruck86 on 28/05/2020 - 10:29

                  @checkingthisout: Ping is a tool to test latency or RTT - the time it takes for a packet to go from your PC to the destination and back.

                  While the ping is the signal that’s sent from one computer to another on the same network, latency is the time (in milliseconds) that it takes for the ping to return to the computer. So latency is a measurement of the entire round trip of that signal while ping is just one way.

                  • checkingthisout on 28/05/2020 - 10:33

                    @Thunderstruck86: Hahaha you literally ripped that from google. “Top 5 reasons your ping is so high” without understanding it. I just found the article on store.hp.com

                    Nice one.

            • Kontiki on 28/05/2020 - 13:38
              +1

              @checkingthisout: It is physically impossible to get these low ping Ms from Australia to ie. the United States. The speed of light doesn't allow for it.

              Sure, superior hardware will make a few Ms difference, but we will always be bound by the speed of light. It takes light around 25-40 Ms to travel from Sydney to Los Angeles in a straight line. That is before we take into account network nodes, hubs etc.

              I guess what I'm saying is that it is perfectly possible to lower a ping from 4 to 2 Ms with better equipment or perhaps more bandwith, but that is a very minor difference for bigger distances like the example between AU and the USA. Your ping won't be halved there. Going from 100 Mbit to 1000Mbit download per second will in no way increase the speed of light, right?

              • checkingthisout on 28/05/2020 - 13:49

                @Kontiki: I didn’t say to USA. I said chorus observed from home to their network Center ping was nearly 50% less and the higher the speed the lower that would get. Go read their annual reports on their hyper fibre deployment.

                You’re talking about round trip latency from NZ to USA. I never once said latency. But I get people’s point. It’s not what I said though.

                The higher the speed. The more bandwidth and the less resistance/interference. The better the latency is. Of course within the limits of physics. Just not something I ever said from the start though.

              • Thunderstruck86 on 28/05/2020 - 13:51

                @Kontiki: But chorus said

                • checkingthisout on 28/05/2020 - 13:53
                  -2

                  @Thunderstruck86: You have literally never used or seen a 10Gbps connection. You have no idea how it would work yet you’re so sure you know how it works. Chorus is a world leader in this tech soon. Yet “it can’t be possible”. Ok.

                  • Kontiki on 28/05/2020 - 13:56
                    +1

                    @checkingthisout: That's because it's not relevant. Pumping more data per second in a connection will not make the packets reach the destination any faster.

                    • Kontiki on 28/05/2020 - 13:58
                      +1

                      @Kontiki: Remember, we are talking fibre here. Fibre already transports with the speed of light. If Chorus gets better results, there could be plenty of reasons: better infrastructure, better equipment etc. But not the higher bandwidth.

                  • Thunderstruck86 on 28/05/2020 - 14:11

                    @checkingthisout: Actually I do almost daily, I work in the industry and have for 15 years.

                  • Thunderstruck86 on 28/05/2020 - 14:20

                    @checkingthisout: If you want to talk about leaders in the network performance industry in terms of optimisation, read this. Hopefully it will give you a better understanding of what you're talking about. https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/performance/glossary/wha…

                    • checkingthisout on 28/05/2020 - 18:33
                      -1

                      @Thunderstruck86: “ Pumping more data per second in a connection will not make the packets reach the destination any faster” LOL ok than bud.

                      Ok now what really happens:

                      “YES gbit has a lower latency, since:

                      the same number of bytes can be transfered in faster time
                      BUT the improvement is only appreciable if the packet(s) have a certain size:

                      56 byte package => virtually no faster transfer
                      1000 byte package => 20% faster transfer
                      20000 byte package(s) => 80% faster transfer
                      So if you have an application which is very sensitive to latency (4ms vs. 0.8ms, round-trip for 20kb) and require larger packages to be transferred, than switching from 100mbit to gbit can give you a latency reduction, even though you use much less than the 100mbit/s in average (= the link is not saturated permanently).

                      Server (100mbit) -> Switch (gbit) -> Server (100mbit):

                      size: 56 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.124/0.176/0.627/0.052 ms
                      size: 100 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.131/0.380/1.165/0.073 ms
                      size: 300 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.311/0.463/2.387/0.115 ms
                      size: 800 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.511/0.665/1.012/0.055 ms
                      size: 1000 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.560/0.747/1.393/0.058 ms
                      size: 1200 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.640/0.830/2.478/0.104 ms
                      size: 1492 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.717/0.782/1.514/0.055 ms
                      size: 1800 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.831/0.953/1.363/0.055 ms
                      size: 5000 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.352/1.458/2.269/0.073 ms
                      size: 20000 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 3.856/3.974/5.058/0.123 ms
                      Server (gbit) -> Switch (gbit) -> Server (gbit):

                      size: 56 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.073/0.144/0.267/0.038 ms
                      size: 100 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.129/0.501/0.630/0.074 ms
                      size: 300 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.185/0.514/0.650/0.072 ms
                      size: 800 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.201/0.583/0.792/0.079 ms
                      size: 1000 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.204/0.609/0.748/0.078 ms
                      size: 1200 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.220/0.621/0.746/0.080 ms
                      size: 1492 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.256/0.343/0.487/0.043 ms
                      size: 1800 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.311/0.672/0.815/0.079 ms
                      size: 5000 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.347/0.556/0.803/0.048 ms
                      size: 20000 :: rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.620/0.813/1.222/0.122 ms
                      = in average over multiple servers 80% latency reduction for 20kb ping

                      (If only one of the links is gbit, you will still have a 5% latency reduction for 20kb ping.)“

                      • Thunderstruck86 on 28/05/2020 - 19:45

                        @checkingthisout: You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
                        of course more data can be moved with more bandwidth.
                        Data throughput doesnt decrease 'ping', which is a tool for measuring latency.
                        What you are depicting above is showing the time it takes to move data (ping = packets) not actual network latency.
                        Stop googling for specific issues on stack exchange to support your absurd pov. Go and do a networking course and then lets have a chat.

                        Edit
                        Let me break it down for you.

                        If a car's top speed is 200KM/hr and the speed limit is 300KM/hr, you're trying to tell me that it would be faster to go from Sydney to Melbourne in the same car if the speed limit was 400KM/hr.

                        The car is the packet, regardless of the underlying link speed, if the link is not saturated the available bandwidth will not make a difference to the time it takes to get from A to B.

                        • checkingthisout on 28/05/2020 - 20:05
                          -1

                          @Thunderstruck86: I never once said latency. I said ping. And it’s blatantly obvious that the higher the speed the lower the ping can be up to a point that the distance travelled isn’t the main factor for higher latency due to distance.

                          You keep talking about home to USA and back which can see a decrease in latency with every iteration of technology. Of course. That’s basic. You think it gets worse or stays the same. You’ve made that clear.

                          But I said PING within the last mile is what chorus recorded and is how that works. Look at the charts above.

                          As if ping times haven’t decreased with every iteration of wifi, fibre technology or satellite update.

                          I’m over you though.

                          • Thunderstruck86 on 28/05/2020 - 20:10

                            @checkingthisout: look up the definition of ping, its a tool not a metric, also please quote where I mentioned the USA?
                            You're trying to shape the entire networking world to suit a narrative around something you read in a chorus annual report for dummies.
                            Next you'll tell me the world is flat and that 5G gives you COVID19.

                          • BROKENKEYBOARD on 29/05/2020 - 16:13

                            @checkingthisout: Have you tried changing between 12/1 and 100/40 on NBN? Would you be expecting a significant change in latency/ping?

      • bdl on 26/05/2020 - 18:43
        +1

        Is Melbourne down?

        • MagnamoniousRex on 26/05/2020 - 18:52
          +10

          Usually people say south but yes.

  • BradH13 on 26/05/2020 - 17:02
    +12

    Should have been at least 1000/100 at a bare minimum.

    We need more upstream speed in Australia far more than we need more downstream.

    I'd like to speak to NBNCo about their "no one uploads things in this country" data they used that resulted in them lowering upstream speeds at wholesale level. I believe it was just cost cutting, and that no data was actually ever considered.

    • ssquid on 26/05/2020 - 17:17
      +5

      No, there are plenty of HFC nodes suffering upstream bandwidth congestion. NBN has been selectively adding more upstream channels as problems appear (and hoping the 20mbps limit will stop them from reaching capacity again too quickly).

      • BradH13 on 26/05/2020 - 18:17
        +4

        I won't neg you because your concern is valid, but it doesn't apply to me. I'm on FTTP here. The only thing stopping me from getting what I want is policy and cost; not technical limitations.

        • theg00s3 on 26/05/2020 - 18:21
          +6

          FTTP is hobbled so that HFC doesn't look as bad

          • CommanderCrumbcake on 26/05/2020 - 18:39

            @theg00s3: Would you mind explaining this? I'm interested in learning more. I always thought FTTP speeds were simply limited to how fast they can push the light down the fibre.

            • theg00s3 on 26/05/2020 - 18:43
              +5

              @CommanderCrumbcake: FTTP is capable of gigabit, symmetric speeds (as in 1000/1000) and higher, but the nbn "has" to cripple the plans so that people don't realise how much better FTTP is compared to the other technologies in the multi-technology mix. Look at New Zealand for example. They based their UFB on the original Labor nbn, and they're currently doing 4 gig plans (as in 4000/4000) over the fibre, with plans to do 8 gig plans

              • CJ31 on 27/05/2020 - 10:57

                @theg00s3: No NZ didn't. FTTP was an election promise of John Key, Rudd took FTTN to the election. It announced the change to fttp a year after NZ. NZ had choose to build it differently too. Rudd had copied NZ we wouldn't be in this mess.

                • theg00s3 on 27/05/2020 - 13:18

                  @CJ31: I stand corrected. However, if we rolled out fibre we could definitely have plans like NZ does with UFB

            • hashtagbargain on 26/05/2020 - 18:47

              @CommanderCrumbcake: And those speeds (pushing light down the fibre) should be in gigabit or terabit, not megabit.

      • neonlight on 26/05/2020 - 19:58

        Not sure what you mean during peak hours on my Telstra HFC always get decent upload. Download always close to 45Mbps which is a shame

    • Pacify on 26/05/2020 - 17:22

      They trying to force anyone the needs higher uploads onto more expensive plans, some sort of desperate revenue attempt from the NBNco

  • corksta on 26/05/2020 - 17:36
    +2

    Take my money

  • JohnHowardsEyebrows on 26/05/2020 - 17:53
    -8

    laughs in 4G broadband

    • checkingthisout on 27/05/2020 - 09:48

      Laughs in. Oh shit I ran out of data already :(

  • tingbonnie88 on 26/05/2020 - 18:13

    How about FTTC?

    • Chicken feed on 26/05/2020 - 18:18

      Need a G.fast dpu for that. I don't think NBN is currently deploying any of that for FTTC.

      • AusNugz on 26/05/2020 - 18:46
        +1

        I think the newer DPUs have it but of course it isn't turned on yet.

      • Turd on 27/05/2020 - 01:45
        +1

        It's mostly finished being deployed. Just not enabled.

    • checkingthisout on 27/05/2020 - 09:48

      Good luck getting 1000mbps on that.

  • Guybrush57 on 26/05/2020 - 18:27
    -7

    I have money burning a hole in my wallet. I'm prepared to pay the $149pm for 1000/50 but last time I had NBN I was on a 100/40 plan with Aussie Broadband which didn't go above 65Mbps. Strangely, I wasn't allowed to pay only 65% of the monthly fee. To potentially improve the speed I had to pay to have my house copper rewired which was an outlay those with FTTP didn't have and even still my service would not be as good as FTTP.

    A quick calculation (100% ÷ 1000Mbps x 60Mbps) shows my connection can achieve 6% of the speed of the $149pm 1000/50 plan compared to a $99pm 100/40 plan. Yeah nah.

    Until FTTP is deployed to my house like everyone else's house who got FTTP was, I won't give a single cent to the NBN. 4G was cheaper, faster and sooner.

    • AusNugz on 26/05/2020 - 18:31
      +3

      By the sound of you have FTTN which doesn't qualify for these plans anyway.

    • freefall101 on 26/05/2020 - 18:37
      +4

      If you have money burning a hole in your pocket, go spend it on fixing your house wiring. It's your house, not the governments, you own your own shitty wiring, not them. If you have a burst water pipe do you complain about the water pressure then go buy bottled water to replace it? No, you fix it.

      Fixing housing wiring is usually pretty cheap, assuming you have a bunch of phone sockets around that's causing the problems. You can just find the first point, put a modem there and get the rest disconnected, that'll improve it pretty dramatically. If it's your wiring to the curb, it's more expensive.

      • Guybrush57 on 26/05/2020 - 18:46

        I should spend 24 months worth of 4G access to fix my wiring so I can:
        •Get slower speed?
        •Get a more unreliable service?
        •Pay a higher monthly fee?
        •Have a service that doesn't work in a power outage?
        •Help pay back the massive Government loans that were borrowed in order for me to use the same copper that was already in the ground before the NBN?

        FTTP should have been deployed to everyone. Don't be selfish freefall101.

  • Kdw26488 on 26/05/2020 - 19:00

    Might give the 1k plan a go.

    Lucky to have FTTP at my home.

    Churning from Superloop as the previous deal is about to expire and the services weren’t quite up to the standard of AussieBB so I’ll be happy to come back.

  • neonlight on 26/05/2020 - 19:50

    Not sure how this is a deal it's more of discussion of a new service. Not paying more than $100 for any of these. For those who really want luxury, the best, go for it.

    Pandemic is still here hence saving money is top priority over something you might not consider essential

    I will keep my 96/36 Telstra thanks.

    At least I know overseas links got no lag unlike ABB to China sites.

    I see many complaints browsing and gaming latency

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join