Why Does YouTube's throughput suck so bad?


Recommended Posts

REJECT/DROP 173.194.55.0/24

REJECT/DROP 206.111.0.0/16

(for the uninformed, /16 and /24 is not a range, but a subnet class) ie, 206.111.0.0 - 206.111.255.255 = /16)

Problem solved, was posted on reddit just this week. I did it myself and everything loads instantly now on my 85mbit FiOS line vs before laggy as ever. This affects all the feeds on youtube/vimeo, so all will be well. It can be confirmed by adding and removing with tests before after and then removed after again.

Time Warner and Verizon have this issue, no one is quite sure the absolute cause, but those servers your blocking are google and vimeo servers that most likely handle content throttling. When they are blocked you download directly from the source, ie; google data center.

Use caution as you are blocking a wide range of ip address locations. No one has reported any adverse effects yet.

Linux commands below; (Advanced Firewall on Windows Vista or higher can handle this also)

sudo ipfw add reject src-ip 173.194.55.0/24 in

sudo ipfw add reject src-ip 206.111.0.0/16 in

Source; http://www.reddit.co...50w8x?context=1

I would like to know how they came up with these subnets from their ISPs and what exactly is meant by the REJECT/DROP. This would helpful to those trying to figure out why their own YouTube browsing is slow on a different ISP.

Well real quick if you resolve

o-o---preferred---sn-mv-p5qe---v17---lscache1.c.youtube.com

You get 206.111.9.12, well thats what I got, which is just cname, etc. But yeah not sure how they determined to block the whole /16 block..

When resolving that I get 208.117.251.13. But still, it leaves too many questions for me. Where did you get that cname from? Who is to say that YouTube doesn't use other caches referred to by cname depending on location. It would seem it's far too difficult to find out YouTube's structure for providing videos to make one suggestion work uniformly. Hence, the method is imperative.

Its its quite possible the cache(s) reside on lots of different networks.. I would not block such networks unless you were having a specific issue with that specific cache, etc..

I would do your own analysis of where your pulling your youtube videos from.

The reddit link is the guy was doing experiments and posted what he found, not sure blocking it is the correct solution - but others seemed to have jumped on that plan. Does not mean its a fix for anyone having youtube issues.

  • Like 2

I have never ever ever ever EVER been able to stream video from YouTube at a decent pace, and I have... big surprise, Time Warner as my ISP. I've always known they were involved in the issue. I have 20 Mbps internet with them and no issue with any speed test ever, just actually playing the videos. Glad to hear people figuring out more info about the cache servers. I'll definitely have to try that when I get home. YouTube still streams like it's 1995 for me.

I have Time Warner Roadrunner and I was also having issues with YouTube buffering. I added the entry to my Windows Firewall and now it streams so fast and perfect like it should. I don't know why this works but it definitely does for me. It is so lame we have to do this just to get good YouTube speeds.

It's pathetic that ISPs are messing with the experience and screwing up people's ability to use the internet connection they paid for. Network caches should only ever be used if the improve performance, not as a way to reduce the ISP's running costs. And it's no surprise to see that American ISPs are responsible for the bulk of the issues, given the issues with broadband competition over there. There's no incentive to offer a better service if users don't have a decent alternative.

Not sure it works...I have Roadrunner 20/2 package. On my desktop, I made the change the change to Windows Firewall, I'm getting 10,000-20,000 kbps download on youtube. On my laptop, where I didn't make any changes to Windows Firewall, I'm getting roughly the same download speed on the same exact video at the same resolution...

From what I remember, youtube implemented small buffering within the last 2 years which means it will buffer a certain amount or percent of the video (not sure which or what the parameter is) and then as you get nearer to the end of that buffer point, load more data from youtube.

You think it's annoying that it does that, especially if you're on a flakey wireless connection but it actually does make sense, how many people on youtube are just browing random videos or stop listening/watching things part the way through? Saves YT a lot of resources and bandwidth to not stream the whole files to everyone if they're not gonna use it, plus it allows them to monitor and slow down connections when they detect people downloading videos en masse.

I wanted to add a bit of interesting information. On any YouTube video you can right click and show video info. This will display the speed at which you are downloading the video. I've gone to a few and some are maxing out my pipe but some more popular videos are throttled down to less than 1Mbps. This would seem to suggest that there is in fact a cache somewhere affecting me. What is the best way for me to determine from where I am downloading a particular video? I'm not too familiar with this level of investigation.

From what I remember, youtube implemented small buffering within the last 2 years which means it will buffer a certain amount or percent of the video (not sure which or what the parameter is) and then as you get nearer to the end of that buffer point, load more data from youtube.

You think it's annoying that it does that, especially if you're on a flakey wireless connection but it actually does make sense, how many people on youtube are just browing random videos or stop listening/watching things part the way through? Saves YT a lot of resources and bandwidth to not stream the whole files to everyone if they're not gonna use it, plus it allows them to monitor and slow down connections when they detect people downloading videos en masse.

There is more of a problem than simple buffering that people are having issue with. I have a 25Mbps connection. If I were streaming videos at that speed, I wouldn't care how little my buffer is. The problem is that either YouTube or ISPs are using caching servers which can't handle the load of their customers. It seems as though some people are finding success in ignoring certain IPs/subnets in which incompetent cache servers reside. That is where this conversation should be heading in my opinion: Helping find a method for each person to apply to their situation.

Someone linked to a good guide the other day, but I'm not able to find it at this time.

You need to go into your advanced firewall for windows, create a outbound rule, choose custom, all programs, all ports, tcp for protocol, enter address lines as 206.111.0.0/16 etc, and finish.

It should look like below for 206.111.0.0/16 in your advanced firewall if done right.

The 173 subnet class c is for vimeo if I read correctly, I just used google in the above example. And its 206.111 not 206.x

And IpTables wise, routers like the Actiontec supplied by FiOS allows for GUI Web Access for advanced filtering.

i think it needs to be an inbound rule, not an outbound, right?

i followed this guide yesterday that i found linked on the Reddit site

http://www.studyblog.net/2011/10/block-ip-address-or-ip-range-in-windows-server-2008-by-windows-firewall/

i can confirm that this fix works. I am doing the Youtube speed test right now, downloading their 720p test video. The site shows that my avg speed over the last month was 4Mbps. Right now it's downloading that video at 20-27Mbps.

Nope never had issue one with youtube bandwidth

Do you have a specific video your having issues with you can link too? Some of the major ISP use their own caching server for youtube, that could be your problem?

I would rightclick on a video and get the info, what speed are you getting. I would also again from rightclick on video to a speedtest - what does that show?

Virgin Media here in the UK use caching server for popular YouTube videos and its really really slow :(

i can confirm that this fix works. I am doing the Youtube speed test right now, downloading their 720p test video. The site shows that my avg speed over the last month was 4Mbps. Right now it's downloading that video at 20-27Mbps.

Yup, fix works for me as well. I was pulling my hair out today trying to figure this out. Was resorting to 240p! Using U-Verse here.

Well, the issue is back. Last for about an hour then I went to load another video in 720p and it only plays 5 seconds or so before it has to buffer again. What a PoS. I use youtube a lot for game mods, lets plays, etc and this is just annoying. Swear this was working fine not even 4 days ago.

edit: Yeah, I can't explain it. Went in and re-added the firewall rule and it wasn't getting above 360p without stopping. Went to do the youtube speed test and the damn thing loaded up fine. Went back to the original video I was trying to watch and its working fine again. Who knows.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      71
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!