2x the throughput of Peplink
NanoPing and Peplink’s SpeedFusion Connect, tested side by side on the same connections. NanoPing came out ahead in every single test.
Average throughput per cycle, Mbit/s
Every test, side by side
NanoPing averaged 403 Mbit/s against SpeedFusion Connect's 194, a 2.1x advantage. And it held every single time: even NanoPing's worst test beat SpeedFusion Connect's best by 56%.
How the tests were run
Both systems are tested side by side from our office in Aalborg, Denmark, to a server in Frankfurt, Germany, the same endpoint SpeedFusion Connect itself connects through. Both use the same two cellular modems and are tested moments apart, so they face the same conditions.
Peplink SpeedFusion Connect
Peplink's bonding service, run on a Peplink B One on firmware v8.5.0 at its default settings. The SpeedFusion license was purchased with unlimited data and a 400 Mbit/s maximum, matching the B One's 400 Mbit/s unencrypted rating; encryption is not used in this setup.
NanoPing
NanoPing's bonded tunnel, version 10.7, running on the test host and bonding the same two cellular modems as the B One. Encryption is not used here either, so both systems run unencrypted.
What is measured
- Throughput: iPerf3 over TCP with four parallel streams, in 30 interleaved measurement cycles; the two systems are measured back to back roughly half a minute apart so both see near-identical conditions. Every test is included; no warm-up tests discarded, no outliers removed.
- Latency, jitter and loss: a constant 10 Mbit/s UDP stream for 5 minutes; 1,200-byte packets, one every 0.96 ms, 312,500 packets per system. Each packet is timestamped on send and arrival with endpoint clocks synchronized via NTP; loss and reordering are read from the packet sequence numbers.
- Recovery: the same 10 Mbit/s stream is held while one of the two bonded modems is disconnected mid-test.
How these figures were produced
- Side by side, not in isolation: the systems are measured back to back within each cycle, so both face the same conditions.
- Every test counts: all tests of both systems are included; none were excluded.
- Spread is shown, not hidden: the charts show each system’s full range of tests, lowest to highest, alongside the averages.
Not even close
Every single NanoPing test moved more data than every single SpeedFusion Connect test. The two never overlapped.
Every test of both systems, Mbit/s
Each bar shows where a system’s 30 test results landed, from lowest to highest; the vertical line is its average. The bars never overlap: NanoPing’s worst result, 355 Mbit/s, still beat SpeedFusion Connect’s best, 229.
What that means in practice
How long a file transfer takes, at each system’s average speed:
All throughput figures
| NanoPing | SpeedFusion Connect | |
|---|---|---|
| Average | 403.4 | 193.7 |
| Median | 405.5 | 192.8 |
| Lowest test | 355.4 | 169.2 |
| Highest test | 456.7 | 228.5 |
| Std deviation | 25.9 | 15.2 |
| Tests | 30 | 30 |
All figures in Mbit/s.
The slowest packets decide how smooth a stream is
We sent the same live stream through both and timed every single packet. The difference is in the slowest packets: 99 out of 100 NanoPing packets arrived within 42 ms, while SpeedFusion Connect's slowest took 98 ms or more, over twice as long. And late packets are what make a video call freeze or stutter.
How long packets took, from typical to worst (ms)
Each row shows how quickly that share of packets arrived, out of 312,500 packets per system. The further right the marks sit, the longer a stream has to wait to play smoothly.
All latency figures
| NanoPing | SpeedFusion Connect | |
|---|---|---|
| Median one-way latency | 31.7 ms | 29.5 ms |
| Average | 32.3 ms | 31.8 ms |
| 95th percentile | 37.8 ms | 42.3 ms |
| 99th percentile | 41.5 ms | 97.5 ms |
| Slowest packet | 86 ms | 192 ms |
| Jitter (packet to packet) | 1.4 ms | 2.0 ms |
| Packets lost | 0 | 128 |
| Packets arriving out of order | 0 | 57,958 |
| Delivered complete and in order | 100.0 % | 81.4 % |
Lower is better. Jitter is the average change in transit time between consecutively received packets. A packet counts as out of order when it arrives after a packet sent later than it.
What happens when a link fails
Both systems carry the same steady 10 Mbit/s stream over both modems; about 11 seconds in, one modem is disconnected. NanoPing carries the stream through the failure with a single brief ripple and no loss.
Per-packet delay through the disconnect
Each thin bar shows the spread of packet delays within a tenth of a second; red ticks are lost packets. The vertical line marks the moment the modem was disconnected.
The event in three phases, in numbers
| NanoPing | SpeedFusion Connect | |
|---|---|---|
| Before the disconnect (0 to 11 s) | 31 / 65 ms, 0 lost | 29 / 87 ms, 1 lost |
| During recovery (11 to 18 s) | 28 / 92 ms, 0 lost | 31 / 180 ms, 121 lost |
| After recovery (18 to 23 s) | 26 / 137 ms, 0 lost | 28 / 40 ms, 0 lost |
Delay as median / 99th percentile within each phase; phase boundaries are identified from the data.
Measured 25 August 2026. Peplink and SpeedFusion are trademarks of Peplink. NanoPing is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Peplink. Results reflect the specific products, configurations and test conditions described on this page and should not be interpreted as representative of all Peplink products or deployment scenarios.
Reliable real-time connectivity in just a few steps
Every signup includes 30 days of full Pro access, no credit card. Spin up NanoPing on your device in just two commands and watch your traffic become reliable and stable right away.