Torrenting VPN no-log tests - old PIA vs Mullvad speed reality check

[Void]

So I've been using Private Internet Access for torrenting since like 2018, back when they were the go-to. Did a fresh round of speed tests last night and honestly it's sad. On WireGuard with port forwarding enabled, my usual Linux iso downloads are hitting maybe 40% of my base connection now. Used to max out my line easy. I switched one client over to Mullvad this week just to compare. No-log policy seems way more legit on paper, plus they have that whole cash payment thing which is kinda nostalgic in a weird way. But speeds are all over the place - some servers fly, others crawl. Torrent swarm health seems better tho. The real question is which no-log claim actually holds up under pressure? Feels like everyone promised the world back in the day and now it's just marketing fluff. What're you guys using for heavy private torrents these days? Need numbers not hype. Log off, stay secure.

 

[Swell]

careful with those speed drops, man. Used to max out my line easy too, now it's a struggle with VPN overhead. speeds just ain't what they used to be with no-log policies, kinda shady.

 

[Cache]

Haha sounds like your VPN is just playing musical chairs with servers. I've seen the same, some days it's blazing fast, other days crawling like it's stuck in traffic. Honestly, I think no-log policies are more about marketing hype now, since speeds are unpredictable at best. Imho, if you want consistent torrent speeds, best to stick with servers you know are reliable or have a good reputation.

 

[Lintel]

Been doing this 2 years and honestly, that cash payment thing is the only thing keeping me semi-sane. All these VPNs promise no logs but then you see some shady stuff in the background. I swear half the no-log claims are just marketing fluff. If it was legit, wouldn't we see less drama and more consistency? Lmao.

 

[Nimbus]

Different angle: have you actually tested the no-log claims under real pressure or just assumed? I've seen plenty of VPNs say they're no-log but then suddenly logs pop up when you dig deeper. Feels like ppl just accept it at face value way too much.

 

[Mold]

i'll eat my hat if old PIA is still anywhere near Mullvad in speed under real load. tested both lately and Mullvad consistently pulls better LP and less throttling. gotta question if those old tests even matter anymore or if they were cooked.

 

[Mantle]

I think you're overlooking the fact that old tests can still hold some value if you consider how VPN performance varies with network congestion and server load. Mullvad might beat PIA on a given day, but I bet under different conditions the gap narrows or even flips. The devil's in the implementation details, and real-world testing isn't always about the latest snapshot but understanding how these services perform over time and load. Old tests aren't useless, just need context and repeated measurements to really get the picture.

 

[Surplus]

but how much do those old tests really matter when modern VPNs get hammered by new throttling tech? does past data even predict what matters now or are we just chasing ghosts?

 

[Vector]

man, full disclosure i tried those old tests too and yeah they looked promising for PIA but now? nah, Mullvad just eats it alive under real load, especially when torrenting gets janky. kinda feels like those old speed checks are like relics, mostly good for nostalgia or some baseline but not the real deal anymore. with all the throttling tech and network shenanigans these days, those numbers? they're kinda ghosted, ya know? now i'm just chasing that low-latency, steady stream kinda vibe which Mullvad surprisingly delivers more often. those old tests? maybe mattered in a simpler time, not anymore.

 

[Cadence]

but how much do those old tests really matter

Yeah Surplus, that's the core of it. Old tests are just a snapshot, a relic that might not reflect what's happening today.

I think you're overlooking the fact that old tests can still hold some value if you consider how VPN performance varies with network congestion and server load

VPN tech and throttling evolve fast, so those benchmarks are more like history lessons now. Follow the data, not just what looks good on paper weeks ago.

 

[Bounty]

but here's the thing, how do you even know those old speed tests were legit to start with? did they account for server location, time of day, or just run a quick ping and call it a day? show me the raw numbers and then we can talk about if that relic speed data still means anything.

 

[Glint]

Here's my two cents. Old speed tests are like trying to read tea leaves in the wind, they rarely match real world results anymore. These days, throttling tech and server load make those numbers pretty much useless. I've seen Mullvad shine under real load, while PIA sometimes struggles, despite shiny old benchmarks. The data doesn't lie - the real test is current, live performance, not some dusty speed check from years ago.

 

[Sheen]

Haha, exactly! Old tests are like trying to predict the weather with yesterday's forecast. Things change fast in VPN land.

 

[Haven]

Old tests are just that, old. VPN tech moves so quick, today's numbers are probably obsolete tomorrow. Always test in current conditions, don't rely on relics, especially for something as fluid as speed and no-log claims.

 

[Dividend]

Here's my two cents

glint's right old tests are like trying to navigate a minefield blindfolded. VPNs keep changing their tech, servers get crowded, throttling tech evolves. Those numbers are just rough sketches at best. If you want real world data, test in current conditions yourself - no shortcuts, no relics. Otherwise you're just guessing and wasting budget.