Weblabor

nem (csak) az interkontinentalis kabel miatt van, sot igazabol valoszinunek tartom, hogy ott a leggyorsabb, mivel ott egyreszt tenyleg "legvonalban" halad, masreszt ott a leheto legkevesebb koztes eszkoz, elagazas, etc. van beepitve, a legnagyobb problema, hogy egyszeruen a feny ilyen lassu:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latency_(engineering)#Packet-switched_networks
Latency is largely a function of the speed of light, which is defined to be 299,792,458 meters/second in a vacuum. This would equate to a latency of 3.33 microseconds for every kilometer of path length. Because the index of refraction of most fiber optic cables is about 1.5, light travels about 1.5 times as fast in a vacuum as it does in the cable. This works out to about 4.9 microseconds of latency for every kilometer. In shorter metro networks, the latency performance rises a bit more due to building risers and cross-connects and can bring the latency as high as 5 microseconds per kilometer. It follows that to calculate latency of a connection, one has to know the distance traveled by the fiber, which is rarely a straight line, since it has to traverse geographic contours and obstacles, such as roads and railway tracks, as well as other rights-of-way. Due to imperfections in the fiber, light degrades as it is transmitted through it. For distances of greater than 100 kilometers, either amplifiers or regenerators need to be deployed.

http://www.akamai.com/html/technology/dataviz2.html

europabol keleti part (Becs - Boston) idealis routeolassal 105ms, a "normal" utvonalat kovetve 156ms.
ugyanez Los Angeles fele (nyugati part 158ms vs 185ms)

btw. nem a counter strike a legjobb eszkoz a halozati latency meresere. :)

Tyrael