As with all things , there is a trade off to keep a service affordable , it doesn’t necessarily follow that all 32 splits are used, but even if they are, the chance of every customer demanding their maximum bandwidth simultaneously is remote, theoretically everyone won’t get the throughput they are ‘paying for’ if everyone did hammer their connection at the same time, but what in the real world would they be doing to run out of bandwidth, 100 HDR streams over the 32 would just about be possible, how likely is it that each one of the 32 is watching 3 HDR streams ?
The VM over utilisation problem ( supposedly resolved ) may well have had more customers sharing a link or the original links didn’t have a similar bandwidth, so it’s not a direct comparison, I dare say many domestic consumers with 900Mb+ connections rarely come close to needing a 20th of that , and if some killer application becomes commonplace and FTTP does hit over utilisation problems , it can be upgraded.
If the point is, 32 x 900Mb is more that 2.5Gb, that is true, but what would be the point of providing enough bandwidth to satisfy a maximum of 32x 900Mb, when all that bandwidth needs to be paid for ( ultimately by the end users much more ) for it to sit idle
