Question about speed if a router and 1GB switch is connected


Recommended Posts

I have a DSL router provided by my ISP and here is the spec http://www.wikidevi.com/wiki/Alice_IAD_WLAN_4421

I bought a NAS and I wanted to buy a 1GB switch to enable faster data access within my network

I am wondering if I connect the 1GB switch to my router (10/100) & NAS to the swtich would I still get high speed of the swtich

Anything connected via ethernet to the switch would be able to communicate with the NAS at 1Gbps, but if your router is also a wireless router than 100Mbps is the maximum speed any wireless device would be able to communicate with the NAS. The slowest link along the path between the two devices will dictate the maximum speed.

If the interconnect is through the switch, then yes, you will get the Gigabit connection. If not, then you will get 100Mbps. For example, if both your computer and your NAS is on the switch, then that's full speed. If your computer is on the switch, and the switch is connected to your router, and the NAS is also on the router, then it will be 100Mbps.

If the Machine & NAS are wired to the switch, then Gigabit if machine has Gigabit LAN otherwise will run at slowest interface speed

If you have to go through the router, then 100mbps, unless wifi, then however fast your wifi is, 54/65/150/300mbps

kind of hard to be 150/300mbps if the lan ports are 100 ;)

I don't understand the point of trying to say your wireless is 300 when it only has ports that are 100 -- your getting 300 to what? Sure and the hell is not going to be another wireless client because that is /2 automatically..

If you going to be connecting via wireless, what point is the gig switch? Might as well just connect it to your 10/100 ports on your router.

  • Like 2

kind of hard to be 150/300mbps if the lan ports are 100 ;)

I don't understand the point of trying to say your wireless is 300 when it only has ports that are 100 -- your getting 300 to what? Sure and the hell is not going to be another wireless client because that is /2 automatically..

If you going to be connecting via wireless, what point is the gig switch? Might as well just connect it to your 10/100 ports on your router.

The point is that I wanted to enable fast data transfer over the network & I was thinking connecting the NAS to a 1GB Switch and then the switch on to my existing router (which is 10/100)

My laptop is & will be using the WLAN from router but I plan to connect the NAS to switch

If you want to maximize the speed over WiFi then you will need a new wireless router with gigabit ethernet ports.

The maximum speed any communication between the router (10/100) and the switch (10/100/1000) will be 100mbps.

The point is that I wanted to enable fast data transfer over the network & I was thinking connecting the NAS to a 1GB Switch and then the switch on to my existing router (which is 10/100)

The point is, no matter what setup you create, your data transfer will be only as fast as the slowest port/interface it has to travel through

My attempt explaining in paint

Capture.PNG

So that GIGABIT PC has two NIC's (pic above)? You could just connect the PC to the 1Gb switch seeing that it connects to the 100Mb router?

The picture was showing (in a visual form) the types of speeds you'd get if either connection was used.

When a WIRED router says it is 100mbps, you'll reliably get roughly 10MB/sec. When a WIRELESS router says 300mpbs, you won't get anywhere near 30MB/sec. As an example, on wireless 300N connecting to my laptop sitting next to my router, i get a whopping 3-4MB/sec (admittedly, that is quite bad...). And no, there aren't 50 other people sharing the wireless, nor clogging the frequency. (see various sources about wireless 'overheads')

The point of all this? Do not feel like your wireless is being "wasted" by only having a 100mbps wired connected to a 300mbps wireless. Your wired likely still as a lot more "application layer" throughput.

"When a WIRELESS router says 300mpbs, you won't get anywhere near 30MB/sec."

Completely and utterly agree with you!! Then they shouldn't report it as such! Just like when they say 54mbit for G, at best you get about 23mbit or about 3MBps

Its pure marketing nonsense how they report wireless RAW total bandwidth, while in wireless there is a **** load of overhead! So if you head over to smallnetbuilders wireless benchmarks N at 40mhz your looking at like 60mbps tops which ok your 100mbit wire can handle.

My point is they are putting 300Mbps on the box -- when clearly that can not be the case if the wire connections are only 100 ;) Who are they thinking they are fooling?

Also to the OP, unless your going to be connecting something else to the gig switch that can do gig, there is NO point to getting it for your nas if then connecting that to a 100mbit switch on your router and your using wireless anyway.

I would wait to get the switch until you have have other devices connecting at gig. Or you move to a wireless speed that is over 100mbit, ac is out there for example. Some of the 3 stream N can get over 100. But then your going to need another wireless router.. Which will prob have gig lan ports.

To be a bit clearer Detections drawing should of shown a gig connected pc and a 100mbit connected pc vs just the one with both connected and wireless client.

Think of it as a road connecting the devices - if at any point there is a lower speedlimit, then that is the fastest you can go on that path even if part of the path is faster. Example you have a 10/1 mbit internet connection 10 down and 1 up.. Does not matter if your computer was connected to router at 10Gb fastest your going to download is 10mbit

  • 2 weeks later...

Yeah pretty much all of the new ones, unless you buy the cheapest available.

Keep in mind at report 300Mbps speeds of your N, 100 is more than enough. Now if your going to go with say a AC vs N wireless or 3 stream N you might be pushing the 100mbit limit.

But currently the only reason to change out your router for one with gig ports would be to not have to use a gig switch for your gig connected devices. But unless I missed something - if your going to be using wireless to access your NAS then your nas has no use of gig either. The only point of connecting your nas at gig is if you were also going to connect something you wanted to move files back and forth with at gig speeds as well.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hello, Were you using a product or service from one of the companies affected by the Klue data breach?  See https://klue.com/blog/an-update-on-recent-klue-security-incident for the company's public statement.  That blog post does not list affected customer. From looking around at reports, I created this list: Gong HackerOne Huntress Insurity Jamf LastPass OneTrust Recorded Future ReliaQuest Salesforce Snyk Sprout Social Tanium It is likely there are other companies affected as well. Regards, Aryeh Goretsky  
    • SpaceX reportedly plans a Starlink mobile service for U.S. consumers by Karthik Mudaliar SpaceX reportedly wants to sell mobile phone plans directly to consumers in the United States as part of a wider expansion of Starlink. According to a report from the Financial Times, SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell discussed the plan with investors during the company’s recent IPO roadshow. The company is also said to be considering building a terrestrial mobile network to complement Starlink’s satellite coverage. The plan is quite different from how Starlink currently operates in the U.S. mobile market. SpaceX already provides satellite connectivity for T-Mobile’s T-Satellite service, but T-Mobile remains responsible for the subscription, billing, and customer support. A Starlink-branded mobile service would give SpaceX control of the customer relationship instead. It could also turn the company from a partner of traditional mobile operators into a direct competitor. T-Mobile also began testing its Starlink-powered satellite service in early 2025. The beta was initially limited to text messaging and was also available to some AT&T and Verizon customers. The service has since expanded to support limited data access through selected apps, including WhatsApp, Google Maps, AccuWeather, and AllTrails. It is designed to provide a connection in areas where normal cell towers are unavailable, rather than replace a conventional mobile network. However, if SpaceX actually has a plan to serve nationwide, it needs to do more than just satellite networks and actually support on-ground operations. It can also partner up with existing carriers and become a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO). With that said, SpaceX has already spent heavily to support its mobile ambitions. Just last year, the company agreed to acquire wireless spectrum licences from EchoStar in deals worth a combined $19.6 billion. EchoStar's spectrum includes AWS-4, H-Block, and AWS-3 frequencies that could be used for both satellite and terrestrial communications. According to a SpaceX securities filing, the Federal Communications Commission approved the transaction in May 2026, although it is not expected to close until late 2027. There's no official statement by SpaceX for now. Pricing, availability, and other details remain unknown. Source: Financial Times
    • We had no idea as kids how much time and energy it took to be an adult 😅
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      xvvxcvv earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Enthusiast
      Xonos went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      400
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      127
    4. 4
      neufuse
      69
    5. 5
      Xenon
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!