Recommended Posts

So, I've been disapointed with my 100mbit home network speed for a while and haven't been able to afford a gigabit router.

It's just come to my attention that gigabit switches exist though, and how cheap they are w00t.gif

So, whats the setup? Cable from the router to the switch and then from the switch to my PCs?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/956988-using-a-gigabit-switch/
Share on other sites

How many ports are you needing on the switch? You can find them for under $30 for a basic gigabit switch.

I recently ordered this 8 port for $29.99

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16833320047

This 5 port has some really good reviews and is $19.99

http://www.newegg.co...N82E16833156250

EDIT: Odd it showed one price during the search but after you click on it it had a different price.

Only 3 computers, I found a super cheap one on eBuyer that seems to do the job:

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/225791

Not sure if this one is better though:

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/132466

I wish that sort of stuff was so cheap over here in the UK, I'm looking at about 35 quid for the same Asus Switch here.

The only difference seems to be that the second one is Metal as opposed to plastic, personal choice really, both support the same specs and both are 5 Port Gigabit Switches.

Up to you which one you get m8, either would be fine.

As for the cabling Cat 5 will not support it as it 10/100 Cabling only, Cat 5e is just the more updated standard which includes GigaBit, with Cat 6 being the newest stuff. See the below info:

The Original Cat 5 Cable

An old standard in the industry, Cat 5 cable is able to perform up to 100MHz and is still widely used for a variety of applications, although most new installations will use Cat 5e or higher.

Able to support 10/100 Ethernet and fast Ethernet, Cat 5 cable is upwardly compatible with the Cat 5e version. However, do keep in mind that your network connections will only be as fast and reliable as its slowest component, not its fastest, unless, of course, they are all equal in this area.

The Improved Cat 5e Cable

With improved durability over Cat 5, the protective outer covering of Cat 5e cable is thicker and therefore more suitable and reliable for more situations than its earlier counterpart. There are several other differences between this version and its predecessor including its backwards compatibility, as it will work along with either 10BaseT or 100Base T networking hubs and cards. There is also less cross talk or electronic interference with Cat 5e as opposed to Cat 5 cable thanks to improved signal capabilities.

In terms of bandwidth, Cat 5e supports gigabit Ethernet connections of up to 350MHz, more than trebling the 100MHz of a Cat 5 cable.

Remember that Cat 5e cable is not rated for use outdoors, although many people do without incident. If you must use this cable outside, add a conduit such as one made from PVC to keep moisture away. The safe operating temperature for Cat 5e cable is anywhere from 10 degrees Celsius to 60 degrees Celsius.

Also, with this particular category cable, 100 meters is the maximum length you will be able to use the cable without the benefit of either a network bridge, hub, or amplification to strengthen the signal.

As a general rule of thumb, if you are ever unsure as to which type you should purchase either Cat 5 or Cat 5e, opt for the latter choice because of its backwards compatibility and overall performance improvements.

The Newer Cat 6 Cable

Certified and designed specifically for gigabit use, Cat 6 cable reduces cross talk even more than its predecessors by improving upon the original Cat 5 version with wires featuring extra twists.

The use of Cat 6 cable does not guarantee that the network will be a full gigabit network, for this to be achieved each and every one of the components must be gigabit certified. Unless your network meets this criteria, opt for Cat 5e which will provide high quality speeds while saving money in the process.

Jamie

Just to clarify, Cat 5 is technically capable of doing Gigabit speed, but only over short distances and it will be unreliable. This is because it's not spec'd to take it, gigabit ethernet was not around with Cat5 which was the point of the new 5e standard.

Well, the standard cat5 cable is about 12m long I think. Not sure if that meets the requirement of short or not. Also, I guess its not too much just to get an extra cable but every saving helps :)

Thanks for all this info btw, its a great primer about this stuff that I usually don't pay much attention to :D

The categories just specify the minimum supported speed the cable is capable of handling, it might be rated at only 100Mbps, but might be easily capable of doing 1Gbps if the cable is built well.

It won't hurt to use Cat5e/Cat6 stuff though, it's fairly cheap (I got 5e cables years ago for like $10)

Yep, the switch will have a dedicated port for the router/modem, and the rest of the ports are for pc's, consoles, other switches. Think you'll want cat5e cable if you are not using that already.

I might be misunderstanding the way you worded that, but to clarify, you can plug the cable from the router/modem into ANY port on the switch (with most standard switches, at least), then the left over ports go to your PCs or another switch if need be.

Again with the Cat 6 and 5e..??

"Cat 5 will not support it as it 10/100 Cabling only"

Nonsense --- the 1000Base-T clearly states that CAT 5 can be used.. The whole point was to be able to run gig over existing cabling..

This thread has been going on an on about it..

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/956354-help-with-gigabit-network-cabling/

Here direct from the 803.11ab standard summary.

UTP CAT5 cable was chosen because it represents the majority of all existing horizontally installed UTP cable. The designation for this physical layer interface is 1000BASE-T. It supports distances up to 100 meters.

And before someone chimes in that is good for only short distances again - I highlighted where it states up to 100 meters ;)

And here

http://ieeexplore.ie...arnumber=798775

Physical Layer Parameters and Specifications for 1000 Mb/s Operation Over 4-Pair of Category 5 Balanced Copper Cabling, Type 1000BASE-T

I just took a 5ft cat 5 cable and plugged into my gig blade and my 10/100 blade in my 6509. Windows is telling me that it is connected at 10Mb/s. Lol....either windows is very wrong, the 3 patch cables that I tried are of bad quality or that the cat 5 cable can't handle squat. Again 3 cables 3ft of different brand, connecting at a whopping 10Mb/s to a cisco backbone switch. Priceless. If I had my flip I would record it. Cat5e of same length connects at 100 and 1000Mb/s respectively according to windows. Must be the switch because Cat 5 can support 1GB up to 100 feet, it can't be the pos cat5 cable.

Exactly my point as I clarified in my post which you chose not to highlight. Cat 5 is TECHNICALLY capable of gigabit speed but is not actually officially spec'd to handle it. If you want to get Gig speeds for certain then go for either Cat5e or Cat 6, as with normal Cat 5 you would need a really good quality cable to get the speeds, and even then they will be unstable and inconsistent.

Exactly my point as I clarified in my post which you chose not to highlight. Cat 5 is TECHNICALLY capable of gigabit speed but is not actually officially spec'd to handle it. If you want to get Gig speeds for certain then go for either Cat5e or Cat 6, as with normal Cat 5 you would need a really good quality cable to get the speeds, and even then they will be unstable and inconsistent.

Re-read BudMan's post, he specifically points out and proves that Cat5 is the minimum specification for gig ethernet speeds, not cat5e or higher....

Not only is cat 5 technically capable of gigabit speeds, it is also the minimum specification for gigabit speeds.

Re-read BudMan's post, he specifically points out and proves that Cat5 is the minimum specification for gig ethernet speeds, not cat5e or higher....

Not only is cat 5 technically capable of gigabit speeds, it is also the minimum specification for gigabit speeds.

read my post under budmans. physical connections, not theory or what someone says. man I wish I had my flip. camera on bb is too crappy, category ranking is too crappy on the cable. stupid crappy phone camera.

read my post under budmans. physical connections, not theory or what someone says. man I wish I had my flip.

Already read your post, Cat5 can handle 100x more than 10Mb/s, the issue is not with the cable unless you have really horrible quality cables.

EDIT: I just checked my own network, running Cat 5 cables that have been installed for probably 8 years or so, I get gigabit speeds both in what Windows reports and actual testing of raw network speeds.

Already read your post, Cat5 can handle 100x more than 10Mb/s, the issue is not with the cable unless you have really horrible quality cables.

So the issue is with the 6509 switch, thats rich.

Just so you have an idea of what kind of switch I am talking about.

http://www.shopricom.com/items/www.shopricom.com/photos/Imagei455aw1WD7_full.jpg

So the issue is with the 6509 switch, thats rich.

Just so you have an idea of what kind of switch I am talking about.

http://www.shopricom.com/items/www.shopricom.com/photos/Imagei455aw1WD7_full.jpg

I never said the switch was the issue, I only said the cable is not the issue assuming they meet the proper specifications. On my own network, I am running cat 5 cables (not cat 5e) and am getting gigabit speeds without an issue, most of the cables are 50 foot cables as well....one of them in fact is 100 foot and it goes through two 50 foot cables connected through a small inline coupler. The coupler itself is only rated at 100Mbit (more specifically it's only rated for cat 5 specifications) but I STILL get gigabit speeds on that system to any other system on my network.

I'm just wondering here, how much does it cost a month to get gigabit internet speeds? Also what hardware do you need and how much does it cost?

It depends on where you live, in the US, I do not think there are any gigabit speed ISPs (there might be, but I am unaware of them). Most of what people use gigabit ethernet for is transferring on their local network, from one computer to another. To do so, you need gigabit network cards on both computers (pretty common on motherboards now, much less common on older systems), and everything between the computers need to be gigabit (if you go modem -> router -> switch -> computers then only the switch needs to be gigabit to transfer between other computers on the switch at gigabit speeds, if you transfer to the router or above, then the router also needs to be gigabit compatible).

I never said the switch was the issue, I only said the cable is not the issue assuming they meet the proper specifications. On my own network, I am running cat 5 cables (not cat 5e) and am getting gigabit speeds without an issue, most of the cables are 50 foot cables as well.

so if it isn't the switch and it isn't the cable so long as they meet the proper specs then what is it? is it the magic jelly bean between the switch and the cable or maybe it is the windows computer or drivers that don't like the cable/the switch it is plugged into.

I have had 10/100 speeds on a cat5, but I have never seen gig speeds. Kind of funny actually that I plug in the crappy cat5 cables and get crap, and the same results out of 3 of them. It is like the computer knows I am attaching crap to it and it doesn't want to get the right speeds, but when I plug in cat5e it gets the right speeds.

It depends on where you live, in the US, I do not think there are any gigabit speed ISPs (there might be, but I am unaware of them). Most of what people use gigabit ethernet for is transferring on their local network, from one computer to another. To do so, you need gigabit network cards on both computers (pretty common on motherboards now, much less common on older systems), and everything between the computers need to be gigabit (if you go modem -> router -> switch -> computers then only the switch needs to be gigabit to transfer between other computers on the switch at gigabit speeds, if you transfer to the router or above, then the router also needs to be gigabit compatible).

Ahh ok. Maybe they'll get gigabit speeds soon, that would be awesome.
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
    • Usually the bigger ones with many fixes/changes take a few, theyre an exception to the rule most likely
    • If you don’t get lucky with Valve’s Steam Machine reservation system, you can make your own Steam Machine instead. Valve says that “starting with the SteamOS 3.8 release, you can put together your own Steam Machine using whatever PC parts you want.” SteamOS 3.8.10 launched last week with a slew of updates, including “improved compatibility with recent Intel and AMD platforms.” Alongside that improved compatibility, Valve is giving gamers the green light to install SteamOS on their own desktops. In an interview with The Verge, Valve’s Pierre-Loup Griffais said Valve has been “rolling out improvements to [SteamOS] so it’s more compatible with desktop hardware,” including eventual support for Nvidia graphics. Griffais says Valve has “a growing team” working on Nvidia driver support for SteamOS, adding, “We’re collaborating with Nvidia very closely.” While he mentioned that Nvidia support might not come this year, Griffais emphasized that “it’s certainly something that we’re working on in the background.”     Subscription not needed: https://archive.fo/Tssfc Subscription needed: https://www.theverge.com/games/953411/valve-steamos-desktop-nvidia
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      452
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!