dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
14
share rss forum feed


Radio Active
My pappy's a pistol
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Fullerton, CA
reply to iansltx

Re: Correction

said by iansltx:

The 10 Gbps is shared among everyone on the node. So realistically Verizon will be able to push gigabit down, 250 Mbit up service over the upcoming network. just clarifying
It's all fluff, smoke and mirrors. How many consumers' computers can actually utilize/process that kind of bandwidth?

Not bagging on iansltx See Profile.
--
"Have fun storming the castle!"


gatorkram
Need for Speed
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink
said by Radio Active:

said by iansltx:

The 10 Gbps is shared among everyone on the node. So realistically Verizon will be able to push gigabit down, 250 Mbit up service over the upcoming network. just clarifying
It's all fluff, smoke and mirrors. How many consumers' computers can actually utilize/process that kind of bandwidth?

Not bagging on iansltx See Profile.
How many people, who would want that type of speed, only have 1 computer at home?

Just saying..
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/6 ··· 71/4f240

iansltx

join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
reply to Radio Active
Meh, my computers can do about 100 Mbit without any problems. If I tuned everything I could probably get up to 200 Mbit. I'd be perfectly happy with a 100 Mbit symmetric connection, to tell you the truth. Heck, 30/30 would be lovely. Just don't charge me through the nose for it and it's all great.

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to Radio Active
said by Radio Active:

said by iansltx:

The 10 Gbps is shared among everyone on the node. So realistically Verizon will be able to push gigabit down, 250 Mbit up service over the upcoming network. just clarifying
It's all fluff, smoke and mirrors. How many consumers' computers can actually utilize/process that kind of bandwidth?

Not bagging on iansltx See Profile.
No one computer can yet in the home, however since more and more crap is becoming a connected device. i can see how the demand for bandwidth will grow sharply. more importantly the demand for sustained bandwidth vs bursting.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO

2 recommendations

reply to Radio Active
Well 100Mbit is only about 9.5MB/s(reality) and GigE is about 95MB/s. There are a lot of (non raid) hard drives out there that are at 100MB/s of throughput. So if one splits 10Gb/s 64 times, I would suspect that there are a lot of computers out there that can handle this speed.


fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2
reply to gatorkram
I barely use 30Mbps as it is.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to Radio Active
said by Radio Active:

It's all fluff, smoke and mirrors. How many consumers' computers can actually utilize/process that kind of bandwidth?

NONE...yet! But imagine a sigle fiber able to handle a medium business location, or a apt. complex/hotel or a personal server farm (don't forget the cost of the service, plus the power requirements/bill)
By the time this reaches end user deployment, there will be demand (one drives the other)


PGHammer

join:2003-06-09
Accokeek, MD
reply to Radio Active
Actually, gigabit on desktops is more common now than it was even three years ago. The lag is internal to the desktop, not at the LAN port, in most cases. Even wireless-N (2.4 GHz N) is 145 mbps (faster than wired Fast Ethernet, which had been the pre-2005 desktop standard). So, it's not that desktops (or even portable computers) can't swallow it; it's that it's not profitable to spit out data that fast in a residential setting. Generally, unless you have a carrier willing to loss-lead with bandwidth, consumption will be governed (at the residential level) by the MOST (not least) expensive national carrier. And, despite Comcast and FIOS, the only truly national US broadband carriers are cellular (VZW, Sprint, and AT&T Mobility); theey are also, by and large, the most expensive.

Because I recently replaced the G router serving the house with an N router, once I can get an N PC card for the legacy laptop in the netbook role, the slowest link in the LAN will be a *wired desktop* (remember, 2.4 GHz N is 145 mbps, which is faster than Fast Ethernet); in short, I can replace the wired connection to that desktop with wireless and see bandwidth go up (not to mention banishing wire clutter). And I'm at the LOW end of typical for BBR/DSLR.

Lazlow

join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
You could also just put a GigE card (wired) and move the desktop to 1000Mbps(GigE or gigabit ethernet), assuming router has GigE ports. I switched to a GigE network(in house) several years ago. In house transfers are now typically at 75MB/s, limiting factor being the hard drive speeds. This will jump to 95MB/s as I replace the older drives with the newer 100MB/s drives.


PGHammer

join:2003-06-09
Accokeek, MD

1 recommendation

The router (WNR3500-1VCNAS) has gigabit WAN ports; however, the desktop iis based on the 845E chipset, and will be replaced at Christmas (motherboard swap; replacement mobo *has* gigE onboard). This desktop is *not* the admin box for the LAN, though, the admin box (also equipped with gigE) is less than two line feet from the router.

The point I am makling is that bandwidth within home LANs is not the issue it used to be.

bn1221

join:2009-04-29
Cortland, NY
Reviews:
·TowerStream
reply to PGHammer
lowest link in the LAN will be a *wired desktop* (remember, 2.4 GHz N is 145 mbps, which is faster than Fast Ethernet); in short, I can replace the wired connection to that desktop with wireless and see bandwidth go up (not to mention banishing wire clutter). And I'm at the LOW end of typical for BBR/DSLR.

Thats 145 half duplex though. And that is also split with more wifi nodes. 100Mbit FDX to a switch beats N based wifi - at least from what i've seen in my office.


PGHammer

join:2003-06-09
Accokeek, MD
There will be no other shared N connections (the laptop is wireless-G, not N). The household LAN is pretty puny by BBR/DSLR standards - two desktops and a laptop.


Radio Active
My pappy's a pistol
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Fullerton, CA
reply to tshirt
said by tshirt:

said by Radio Active:

It's all fluff, smoke and mirrors. How many consumers' computers can actually utilize/process that kind of bandwidth?

NONE...yet! But imagine a sigle fiber able to handle a medium business location, or a apt. complex/hotel or a personal server farm (don't forget the cost of the service, plus the power requirements/bill)
By the time this reaches end user deployment, there will be demand (one drives the other)
Good point. I just wasn't looking at the "bigger" picture, that one connection could actually be used for more than a couple or few devices.

"D'OH!" on me. With many devices and adequate routing and switching, I imagine this is not unattainable or unusable. Thanks, all, for the clue.
--
"Have fun storming the castle!"