Gigabit capable hardware

[Kevinw]

What are the viable reasons to install Gigabit capable Nic cards, Switches and router in a home system?
I have 2 wired computers, 2 wireless, a switch feeding a BD player, Xbox, HTPC and a Dish 622,. I have another switch feeding a Dish 222 and an Xbox. Plus 2 I-phones and a Wii
I don't transfer files between anything. We do use for online gaming and video streaming( Netflix etc)
I have SMCWRGBR14-N router and the HTPC has a gigabit lan card but it is not being fed anything over 100mps at the moment.

 

[lsilvest]

The only reason I have the wireless n and gigabit is I record OTA HD and I transfer the files between computers and stream the HD video. The n and Gigabit just make it so much faster and streaming the HD video is hit and miss at best with g. Other than that I can't think of any reason. The Dish DVR and my Blu-ray player are only 10/100 and still faster than any internet connection.

 

[mike123abc]

Router not too important if you do not have 100mbit+ internet connection. Gigabit switch is really all you need. All computers come with Gbit ethernet now. Gigabit is really only useful for large file transfers now (like if you eventually set up a home media server on your PC). If you wanted to stream a few HD streams at once.

 

[Jim S.]

If you have a dual-band 'n' wireless setup, you can in theory get 300 Mbps if you feed it with a gigabit connection.

 

[lsilvest]

If you have a dual-band 'n' wireless setup, you can in theory get 300 Mbps if you feed it with a gigabit connection.

Dual-band only refers to the frequencies available (2.4 and 5). The 300Mbps is the wireless speed capability of the router and dependent on the capability of the receiver (I get 300 on my connections with a regular router). The gigabit speed only refers to the ethernet connection. Many n routers do not support gigabit ethernet.

 

[Kevinw]

My router is capable of Gigabit, My new modem will be Docsis 3, and I have a megabit switch due here this week. My goal is to have a megabit connection to my HTPC and to my Son's gaming PC.

 

[Jim S.]

Dual-band only refers to the frequencies available (2.4 and 5). The 300Mbps is the wireless speed capability of the router and dependent on the capability of the receiver (I get 300 on my connections with a regular router). The gigabit speed only refers to the ethernet connection. Many n routers do not support gigabit ethernet.

I guess I was mistaken about dual-band being needed for 300M, but then, I'm cheap All the n routers I've used have been 2.4GHz and have only gone up to 100M.

I'm aware that some routers don't support gigabit, I should've been more clear. But my main point stands: IF you have a 300M router, you're going to need gigabit to get 300M from your wired systems. (I'm not sure why they make 300M routers without gigabit. Maybe for people who only use wireless?)

 

[diogen]

I'm not sure why they make 300M routers without gigabit...

Numbers can be deceiving. And with wireless bandwidth they almost always are...

It would be safe to assume that under ideal circumstances you will at best get half the spec bandwidth. This is true (from my experience) for b and g. And I suspect it will just as well be for n, at least in the 2.4GHz range. In real environments you lose even more...

Also, none of the consumer routers/switches can sustain Gbps for any considerable amount of time. Especially more than on one line.

Also - this was true in the early internet days and could have changed - the Win2K TCP/IP stack can't do better than 300-400 Mbps, IIRC. At that time Solaris was the leader...

The basic on-board ethernet controller chips are also a limitation (Marvel is reportedly the best; not often used). There is a reason why only Intel/Broadcom are used on servers.

Cables - another story...

Bottom line, if you can have sustainable ~250Mbps (about 2GB per minute) on your home network with multiple nodes, you are good...

Diogen.