A lot of info we already knew.
Good read though.
Good read though.
[THG] Home Networking Comparision
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...king,2470.html
![]()
![]()
Quote:
Quote:
| Our subject today is infrastructure, especially when it comes to picking a topology suited to entertainment applications. The four primary technologies available today for creating a home network are Ethernet, 802.11 wireless, Powerline, and coaxial. Each of these four has a needed place in today's market. In order to compare them with the fewest possible variables, we opted to source the latter three of the four from Netgear. Ethernet connectivity generally comes built onto the motherboard these days, at least in consumer circles. There are discrete options, such as Bigfoot's Killer NIC, but most people will simply save their money for other, more palpable upgrades, and use integrated options. Which of the four connection technologies is right for you? Let's find out. |
2
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Quote:
You have a 10GbE home network?
![]()
I know one guy who does....
Originally Posted by Raptor_Jesus  Bishes don't know bout my 10gbps ethernet. |
I know one guy who does....
2
Quote:
Was it this guy?
Originally Posted by DuckieHo You have a 10GbE home network?
I know one guy who does.... |
2
Quote:
Did you check the other benchmarks? In many cases MoCA is twice as fast as Powerline. 10Mbps more is used if you have a home network... which is the point of having a faster home network.... 30mins to transfer a BluRay vs 1hr.
Originally Posted by cpswaim I just purchased a powerline networking kit (PLK300, Linksys w/ 4 port switch on one end) and am ecstatic with it. For light gaming (xbox/playstation), and surfing it seems to me you aren't dependent on your network speed, but your internet speed. The latency of both the Coax and Powerline solutions were almost equivalent, but yet in the final thoughts, they said Powerline was the worst option. Baring humongous houses (3000+ sq ft), why is this? I don't see the reason for saying the coax option is so much better for 10 more Mbps (that aren't being used) and .5 ms in min. latency. I'm not trying to argue the article, I'm just wondering why. |
Quote:
I was looking at this a while back and the 310N or 320N look like good solutions, where you get Gigabit ethernet (if you ever want to run Cat5E/Cat 6) and Wireless N.
EDIT: On the Linksys page they don't have the 310N anymore (which was the non Dual Band version of the 320N.)
If you just want a simple N router, you could go for the 160N which I think is one of the entry level N routers.
Originally Posted by Pheatton Hmm seems its time to get Wireless N for the home. I really want to run Cat5 but it would be nearly impossible in my house... Any good Linksys ones to look at? |
EDIT: On the Linksys page they don't have the 310N anymore (which was the non Dual Band version of the 320N.)
If you just want a simple N router, you could go for the 160N which I think is one of the entry level N routers.
hm how did they get 666.3 mbps?
![]()
Quote:
I don't understand your point... the latency for N in this test is 0.1, do you really think G would get any better?
Originally Posted by videoman5 No tests with G? The 3 bands needed for N really puts a damper on latency, at longer distances. |
Quote:
Yeah I started to read about the latest Linksys stuff and most people say they are junk for the most part. I do I have a DIR-655 Xtreme N Gigabit Router laying around. I have not used it yet as the current router has the Vonage built in that my parents use. I did buy the little Vonage adapter that is completely seperate so that I can use what ever router I want.
Originally Posted by GH0 Look at the newest ASUS RT-N16 router. It is 5 times better then the Linksys router, and can be loaded with DD-WRT. |
Yeah I started to read about the latest Linksys stuff and most people say they are junk for the most part. I do I have a DIR-655 Xtreme N Gigabit Router laying around. I have not used it yet as the current router has the Vonage built in that my parents use. I did buy the little Vonage adapter that is completely seperate so that I can use what ever router I want.
Quote:
Sadly I do not. It would be fun, though.
Originally Posted by DuckieHo You have a 10GbE home network?
I know one guy who does.... |
2
Quote:
They tested it "in room" as to which means nothing. It doesn't take into consideration walls, or objects, and keeps RF interference to the low. In that situation, then yes, N is better. Under normal circumstances there's a wall or two, and some objects between you and the ISR, and if you live in densely populated area, or live on a military base, RF interference becomes a problem. Since N uses 3 bands, it is about 3 times more likely to drop a packet. Which cannot be tested by a single ping, but rather thousands of pings. This review is bunk unless they tell us everything about the RF conditions, and the physical state of the matter between the client and the ISR.
Edit: After reading the article, it seems they tested various enviroments, but opted to pick the best case scenario for the final test. FAIL. They did use 5.0Ghz N, which is almost required when using N, and that takes RF congestion mostly out of the picture.
Edit2: Mind you, what I said only considers ping. N should better G in all tests for throughput.
Originally Posted by SgtSpike I don't understand your point... the latency for N in this test is 0.1, do you really think G would get any better? |
Edit: After reading the article, it seems they tested various enviroments, but opted to pick the best case scenario for the final test. FAIL. They did use 5.0Ghz N, which is almost required when using N, and that takes RF congestion mostly out of the picture.
Edit2: Mind you, what I said only considers ping. N should better G in all tests for throughput.
Quote:
Across house test.
![]()
This review is not a end all, be all review. If you want to see awesome wireless, read their beamforming article.
Originally Posted by videoman5 They tested it "in room" as to which means nothing. It doesn't take into consideration walls, or objects, and keeps RF interference to the low. In that situation, then yes, N is better. Under normal circumstances there's a wall or two, and some objects between you and the ISR, and if you live in densely populated area, or live on a military base, RF interference becomes a problem. Since N uses 3 bands, it is about 3 times more likely to drop a packet. This review is bunk unless they tell us everything about the RF conditions, and the physical state of the matter between the client and the ISR. |
This review is not a end all, be all review. If you want to see awesome wireless, read their beamforming article.
2
Quote:
Why cat6? Just futureproofing?
Originally Posted by citat3962 +rep duckie, this is right up my alley. I was researching a G adapter for my FileServer gone HTPC and after reading that and considering the price of a N router and adapter for just this machine, I've decided I'll get a length of Cat6 and some jacks and wall plates instead. I like my WRT54G + DDWRT just fine and see no reason to replace it. I don't really care to spend $$ on a PCI adapter to find out if G will give me a good experience through two walls and a Washer and Dryer. |
btw heres the article about beam forming http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ckus,2390.html
![]()
wow at results
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
