Gigabit ethernet has been standard on consumer electronics for a decade...

Gigabit ethernet has been standard on consumer electronics for a decade, how long till 10 gigabit ethernet moves down into the consumer realm?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.5GBASE-T_and_5GBASE-T.
twitter.com/AnonBabble

as soon as the bandwidth is needed in terms of drive speed and internet speed

Hard to say, I switched to gigabit over a week in my job. It was still using fast ethernet.

SSDs are already many times faster than gigabit ethernet my dude, even 7200 RPM hard drives can transfer at a little higher than gigabit speed on sequential files.

yes, so as soon as the majority of storage is not hdds anymore
which is quite some time

heh

i only had adsl since 2010 and 1.8Mbps. there's no intention of improve speeds at all, but at least the last year or two it has been consistent. previously it would be as slow as dialup, drop the connection entirely at least once a day, or go down for days.

t. 3rd world shithole

>be american
>Have ComCast
>its the only ISP available in my area
>Housed is wired so shitty that there is only one line to have a router connected to
>Have to run an access point across the house to a wi-fi repeater to get 20/20
Fuck

10GB copper is only good for short runs, anything else don't even bother

tfw 100 mbit switches at office.

1 GBs dl speed.

The fastest 10K 3.5 hdd only transfers max at little over 150 MB/s. The standard 7200 rpm drive is little slower, which is what the vast majority of all data is stored on. Sata interface speed don't really mean much if the drive itself is limitation. 150MB/s equals 1.2 Gbps so really in real world situations GB Ethernet is still fine.

You can now get a 16 port 10GbE switch (12 SFP+/4 10GBASE-T) for like $500, so thing are getting there.

The remaining challenges are:

> decent wifi is good enough for normies, especially in comparison to the shit that is mobile data
> UTP is on its last legs above 1Gb. 10GbE requires at least 2 of: short runs, expensive/PITA cable, or power-hungry transceivers using LDPC
> low volume equipment = high prices, stalling shit further

It honestly not all that expensive to make your own 10 GbE NAS/switch/workstation setup though if you truly need it though.

Why would you even need 10GB in the home? Most devices are limited by design, ex: most wired streaming media players are limited to 100meg, WiFi speed is still not even GB yet, your internet speed ain't no where near GB yet, your data trans rate is limited to your 3.5 7200 rpm drives, which tops out at 150 mb/s = 1.2GB so really there is no need for 10GB in the home. Now office/large corporations it makes sense cause 10GB is for backbone main connections to the core infrastructure so the core don't get overloaded.

I am pretty sure this is addressing things within a large lan, where transfer speeds or gb/s+ occur regularly. This should have been pretty obvious.

why not go terrabit?

So run coax to another fucking room holy shit

>your data trans rate is limited to your 3.5 7200 rpm drives, which tops out at 150 mb/s = 1.2GB so really there is no need for 10GB in the home.

There's this thing called 'RAM' and another thing called an 'SSD'. I have both.

How? Teach me senpai!

Your data drives which is what a lot of people store all there high volume (ex TB) aren't SSD. I don't think it'd be a financially good move to store several TB on SSD's when reg drives are better way to go but that's me.

This. Comcast will even do it for like 20 bucks

> buy 2 cheap used SFP+ cards off ebay, throw one in your workstation
> build a NAS box (if you don't already have one), throw the other SFP+ card in it
> make sure you have lots of RAM and/or an NVMe SSD for read caching now, since you'll actually need it to saturate a 10Gb line
> use a direct attach twinax copper cable to connect NAS to workstation if you're too cheap to buy a switch immediately, otherwise just buy the fucking switch

ta-da, you now have networked storage that's faster than any SATA SSD and more usable than a local NVMe SSD for more realistic uses.

What the fuck is wrong with all you newfags? Let me break this down so even juniors (everyone else in this thread) can understand.

>Muh internet is too slow xD LEL
10GbE for WAN is not the point, LAN transfer speeds are. Unless you are a medium to large business with multiple campus' or similar topology, you will have NO use case for 10GbE WAN.

>Muh need for it doesn't exist
Two hosts with a single SSD each can easily saturate single gigabit links (as correctly pointed out).
RAID 0, 5, 10 with 2, 3, 4 conventional drives respectively can saturate gigabit links.

>Muh 10GbE is only good for short runs
10GBase-T has a max run length of 100 meters, just like 1GBase-T. CAT7 and CAT6 is not expensive anymore, only marginally more than 5e. You can even use CAT5e for home as long as you use STP and it's rated for more than 350mhz. You loose some speed obviously, but the cabling cost/performance/availability argument has no leg to stand on anymore.

>Muh wallet hurts
You can get an Intel X540-T2 for under $200 that is made from ghost runs on Intel's manufacturing lines. Genuine adapters are not much more. As correctly pointed out, you can get sub $500 switches now easily. If you don't want to deal with transceivers and SFP+, Netgear makes 8 and 12 port 10GbE switches for a few hundred bucks.

>Muh use case for home
I have one box with a 24TB array of 7200rpm spindles and a 4TB array of SSDs. All wired PCs in the house are driveless, and boot from iSCSI. This makes for easy and efficient data management (dedupe, backup, etc.) and all laptops are AC that boot from small internal SSDs and have a second iSCSI target for data storage. You can't tell the difference even with doing sysadmin work. All of my virtualization hosts have no internal storage since they boot from FCoE.

All of this has cost me less than 4K over a year, given that I do pickup free gear from work.

I never have to wait for anything, ever.

I should clarify, 4K for all of my gear.

Two X540-T2 cards and a netgear 12 port 10GbE switch were under 1000 bucks USD.

>RAID 0, 5, 10 with 2, 3, 4 conventional drives respectively can saturate gigabit links.

A single 5400 rpm can get bottlenecked by 1GbE (~120-125 MB/s) for big linear reads quite easily.

Yes, I realize this but to prevent the slippery slope of what CAN but may or may not (which you did anyways), I pointed to RAID, which is becoming fairly ubiquitous in home/consumer usage.

But 10GbE for single, 5400rpm drives do not typically make sense. Are there any other obscure scenarios that I omitted for the sake of brevity that you would like to point out? A RAID0 of Class 10 MicroSD cards, perhaps?

Oh, and neck yourself for telling me something I already know, you pedantic faggot.

We're talking about personal computers. Not backup arrays so I have no idea what the fuck you're going on about. I don't work from my NAS, I work from my computer, which has an SSD and RAM, so no, a 10GB Ethernet connection won't be lost on my machine and my machine won't bottleneck the connection.

Probably won't. They recently invented 2.5gb/s (cat5e) and 5gb/s (cat6+) as a half step because 10gb/s was too much of a pain

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.5GBASE-T_and_5GBASE-T.

This shit won't take off. The only thing limiting 10GbE is power consumption and the cost associated with lower power consumption (compared to enterprise gear).

>Unless you are a medium to large business with multiple campus' or similar topology, you will have NO use case for 10GbE WAN.
Not true. It'd be really good for bittorrent in and file sharing in general. A single 10 Gbps seed would meet the needs of hundreds of leechers. It would be easier to seed a broad range of torrents if you didn't need a ton of seeds per torrent to make decent download speeds.

Also, faster speeds could lead to more in-home data centers. Why bother colocating if you've got 10 Gbps to your house? This is how it was in the early days of the internet. People would just run BBSes and homepages from their basement.

And what ISP is going to provide a 10GbE connection to your premise? I'll be generous to your point, assuming you could find one, what would the cost be? Oh, right, thousands of dollars a month for a WDM connection. Unless you live in Chattanooga, buttfuck Vermont, shithole Detroit.

10Gbit WAN to consumer premise is extremely rare and otherwise moot. Is your use case valid? Technically, yes. Is it practically feasible? No.

This is a nerd-boner that is far from reality. In home data centers are not economical given the existing "cloud" infrastructure. How do you enjoy working in retail?

Easy bandwidth cap so you don't just go downloading shit all day

>And what ISP is going to provide a 10GbE connection to your premise?
That's not the point. I was saying that there is a use case for 10 Gbps WAN.

>shithole Detroit
I'm five minutes from shithole Detroit. The 10 Gbps service you're talking about is only available downtown though, which is actually a really nice area.

> Is it practically feasible? No.
It would be feasible if AT&T didn't steal billions of dollars that were meant for infrastructure upgrades. It would also be feasible if our government wasn't run by retards that threw out the idea of laying fiber with all new public road projects.

You don't actually need enterprise equipment to run a web service. Most people around here could do it with their old FX-8350 or whatever. Most things don't need five nines.

>How do you enjoy working in retail?
Good laugh mate.

I did not say that you need enterprise gear to run a web service. Are you retarded?

I said, to paraphrase for the challenged, who the fuck is going to get a 10gbps internet connection to their home for a seedbox or any other web service?

>I said, to paraphrase for the challenged, who the fuck is going to get a 10gbps internet connection to their home for a seedbox or any other web service?
Again, besides the point. If 10 Gbps were commonly available, what I said would be a potential side-effect of it. Those two posts were specifically in response to you saying "you will have NO use case for 10GbE WAN", which is wrong.

Most people never will use it.
Most still dont even take advantage of a gigabit port.
Most people never do in home networking.
Even with fast internet, your speeds are often slower than what most websites will run at.
Most sites seem to have their upload throttled.

I really dont see 10 gigabit becoming standard in a home setup. There for a while gigabit was standard but then companies even started taking that ability away so they could use cheaper 10/100mpbs chips.

An obscure use case that isn't really a use case at all, given that just about every other possible way is better at achieving the desired result.

>Detroit
>Nice Area
Pick one faggot.

>feasible if our government wasn't run by retards

Okay, go ahead and run for office so that you can change US domestic policy to allow for your 10GbE home connection for you seedbox "use case".

I loathe people like you for watering down the talent in this field.

Ethernet is going to die. Have fun dealing with Thunderbolt.

Any more hairs you would like to split? You can make a use case for anything on paper fagget, that doesn't mean it's practical, useful or a good idea.

God fucking damnit retard. 10 gigabit internet connection (read WAN), I agree, it's not useful en mass.

10 gigabit LAN is extremely useful for home.

>Most still dont even take advantage of a gigabit port.
Lots of normalfags try to upload video from their phone to the cloud, and 10 Gbps would make it easier to share 1080p and 4K video. 1 Gbps would be a nice start though.

>An obscure use case that isn't really a use case at all
Bittorrent is an obscure use case? That's hilarious, you're really reaching now.

>Pick one faggot.
You've clearly never been to downtown Detroit. Pic related. Though you're clearly the kind of person that comments on things you have no experience with.

>that doesn't mean it's practical, useful or a good idea.
>I don't like change and people having fast internet is going to put me out of my CloudOps(TM) job.
Go be agile somewhere else.

I've got roughly 9TB of data and that will only grow as years pass. Mean while my internet speed is only 10 meg and won't get any faster anytime soon cause my isp charges me $46 for my current ten meg so to "upgrade" would cost me like close to $100 for there top of the line plan. It would be very time consuming to backup all that to the cloud. Far better & cheaper to have it as it is now, server with raid +ups+ full offline split backups of all data. And before people say "switch isp" ,for me that ain't really an option, my area my internet/cable is limited to really only one company (city owned power/water/telecom)

>standard on consumer electronics for a decade
while it may have been a standard, many consumer routers still can't achieve gigabit speeds in WAN/LAN or LAN/WAN throughput.

Sure LAN/LAN will be gigabit, but being limited to a local network for your gigabit speeds is somewhat bullshit, especially when it's been a standard for this long.

>paying $200 to transfer files from device to device slightly faster
>most consumers only own one ethernet-connected device with local file storage anyway
>most large datasets are designed to be streamed at 50Mbps or lower and their existence as files is just a coincidence of the exact method used to pirate them

1000 came when a 10/100/1000 controller was within about 10 cents of a 10/100 controller in bulk quantities. 10Ge is currently about $20 out from there. It'll be a long, long while unless adhoc clustering finally takes off and there's a consumer application.

>Bittorrent is an obscure use case? That's hilarious, you're really reaching now.

A seedbox that is popular enough to utilize some or all of a 10 gigabit connection would warrant being collocated. It's call doing things properly. High traffic services of any kind being served from a residential home is obscure.
You seeding your 10TB Loli collection to your friends is obscure.

>You've clearly never been to downtown Detroit. Pic related.

I have, and it was the filthiest nigger infested shithole that I've been to.

>Though you're clearly the kind of person that comments on things you have no experience with.

Lol. Pic related, it's the data center I run.

>that doesn't mean it's practical, useful or a good idea.
>I don't like change and people having fast internet is going to put me out of my CloudOps(TM) job.
>Go be agile somewhere else.

Lmao. I am all for getting speeds like that to residential, but I actually know what I'm talking about enough to know it's not feasible or cost effective. Not every consumer is a faggot that wants to run seedboxes and mini data centers from his house. Get some fresh fried chicken air in downtown D-town nigger. I dislike cloud services and I don't even sell anything!

Rekt.

>it's not feasible or cost effective

Clarification, with current demand, it is neither of the above. 4K streaming becomes ubiquitous? Yes, 10Gbit WAN is guud. Deferred client computing? Yes, 10Gbit WAN is guud. Are either of those things in demand to millions or tens of million? No, not yet anyway.

The only people that hoard data close to or above double digit TBs are faggots on Sup Forums, people in the field (that have no life outside of work) and people in graphics, media and music.

Have you checked the price for 1TB of backup space lately? Oh yeah, it's a few hundred bucks a month at the cheapest. If you're going to back all of that up, you might as well colo a box and walk a fucking hard drive over to it once a week.

When I transfer TB virtual machines between my devices from my home office, yeah, slightly faster makes me more money.

Most consumers don't even utilize 1gbps on their LAN regularly.

You missed my point entirely. Spotted the helpdesk kid. How's your first week going?

>Lots of normalfags try to upload video from their phone to the cloud, and 10 Gbps would make it easier to share 1080p and 4K video. 1 Gbps would be a nice start though.
I fucking hate the cloud so dont think Im about to be its ally,
but do you have any clue what would happen to cloud prices if normies were granted the ability to upload 1080 and 4k video at the speed of light?
I fear the repercussions of this would spill over into the normal tech market and even advertising markets will punish us with their "adblocking is stealing" bullshit.

>but do you have any clue what would happen to cloud prices if normies were granted the ability to upload 1080 and 4k video at the speed of light?
Not much if 10 Gbps was cheap enough that consumers could afford it.

>10 gigabit LAN is extremely useful for home.
Yea it is. Im about to upgrade a bunch of shit to take advantage of gigabit myself, but unfortunately I wont be upgrading enough to do 10g stuff.
What type of drive do you have to have to use those speeds other than ramdisks

10gbps may be cheap, but hdds wont be priced any cheaper.
If every whore could flood the net selfies and vines 100x more efficiently.. I cant even imagine.

focus on wider spread 1gbps before jumping on the 10gbps train.

See >I have one box with a 24TB array of 7200rpm spindles and a 4TB array of SSDs

I wasn't being sarcastic, brainletta, I actually do see 10gbit as useful at home for prosumers.

This is my private gear for my home. Too lazy to type out my home-office gear.

I wasn't being sarcastic, I

There is WAAAYY more untapped storage capacity on the Internet than anyone could possibly need. If 10 Gbps were commonly available it would force a restructuring to a more decentralized model. So instead of just storing everything on one centralized server it would use the users as peers. Think IPFS.

I run nested virtual machines though samba.. I also see 10gbit as something that is useful.
what does brainletta mean, were you trying to talk shit?

Agree, I have to use multiple wan because I can't get gigabit at home. I would almost never have to go to the DC if I had a gigabit to my house.

My personal gear are WD Red Pros and WD REs. SSDs are Intel for work, Samsung and Adata (don't bitch me out) for personal.

If you think Im wasting my storage for some whores instagram you can fuck off.

>Gigabit ethernet has been standard on consumer electronics for a decade
Nope. 100Mbps were still the standard consumer ethernet up until few years ago. This mainly changed due to the Gigabit frenzy.

Atbest 5 years is what I'd give for the consumer 1Gb standard.

I was trying, wasn't sure if you were agreeing or being sarcastic. No tone with text.

Nested VMs, totally get you. Samba? Not great but it works. iSCSI is ideal.

>Agree, I have to use multiple wan because I can't get gigabit at home
only way i can do it is by turning off all traffic monitoring and QoS on my ISP provided router.

The only asus router that can give 1gbps WAN is the $300 octopus looking router.

I want that hardware without the wifi in a basic router package for $200 and i'd be all over it.

If you don't visit some whore's instagram them nothing from it would get cached on your node.

>Adata (don't bitch me out)
Got a good chuckle.
Ill have to look up the difference between red and red pros. I was going to use wd red 7200 for my storage, but hgst 7200 was on sale for a far better price so we hgst now.

I dont know alot about this stuff. I doubt youd be so wreckless asto put it in raid 0, what configuration do you use that permits these speeds with a mechanical drive?

The Asus Dark Night (RT-N66U, AC-xxU) are the ones you are thinking of. They're pretty good as far as consumer gear goes. Their firmware is disgusting sometimes though, better than d-dink, toiletpaper-link and netqueer garbage.

I use pfSense for my Edge router. My core router is Cisco Meraki because they gibbs it to me for free.

I probably have 30k worth of networking gear alone in my house.

I'm debating picking up an i3 barebones tower for $200 on sale, throw a i350-T2 gigabit NIC or similar in there and then run pfsense on it.


Should be able to handle gigabit WAN throughput. Or very close to it.

They are fast but not reliable, horrible RMAs. Better than OCZ (no longer around but released first SSDs).

Normal reds are 64mb cache, 5400rpm. Pros are 7200RPM and 64 or 128mb cache and some other marketing bullshit. HGST is alright, stay away from Seagate.

I use RAID10 for most stuff, RAID5 for non-important data that need lots of read IOPS. RAID5 shouldn't be used anymore for anything but expendable data, and it's useless for heavy writes, even with write caching.

Ask away, will answer any questions.

let me break it down for you, beardo

people whose legs haven't fallen off from the mountain dew-induced diabetes are not interested in paying $4,000 a year so they don't have to stand up and sneakernet a thumb drive ten feet to their kodi box, nor are they interested in paying $4,000 a year for it to buffer only 10x faster than realtime rather than 100x

The problem is that transmitting 10Gbps and beyond over metal is a PITA.

The masses perfer wireless ethernet so mainstream demand is pretty much a niche at best.

Pretty sure that's exactly what he said.

>perfer wireless ethernet
what did he mean by this

If only there was something other than copper to use. Oh wait, that's right, there is.

Oh yeah dude, people don't understand that gigabit is not heavy to modern CPUs. I was running pfSense on a quad core Atom on one of my LANs and CPU only floated around 25% under full gigabit transfers. an i3 would be more than enough.

THANK YOU. I've been trying to say this the entire fucking thread.

Buddy with his >muh seedbox usecase

I see you might have also been trying to reply to the other guy. Idk im too tired for this shit. Im the guy you first linked to in your post using the word "brainletta".. The second guy looked to be talking shit.

I wasnt talking shit btw, just a chill conversation.

>iSCSI
Ill look into that, I either hadnt heard of it before or looked over it assuming it to be a physical interface.
Doing the vms though samba was done in a pinch. I have an assortment of vmware, virtualbox, and kvm vms. Im trying to migrate them all to kvm, and each one has to be manually sorted, files extracted, bookmarks, web history, fucking everything. I quit vmware on linux because it wouldn't work right, so I wound up using vmware in virtual box and running the nested vm though samba so I wouldn't have to allocate a massive image just to transfer in yet another image. This way I can load a 100gb image on a machine with a 10gb hardrive with only 2 gb free
It was some what slow starting up, but surprisingly acceptable performance later on, granted it was all on the same computer. I forgot I was even inside of 2 vms and wound up watching youtube for a few hours and then tripped out when I opened the start menu and realized I hadnt had a start menu in years

Why not? It works with people existing cabling and is far easier to implement than 10G. By the end of '18, most routers, switches, motherboards, and laptops will ship with it.

10G will take at least 2020 to start catching on in consumer stuff.

:

is wrong, 10gbase-t is good up to 100 meters. For you retards that don't understand base-**, base-t means twisted pair, or a normal fucking category X ethernet cable

You might be retarded so I need to reiterate that I was saying that Bittorrent is a use case for 10 Gbps that pretty much everyone would benefit from because even normalfags use popcorn time. I didn't say they would pay for 10 Gbps at current prices to get it. If they were going to do that, they'd already have 10 Gbps, so I didn't think you were dumb enough to assume something like that.

It's future proofing, his file transfers are only going to be larger and go faster as time goes on, and he'll be good for up to 10x the speed of GbE.

Normies have always hated wires. Wireless Ethernet is what sells in the mainstream market.

>stay away from Seagate.
oh yea, I made it a point to avoid them.

Ok thank,
>raid 5
I heard that the recovery process of raid 5 is likely to destroy another drive in the process and that raid 6 is its replacement that should be used, is this true?

I'm looking to run snort or similar packages, so I expect to need the CPU a bit more.

>Wireless Ethernet
What does he mean by this?

Think Telsa

i'd much rather see faster internet speeds. A lot of people are still on 10/10

You are stupid or dense as concrete?

Wireless Ethernet = Wi-Fi a.k.a transmitting frames over microwaves.

Because IEEE doesn't want to implement quarter and half steps when 10gbe is already used in enterprise widely. Do you understand the back implementation that would have to be done?

10GbE already works with existing cabling, 5e will work but not at 100m full speed. Changing out the cabling is cheaper than changing out gear to 2.5 and 5gbit that doesn't even exist yet beyond paper.

It's not far easier to implement, at all. This is just plain sheer retardation from the flame retardant in your mountain dew.

Have you not noticed that ethernet always increases by a factor of ten? 10, 100, 1000, 10000? Do you not understand that the components that make up all this technology scale in specific ways (I.E. FREQUENCY IN hz, mhz, etc.)

>Wi-Fi
Then he should say so

Wireless ethernet is not and never has been a thing.

Isn't Wi-Fi basically a wireless implementation of the Ethernet protocol, essentially making it wireless Ethernet?

I had SDSL 1.5Mbit up and down back in 1998 and I thought it was glorious.

No worries brocade.

Most recent Intel core i5, i7 chips support extended page tables and shit for nesting virtualization. You don't really take a huge hit for it anymore.

I see what you did but it's a bit of a roundabout way of doing it. Fine for home, but I would fire someone that did it in production.

It's easy to get lost in the inceptions of VMs and RDP sessions kek.

VMWare is great for some things, great feature set and tunables but it's a finicky fucker. If you're doing straight Windows, just use Hyper-V. It works GREAT for Windows guests VMs. You don't need all the obscure, complicated shit of other solutions.

Ethernet is basically the interface (like SATA or IDE)

Wifi is the method of transmission. You usually just call it wireless or 802.11 b/g/n/ac

Dunno about all that considering anyone who I've seen that offers over a gigabit usually has two lines they can either bond at home or run as two separate links. Most consumer routers are already moving towards dual WAN anyways already which should continue on though. They'll likely go the cheapest route and expect consumers to bond at the home or use as two different links.

Just neck yourself already, you lost.

Talking to me about popcorn time and shit. Do you manage a data center? Have you been working as an architect for fortune 500s for a decade? No? Fuckoff m80.

>I need muh 10gbit for normie movies.

Have fun with that when the majority of torrents can barely push 100kbps because there are 2 seeds. One in India and the other in the middle of the desert on a sat connection.

It's still using the Ethernet interface though, right? So while it's generally known as Wi-Fi, calling it wireless Ethernet isn't really wrong.

>It's still using the Ethernet interface though, right?
no

>Have you not noticed that ethernet always increases by a factor of ten?
Look at this nigga that don't know about 40GbE.

>Ethernet is the interface
>Wifi is the method of transmission
you shouldn't've said it was then.

That's correct. Calculating parity is REALLY hard on the other drives, so if there are bad sectors or another failure, you will lose the array with little or no chance of recovery.

Raid6 (double parity) can mitigate this, but at that point you will have to have at least 4 drives, so a RAID10 would be ideal (at least one failure tolerated). Unless you need the maximum space or the data is expendable/backed up elsewhere, stay away from 5 and 6.

This is exactly why they won't let this happen. This was stifled back in the 90's already. It would be a huge boom for small and home businesses which could compete with larger companies. That would be too much like free market which is bad to the oligarchs and commisars.