Eithernet Speed is it worth using Gigabit 1000MBS?

Most folks ethernet system runs on 100Mbs I believe over Cat5 cable.
On the HH3 is a Gigabit output which offers speeds up to 1000Mbs.
Is it worth getting a new gigabit network card to utilkise this port. Would I see any visible differance in speed on downloads or streaming?

Do you have any recommendations for cheap GigE switches? And what sort of speeds are you seeing between machines?
I get about 20 megabytes per second between my PC and Popcorn media player, but they are linked directly using my second network port on my motherboard, I then have the 2 ports on the PC in bridged mode so that the Popcorn can still connect to the net through the PC, which is then connected to the HH3 along with all the consoles and stuff. The main draw back of that method though is that the PC must be left on when wanting to use the Popcorn to view Youtube etc.
Cheers, Andy.

Similar Messages

How do I maximize LAN speeds using Gigabit Ethernet, jumbo frames?

I move a lot of large files (RAW photos, music and video) around my internal network, and I'm trying to squeeze out the fastest transfer speeds possible. My question has to do both with decisions about hardware and what settings to use once it's all hooked up.
This is what I have so far:
-- imac 3.06GHz, macbook pro 2.53GHz
-- Cisco gigabit smart switch capable of jumbo frames
-- Buffalo Terastation Duo NAS (network attached storage), also capable of Gbit and jumbo frames
-- All wired up with either cat6 or cat53e.
-- The sizes of the files I'm moving would include large #s of files at either 15MB (photos), 7MB (music), 1-2GB (video) and 650MB (also video).
-- jumbo frames have been enabled in the settings of the macs, the switch and the buffalo HD.
-- I've played with various settings of simultaneous connections (more of a help with smaller files), no real difference
-- Network utility shows the ethernet set to Gbit, with no errors or collisions.
-- have tried both ftp and the finder's drap and drop
-- also, whenever I'm doing a major move of data, I kick my family off the network, so there is no other traffic that should be interfering.
Even with all that, I'm still lucky to get transfer speeds at 15-20mbps, but more commonly at around 10. The other odd thing I've encountered while trying to up my speeds, is that I might start out a transfer at maybe 60mbps, it will maintain that for about 30-60sec and then it appears to ramp itself down, sometimes to as low as 1-5mbps. I'm starting to think my network is mocking me
I also have a dual band (2.4/5) wireless n router (not jumbo frame capable), but I'm assuming wired is going to trump wireless? (NOTE: in my tests, I have disabled wireless to force the connection through the ethernet).
Can anyone help with suggestions, and/or suggest a strong networking reference book with emphasis on mac? I'm willing to invest in additional equipment within reason.
Thanks in advance!
juliana

I'm going to pick and choose to answer just a few of the items you have listed. Hopefully others will address other items.
• This setup was getting me speeds as high as 10-15MB/sec, and as low as 5-6MB/sec when I was transferring video files around 1-2 GB in size
I would think a single large file would get the best sustained transfer rates, as you have less create new file overhead on the destination device. It is disturbing that the large files transfer at a slower rate.
• Would a RAID0 config get me faster write speeds than RAID1? I have another NAS that can do other RAID configs, which is fastest as far as write times?
RAID0 (Striped) is generally faster, as the I/O is spread across 2 disks.
RAID1 is mirrored, so you can not free the buffer until the same data is on BOTH disks. The disks are NOT going to be in rotational sync, so at least one of the disks will have to wait longer for the write sectors to move under the write heads.
But RAID1 gives you redundency. RAID0 has not redundency. And you can NOT switch back and forth between the 2 without reformatting your disks, so if you choose RAID0, you do not get redundency unless you provide your own via a backup device for your NAS.
• what is the most efficient transfer protocol? ftp? smb? something else? And am I better off invoking the protocol from the terminal, or is the overhead of an app-based client negligible?
Test the different transfers using a large file (100's of MB or a GB sized file would be good as a test file).
I've had good file transfers with AFP file sharing, but not knowing anything about your NAS, I do not know if it supports AFP, and if it does, whether it is a good implementation.
If your NAS supports ssh, then I would try scp instead of ftp. scp is like using cp only it works over the network.
If your NAS support rsync, that would be even better, as it has the ability to just copy files that are either NOT on the destination or update files which have changed, but leave the matching files alone.
This would help in situations where you cannot copy everything all at once.
But no matter what you choose, you should measure your performance so you choose something that is good enough.
• If a client is fine, does anyone have a suggestion as to best one for speed? Doesn't have to be free -- I don't mind supporting good software.
Again just test what you have.
• Whats a good number to allow for simultaneous connections, given the number of files and their size?
If the bottleneck is the NAS, then adding more I/O that will force the disk heads to move away from the current file being written will just slow things down.
But try 2 connections and measure your performance. If it gets better, then maybe the NAS is not the bottleneck.
• What question am I not asking?
You should try using another system as a test destination device in the network setup to see if it gets better, worse, or the same throughput as the NAS. You need to see about changing things in your setup to isolate where the problem might be.
Also do not rule out bad ethernet cables, so switch them out as well. For example, there was a time I tried to use Gigabit ethernet, but could only get 100BaseT. I even purchased a new gigabit switch, thinking the 1st was just not up to the task. It turned out I had a cheap ethernet cable that only had 4 wires instead of 8 and was not capable of gigabit speeds. An ethernet cable that has a broken wire or connector could exhibit similar performance issues.
So change anything and everything in your setup, one item at a time and use the same test so you have a pear to pear comparision.

WRT320n no longer uses gigabit

My two months old WRT320n no longer uses gigabit on my LAN connection. When I copy files I get a maximum speed of 14-15 mb/s. The lights on the router are green for ALL my LAN connections.
Why have this started to occur all of a sudden? I havent changed anything on my computers, the speed just dropped. uPnp disabled, latest firmware.
Message Edited by wrexlam on 08-30-2009 02:03 PM

First of all connect the computer to modem directly...just to check if the modem is working fine..
Try toreflash the firmware of the router and reconfigure it from the scratch...
Go to website linksysbycisco.com/downloads.........insert model no of your router in serach tab......select proper version of your router........download the firmware file......save that file on desktop
Follow these steps to upgrade the firmware on the device : -
Open an Internet Explorer browser page on a computer hard wired to the router...
In the address bar type - 192.168.1.1...Leave the Username blank & in Password use admin in lower case...
Click on the 'Administration' tab- Then click on the 'Firmware Upgrade' sub tab- Here click on 'Browse' and browse the .bin firmware file and click on "Upgrade"...
Wait for few seconds until it shows that "Upgrade is successful" After the firmware upgrade, click on "Reboot" and you will be returned back to the same page OR it will say "Page cannot be displayed".
Now reset your router :
Press and hold the reset button for 30 seconds...Release the reset button...Unplug the power cable from your router, wait for 30 seconds and re-connect the power cable...Now re-configure your router...

Max nodes using Gigabit ethernet and 10G RAC

Does anybody have any experience on the maximum practical number of nodes that can be hooked together using Gigabit ethernet (over copper) as the interconnect? What's the largest such configuration that anyone has done before saturating the private network? I realize that the type of application/database and utilization can affect this (i.e. OLTP vs DW vs etc...) but I'm just trying to get an idea. I heard 1 dba say that they started saturating the network after 4 nodes. Another said the practical limit was 32.
Any real world numbers out there?

Well, without knowing there needs, there isn't much i can offer you. gigE interconnects are about as fast as most locally contained IO devices if you have a quality network to back it up with.
5 nodes is no problem in most cases, however if your concerned and have the budget - look at enterprise class interconnects such as:
http://doc.quadrics.com/quadrics/QuadricsHome.nsf/DisplayPages/Homepage
Most of the "high end" stuff is considered supercomputing for mass bandwidth on shared memory and bus interconnects.
10gigE is probably more affordable than true grid computing interconnects by supercomputing standards.
Grids really shine with planning - and not with brute force. You can make a "grid" that is divided in processing and databases but acts as one "instance" for example dedicate certain batch jobs to certain servers in the cluster, do backups from a backup node and distribute jobs across the network/grid. Your interconnects would usually be the least contention in an RDBMS environment vs your SAN/Storage environment.
Again.. depends on what you want to do and what your scalability requirements are :)

Is it worth using select query on infotype tables

Hi Experts,
I might be posting in the wrong column, but i just need to know is it worth using a select query on Infotype tables (PAxxxx)?? or should we prefer using the function modules for data fetching?
If select is not suggested, what is the reason for that?
Rgds
Prateek

Hi ,
Its not said that u cant write select on PAXXXX tables . Yes of couse LDB are there to fetch the data but it depends on
the requirement when to write a select and when to consider using in LDB .
Generally when you are looking at say 8 to 10 tables of infotypes with free selection , then LDB is suggested to fetch the data .
if you are looking to fetch the data for say some tables for a restricted selection (where clause) then select is used .
If i want to write a program using select only then fetching data from infotypes tables for large no of records will lead to
more time consumption which becomes easier in LDB as they are fetched in hierarchy level based on keys .
Normally it will be a combination of LDB and select querys in the development scenario
Br,
Vijay.

I want to buy MBA 11'' which model is good. i.e. i need speed. I am using Lenovo netbook s-10. Is very slow in opening web pages an also in operating other apps.

I want to buy MBA 11'' which model is good. i.e. i need speed. I am using Lenovo netbook s-10. Is very slow in opening web pages an also in operating other apps.

Put your first emphasis on memory. Don't even consider 2 GB.
Second, maximize your SSD size according to the ability of your wallet. Lastly is your processor.
For what you describe the MBA is plenty fast.

RTFEditorKit is it worth using it.

Hello.
Its been well documented that a RTFEditorkit does not save(persist) images,tables using a JTextPane.
Does anybody have a solution to this or is it worth using it at all.
Feedback appreciated.

You asked for solution.
The code to save/load images below.
If you want to develop your own RTFEditorKit I'll be glad to answer questions.
regards,
Stas
    protected void writeIcon(Element leaf, Writer out) throws IOException {
        AttributeSet attr = leaf.getAttributes();
        ImageIcon icon = (ImageIcon) StyleConstants.getIcon(attr);
        int w = StyleConstants.getIcon(attr).getIconWidth();
        int h = StyleConstants.getIcon(attr).getIconHeight();
        if (icon != null) {
            ByteArrayOutputStream os = new ByteArrayOutputStream();
             * perform saving as PNG image It's MS Word approach to images. PNG
             * format is used because of free licensing of PNG format.
            ImageEncoder pe = ImageCodec.createImageEncoder("PNG", os, null);
            BufferedImage bi = new BufferedImage(w, h, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_RGB);
            bi.getGraphics().drawImage(icon.getImage(), 0, 0, null);
            pe.encode(bi);
            byte[] ba = os.toByteArray();
            int len = ba.length;
            int i;
            StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer(len * 2);
            for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
                String sByte = Integer.toHexString(ba[i] & 0xFF);
                if (sByte.length() < 2) {
                    sb.append('0' + sByte);
                } else {
                    sb.append(sByte);
            String s = sb.toString();
            out.write("{\\pict\\pngblip ");
            out.write(s);
            out.write("}");
    protected void insertImage(String content) {
        int len = content.length();
        //converts to binary representation
        byte[] buf = new byte[len / 2];
        for (int j = 0; j < len / 2; j++) {
            byte b1 = get16(content.charAt(j * 2));
            byte b2 = get16(content.charAt(j * 2 + 1));
            buf[j] = (byte) (b1 * 16 + b2);
        //creates image from binary
        Image img = Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit().createImage(buf);
        ImageIcon icon = new ImageIcon();
        icon.setImage(img);
        if ((icon.getIconHeight() < 0) || (icon.getIconWidth() < 0)) {
            return;
        MutableAttributeSet attr = new DefaultBajtextAttributeSet();
        StyleConstants.setIcon(attr, icon);
        //inserts image in the document
            document.insertString(currentOffset, " ", attr);
            currentOffset++;

Warp Stabilizer and Speed can't be used on same clip

...just my luck that on my first ever Premiere project (CS6) I'm building a timeline and need to use both the Rate Stretch Tool and the Warp Stabilizer on multiple clips. The message, "Warp Stabilizer and Speed can't be used on same clip" took me by surprise.
However, after research here on the Forum, I found a Workaround that I'm deploying:
"Apply the effects, nest and finally apply warp stabilize" Ann Bens
Here's what I did:
In my only sequence -- Sequence 01 -- I highlighted a clip that I had already applied Rate Stretch to.
chose Clip/Nest
This created a Nested Sequence 02 with the clip in it.
In Sequence 01, the clip now says, "Nested Sequence 02"
I applied the Warp Stabilizer to the Nested Sequence 02 clip and it worked. Both Rate Stretch and Warp Stabilizer have been applied to the same clip!
So I've done this like ten times to ten clips and now have 10 Nested Sequence folders.
Questions:
Are my step-by-steps correct?
Do I let these multiple Nested Sequences just keep piling up? (when I right click on a Nested Sequence and choose Clear, I get a warning message that I'm going to delete clip references)
Now that the workaround has worked, is there a way to close -- unlink -- from these Nested Sequence folders? If so how?
I am so Over My Head for a first project. I thought you could always compound Video Effects!
NotOnSugarMountain

Best is to make a copy of the timeline or clips that you are going to multiple nest etc.
If you screw up you can easily replace nested clips etc with a copy from the copy you made.
There is an undo function but most of the time its not enough.

Real-time Blacklist (RBL) Servers are they worth using?

Hi, are Real-time Blacklist (RBL) Servers worth using, and if so what's the best once to use?
Thanks
- Cameron

I agree with Joe. Using just Spamhaus is a pretty good approach. Spamhaus is reasonably conservative about blacklisting servers, so it is less likely that you will reject legitimate servers (which can happen with some more aggressive RBLs).
Also, if you are serious about this, download and carefully follow Pterobyte's "Frontline Defense for Mac OSX Server" <http://osx.topicdesk.com/content/view/38/62/>. By implementing his tutorial, you will be fine tuning your server so that it rejects about 70% - 80% of spam before it reaching your content filter. It increases the efficiency of your setup a great deal.

HT201788 What speed disks should i use in an Apple Superdrive

What speed disks should i use in an Apple Superdrive?
Thanks

It matters little. The slower the burn speed, i.e. 2x or 4x, the better the burn.
What is important is the brand of media: most of here recommend Verbatim, Maxell and Taiyo Yuden.

Internet is really slow over a home Wi-Fi router using Firefox; speeds up dramataically if using Internet Explorer. WHy?

For months I have been battling with slow internet connection speeds with my Wi-Fi router at home. I have changed everything and tested every alternative configuration. I have even changed the router. In the end I have worked out it is not the router, or the OS, or the windows user account that are the problem. It is using Mozilla Firefox. I really want to carry on using Firefox but I cannot. Using Fiirefox I might get a connection speed of about 500Kbs; using IE I get the full 10 Mbs that my ISP (cable) gives. It is not consistent: the problem comes and goes. But when the problem is there, it can be fixed by stopping using Firefox and using IE instead. Why could this be?

The default of the pref network.http.max-connections has been increased from 30 to 256 in Firefox 6+ versions.
Try to decrease the value of the pref <b>network.http.max-connections</b> from 256 to 30 as used in Firefox 3 versions.
*https://support.mozilla.com/kb/Firefox+never+finishes+loading+certain+websites

Are Gigabit speeds achievable, am I using the right RJ45 plugs?

I recently purchased a AEBS, and am so pleased with it. Wireless printing work flawless and I have not be prone to any problems yet.
However, I thought I would try out the Gigabit Ethernet today. I bought a Cat 6 Patch cable with the ends already fitted off the internet for nothing. I cut it in half, and fitted my RJ45 plugs I normally use for Cat 5e cable. This was so I would have two cables.
I plugged one into my iMac G5 to the AEBS, and the other from my MacBook Pro to the AEBS. They both connected fine, but I did not notice any difference in speed transfer when copying a 400mb file across the network from the iMac G5 to the MacBook Pro.
I know Cat 6 cable always has longer plugs fitted, so do I have to buy a different type of RJ45 plug than the ones I use for Cat 5e
I did have another computer connected to AEBS through Cat 5e at 100mbps, so does the router only run as fast as the slowest device attached?
please let me know as I am about to buy a Gigabit switch to plug into the back of the AEBS.
many thanks in advance.

You didn't mention what speed you actually got. On gigabit ethernet it's possible to get rates of about 100MB/sec (i.e. 800Mbps). However, you have to take into account other limitations, notably the speed of the hard drives in the systems. In your case I'd expect the laptop to have the slowest drive... maybe 40MB/sec? So here you're only going to get a maximum of (perhaps) 320Mbps.
In testing I've been able to work around this by copying the file twice. The first time it gets cached in memory on the source machine (assuming the file isn't too big). Then on the second transfer you won't be limited on read speeds again. Of course you'll still see whatever bottlenecks may exist on the destination machine.
Lastly, are you certain the iMac G5 supports gigabit? In searching for specs it seemed that early models didn't have this feature, only 100Mb.

I have a dual boot system. Windows xp and Windows 7. Photoshop elements 7 would not run on Windows 7, so I purchased Elements 13. Slow as christmas. Not worth using at the speed it takes to do work on photos

I have a dual boot system, xp pro and 7 pro. Photoshop elements 7 runs fine on xp, but would not run on windows 7. Bought elements 13, Very, Very slow. To slow to work on photographs. I have bought new ram and done every other optimize ideas I have found online.
Any ideas. Asus anthlon 64 x 2, 4g ram, m2n e motherboard, NVidia video card, 2+ g processor

Please post Photoshop Elements related queries over at
http://forums.adobe.com/community/photoshop_elements

Speed limit of UDP over gigabit ethernet

Dear Community,
I am trying to stream 10-20MBytes/sec over IP multicast from one LabVIEW application to several others. I think that UDP is probably the best way to go but I was wondering what kinds of network speeds people have been able to achieve?
I realize that this can be CPU and OS dependent. I'm using dual Xeon machines over a dedicated gigabit network. We are running Windows XP Pro.
For what it's worth, I am also trying to write the same data to disk at the same time.
Any and all tips appreciated.
Thanks!
Cas

Hi Cas,
80 MB/sec was the TCP/IP rate achieved by the questioner in this link.
http://exchange.ni.com/servlet/ProcessRequest?RHIVEID=101&RPAGEID=137&HOID=50650000000500000002910100&HTHREAD=000102658&UCATEGORY_0=_49_%24_6_&UCATEGORY_S=0
That Q in turn points to an earlier discussion where the results were also good.
Please let me know what kind of result you get. I am interested in this topic.
Trying to help,
Ben
Ben Rayner
I am currently active on.. MainStream Preppers
Rayner's Ridge is under construction

What's the maximum LAN speed with the Thunderbolt to Gigabit Ethernet Adapter on my MacBook Pro?

While I was at Yodobashi Camera yesterday, I got a Thunderbolt to Gigabit ethernet adapter for my MacBook Pro. I figure, since I'm paying for the high speed fiber optic (Sony Nuro), why limit my self to wi-fi speeds at home?
Before connecting the adapter, via wi-fi it the speed was 143.8 Mbps down and 181.5 Mbps up.
After connecting the adapter and making a direct LAN connection to the router, the speed is 783.2 Mbps down and 940.1 Mbps up.
I'm certainly happy with the speed, but since Sony Nuro is supposed to be 2 Gbps down and 1 Gbps up I was wondering what the maximum possible is with this computer and adapter. Before asking the provider I was curious what the maximum specs where.
The ether cable is a 3 m category 6.
Thanks,
doug

It's not really your computer that is getting the 2Gbps download - it is the router/ modem.
If you hooked better/ different hardware up you could probably push those speeds around your network too. The trouble is that most residential hardware is gigabit ethernet not fibre. Fibre cards & cable are expensive in comparison.
The existing hardware may allow you to 'bond or aggregate' multiple ethernet connections into one link to get more speed over ethernet. Obviously this requires more complex routers, switches & a network admin to set it up
Those speeds sound nice, this bottleneck will mean that other devices on you network can't choke up the whole connection & make other users sad.

Eithernet Speed is it worth using Gigabit 1000MBS?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for