Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 45

Thread: CAT5/5e/6 Cable Performance

  1. #31
    Very good friend of the forum killadaninja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London, United Kingdom.
    Posts
    526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by streaker69 View Post
    Personally, I don't like Vista either, and I won't buy it for my network here at least until it's a couple service packs down the road


    Aymen to that, i, like many others, had some seriouse issues with vista networking mainly wireless related stuff.
    Sometimes I try to fit a 16-character string into an 8–byte space, on purpose.

  2. #32
    Senior Member streaker69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginville, BlueBall, Bird In Hand, Intercourse, Paradise, PA
    Posts
    3,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by killadaninja View Post
    Aymen to that, i, like many others, had some seriouse issues with vista networking mainly wireless related stuff.
    Since the WinNT Sp2 debacle, no one should ever get an MS OS until it's been proven. Hell, I didn't even roll out XPSp3 until several months after it was released. I think I just rolled it to the last couple of machines a couple weeks ago.

    I let all the early adopters find the issues, although I did make the mistake of installing the Kaminsky DNS patch when it was first released. Dan Kaminsky owes me 23 hours of time because of that patch.
    A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

  3. #33
    Very good friend of the forum killadaninja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London, United Kingdom.
    Posts
    526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by streaker69 View Post
    Since the WinNT Sp2 debacle, no one should ever get an MS OS until it's been proven. Hell, I didn't even roll out XPSp3 until several months after it was released. I think I just rolled it to the last couple of machines a couple weeks ago.

    I let all the early adopters find the issues, although I did make the mistake of installing the Kaminsky DNS patch when it was first released. Dan Kaminsky owes me 23 hours of time because of that patch.
    Random transaction number responses?
    Sometimes I try to fit a 16-character string into an 8–byte space, on purpose.

  4. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    468

    Default

    Taking this off topic a bit.
    Question for all the BoFh's on here, what process and/or program do you find best for testing/benchmarking Windows Data transfer speeds between Server and Clients.

  5. #35
    My life is this forum thorin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by radioraiders View Post
    I didn't dig into it. It was 2 WinXP machines connected via a switch, I copied/pasted a DVD (VOB files) from one to another an measured the throughput with a bitrate tool. With the CAT5e transfer speed was around 400Mbps, when I removed them and put the CAT6 the best was about 200Mbps. With the CAT5e back in it was back to 400Mbps... I got pissed off, put the CAT6 cables in my closet and got on with my day...

    Guess I have to read up on ethernet cables....
    There are still a number of things that could cause the effect you're seeing when simply swapping out the cables and not restarting/power-cycling the devices involved. Including but not limited to:
    1) Windows XP speed/duplex auto-negotiation sucks.
    2) Windows would have to renew or release/renew your DHCP settings which could cause some type of synchronization issue.
    3) You haven't mentioned what type of switch/router/FW whatever you're connecting to but that could present similar issues as well (though less likely).

    As for the whole ipconfig thing, I think me meant netstat and if he didn't no biggy, here's another suggestion.

    "netstat -e" which produces something like:
    C:\>netstat -e
    Interface Statistics

    Received Sent

    Bytes 8354196 2738477
    Unicast packets 14882 13716
    Non-unicast packets 1440 289
    Discards 0 0
    Errors 0 0
    Unknown protocols 0
    or maybe "netstat -s" which produces something like:
    C:\>netstat -s

    IPv4 Statistics

    Packets Received = 14955
    Received Header Errors = 0
    Received Address Errors = 0
    Datagrams Forwarded = 0
    Unknown Protocols Received = 0
    Received Packets Discarded = 0
    Received Packets Delivered = 14955
    Output Requests = 13897
    Routing Discards = 0
    Discarded Output Packets = 0
    Output Packet No Route = 0
    Reassembly Required = 0
    Reassembly Successful = 0
    Reassembly Failures = 0
    Datagrams Successfully Fragmented = 0
    Datagrams Failing Fragmentation = 0
    Fragments Created = 0

    ICMPv4 Statistics

    Received Sent
    Messages 24 10
    Errors 0 0
    Destination Unreachable 0 1
    Time Exceeded 0 0
    Parameter Problems 0 0
    Source Quenches 0 0
    Redirects 0 0
    Echos 0 9
    Echo Replies 24 0
    Timestamps 0 0
    Timestamp Replies 0 0
    Address Masks 0 0
    Address Mask Replies 0 0

    TCP Statistics for IPv4

    Active Opens = 300
    Passive Opens = 5
    Failed Connection Attempts = 18
    Reset Connections = 15
    Current Connections = 8
    Segments Received = 8894
    Segments Sent = 8105
    Segments Retransmitted = 102

    UDP Statistics for IPv4

    Datagrams Received = 6046
    No Ports = 18
    Receive Errors = 3
    Datagrams Sent = 5672
    I'm a compulsive post editor, you might wanna wait until my post has been online for 5-10 mins before quoting it as it will likely change.

    I know I seem harsh in some of my replies. SORRY! But if you're doing something illegal or posting something that seems to be obvious BS I'm going to call you on it.

  6. #36
    Senior Member streaker69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginville, BlueBall, Bird In Hand, Intercourse, Paradise, PA
    Posts
    3,535

    Default

    1) Windows XP speed/duplex auto-negotiation sucks.
    It isn't just XP, it's all Windows OS.

    As I suggested previously in this thread, it's best if you're running managed switches where you can set the Speed/Duplex, and you're not running Gig speeds, you should configure everything for 100MbFDX. You'll find that the network will perform better by doing so.

    To test this, set devices to Auto-negotiate and copy a 600MB file and it will take around 20 minutes to copy. Set everything to 100MbFDX and copy the same file, it should copy in less than 3 minutes.
    A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

  7. #37
    My life is this forum thorin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by streaker69 View Post
    It isn't just XP, it's all Windows OS.
    You're right I was too specific /me hangs his head in shame

    I've been hit with this at a number of client sites and LAN parties. You try to copy something large from someone or they try to grab something from you and it's a huge world of pain because one of the end points it's auto-negotiating poorly because of Winblows.
    I'm a compulsive post editor, you might wanna wait until my post has been online for 5-10 mins before quoting it as it will likely change.

    I know I seem harsh in some of my replies. SORRY! But if you're doing something illegal or posting something that seems to be obvious BS I'm going to call you on it.

  8. #38
    Fx_Zero
    Guest

    Default

    cat 5 is voice and data

    you get that though your isp or sometime your isp gives you cat 3 as your stock wire for broadband

    cat 6 is pure data only

    it's only 100 mhz of a difference

    if your going to do a lot of dl it can make a difference plus performance and speed can vary

    now if your let say on cable and your connect directly to the poll then you can expect speed up to 700 kbs plus

  9. #39
    Senior Member streaker69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginville, BlueBall, Bird In Hand, Intercourse, Paradise, PA
    Posts
    3,535

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fx_Zero View Post
    cat 5 is voice and data

    you get that though your isp or sometime your isp gives you cat 3 as your stock wire for broadband
    Oh? You mean to say that CAT3 run by the ISP directly to homes?

    cat 6 is pure data only
    So CAT6 cannot run an analog signal, only a digital signal? That some pretty amazing wire.

    it's only 100 mhz of a difference

    if your going to do a lot of dl it can make a difference plus performance and speed can vary

    now if your let say on cable and your connect directly to the poll then you can expect speed up to 700 kbs plus
    How would one run CAT6 directly to the poll (sic), when Ethernet is not on the poll (sic)? You have either DSL, which uses standard phone line, which is NOT CAT3, Cable which uses Coaxial cable, or FIOS which uses Fiber? Where is the CAT6 going to connect?
    A third party security audit is the IT equivalent of a colonoscopy. It's long, intrusive, very uncomfortable, and when it's done, you'll have seen things you really didn't want to see, and you'll never forget that you've had one.

  10. #40
    Senior Member ShadowKill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fx_Zero View Post
    cat 5 is voice and data

    you get that though your isp or sometime your isp gives you cat 3 as your stock wire for broadband

    cat 6 is pure data only

    it's only 100 mhz of a difference

    if your going to do a lot of dl it can make a difference plus performance and speed can vary

    now if your let say on cable and your connect directly to the poll then you can expect speed up to 700 kbs plus
    Cat 6 provides for performance of 150 MHz above Cat 5.... That's more than double the MHz level of Cat 5.

    Not to mention 6a which provides for 500 MHz performance and supports 802.3an 10GBase-T....



    "The goal of every man should be to continue living even after he can no longer draw breath."

    ~ShadowKill

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •