+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 52
Wireless Networks Thread, Cat5e or 6 for gigabit copper network in Technical; You can run both together thats not a problem just the CAT6 cable is a little larger so more trunking ...
  1. #16
    wesleyw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Kingswinford
    Posts
    2,208
    Thank Post
    225
    Thanked 50 Times in 44 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    30

    Re: Cat5e or 6 for gigabit copper network

    You can run both together thats not a problem just the CAT6 cable is a little larger so more trunking is needed!

    Wes

  2. #17

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,967
    Thank Post
    1,352
    Thanked 1,814 Times in 1,126 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    600

    Re: Cat5e or 6 for gigabit copper network

    Quote Originally Posted by meastaugh1
    Thanks all for your thoughts.

    Tony, I'll likely be implementing a local NAS: on the same switch as the workstations. They will be saving directly to a local HDD then uploading to the NAS. The current application is U-Lead video studio.

    I'll price up both and see how much "future proofing" will cost.
    I would look at setting the upload to NAS as a nightly backup rather than getting students to do it at the end of a lesson. If you have a large project (around 4-6GB) for a group of 3 students, and have 5 groups ... it can be a nightmare to upload them all at once.

    Do you already have the NAS device? Or something similar with the same disk speeds and speed of NIC? Try and connect a few different machines to the same switch and do test uploads and downloads to see what the performance hit it. Will the switch be gigabit on each port? Your original post sort of makes me presume it. If it is not them you are unlikely to see improved performance between Cat5 and Cat6.

    Remember that sometimes the bottle-neck is not with the network but the workstations or storage device itself.

    Good luck with it all.

  3. #18
    meastaugh1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    London/Hertfordshire
    Posts
    890
    Thank Post
    69
    Thanked 85 Times in 70 Posts
    Rep Power
    32

    Re: Cat5e or 6 for gigabit copper network

    Thanks Tony,

    It's certainly something to think about: I'll get someone to do some upload tests when it's in to determine the best usage pattern. We don't have the NAS yet, just a Netgear SC101 as an interim measure, which periodically falls over (typical Netgear!).

    Yes, I intend for the link between the clients and NAS to be fully gigabit.

    Mike

  4. #19
    DMcCoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Isle of Wight
    Posts
    3,476
    Thank Post
    10
    Thanked 500 Times in 440 Posts
    Rep Power
    114

    Re: Cat5e or 6 for gigabit copper network

    although if you have short cable runs to the switch you might not need to replace it immediatly anyway. I have a cat5 room that has been tested and certified to cat 5e standard as they are all short runs (switch is in room) and they are well contained.

  5. #20
    gwendes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,495
    Thank Post
    161
    Thanked 30 Times in 29 Posts
    Rep Power
    26
    Not long until Cat7... Cat6 is an aging tech!

  6. #21

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,966
    Thank Post
    519
    Thanked 2,503 Times in 1,943 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    841
    Quote Originally Posted by gwendes View Post
    Not long until Cat7... Cat6 is an aging tech!
    Is Cat7 gonna be an inch thick with a max length of 12 inches? Seems that the higher the standard, the thicker it becomes and the more difficult to install...

  7. #22

    nephilim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Dunstable
    Posts
    12,181
    Thank Post
    1,651
    Thanked 1,973 Times in 1,445 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    443
    I have CAT6 running to the network points in the wall, but because of budget constraints am forced to use CAT5e as the network cable...

  8. #23

    Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    9,262
    Thank Post
    242
    Thanked 1,572 Times in 1,252 Posts
    Rep Power
    340
    To be honest I would stick with CAT5e. There's a huge difference in cost between CAT5e, CAT6 and CAT6a cables and secondly labour will be considerably more too as the cable is thicker and much more difficult to install.

    CAT6 will support 10Gbps upto 55metres and CAT6a upto 100metres, so Becta's advise of CAT6 isn't that good really. Most networks adhere to the 100metres rule, so in practice CAT5 and CAT6 have little technical differences between them. CAT6a is what you're after for true future proofness (if there's such a word).

    Personally however I think at the rate wireless is developing, speeds are fast approaching that of 10/100 ethernet, so it's only a matter of time before it reaches 1000Mbps equivalent speeds. I'd also bet it'll be a fraction of the cost of CAT6 too

  9. #24
    apeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Lost
    Posts
    1,612
    Thank Post
    95
    Thanked 115 Times in 111 Posts
    Rep Power
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Personally however I think at the rate wireless is developing, speeds are fast approaching that of 10/100 ethernet, so it's only a matter of time before it reaches 1000Mbps equivalent speeds. I'd also bet it'll be a fraction of the cost of CAT6 too
    Oh what a headache that would be to rely solely on wireless..

  10. #25
    DMcCoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Isle of Wight
    Posts
    3,476
    Thank Post
    10
    Thanked 500 Times in 440 Posts
    Rep Power
    114
    I'm still waiting for WiFi PXE boot and multicasting before it could be useful for very much.

  11. #26

    Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    9,262
    Thank Post
    242
    Thanked 1,572 Times in 1,252 Posts
    Rep Power
    340
    I think imaging over wireless is a long, long way off. Would probably take days to image a few workstations

    Wireless is generally a headache now as it's limited in bandwidth comparatively to wired, but as time goes on APs will get faster and will easily be more cost effective than running CAT6a everywhere.

  12. #27
    mjs_mjs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    bexleyheath, london
    Posts
    1,020
    Thank Post
    37
    Thanked 111 Times in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Wireless is generally a headache now as it's limited in bandwidth comparatively to wired, but as time goes on APs will get faster and will easily be more cost effective than running CAT6a everywhere.
    But you will still have to run cat5/6/7 to the AP... not forgetting that that 54/108/future speeds wireless bandwidth is shared amongst the devices connected. Where as cables is dedicated from switch to host.

  13. #28

    Michael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    9,262
    Thank Post
    242
    Thanked 1,572 Times in 1,252 Posts
    Rep Power
    340
    But you will still have to run cat5/6/7 to the AP... not forgetting that that 54/108/future speeds wireless bandwidth is shared amongst the devices connected. Where as cables is dedicated from switch to host.
    You're right, but you're looking at one or two ports per room at most. CAT6 wouldn't be a problem at this quantity, especially bending around corners whilst keeping it looking tidy.

  14. #29

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    998
    Thank Post
    132
    Thanked 58 Times in 51 Posts
    Rep Power
    24
    As GrumbleDook mentions, check out the performance of the NAS. A lot of devices simply don't offer read/write speeds capable of taking advantage of gigabit networks. It may actually be cheaper to buy/build a fileserver that has the performance that you require.

  15. #30
    mjs_mjs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    bexleyheath, london
    Posts
    1,020
    Thank Post
    37
    Thanked 111 Times in 95 Posts
    Rep Power
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by fafster View Post
    As GrumbleDook mentions, check out the performance of the NAS. A lot of devices simply don't offer read/write speeds capable of taking advantage of gigabit networks. It may actually be cheaper to buy/build a fileserver that has the performance that you require.
    i didn't really answer the question; if it's one room with a switch in the room or even next door - there will be little difference between 5e and 6. And i would got for 5e personally (asumming upto say 20m) With cat6/fiber uplinks back to the network. Get a gig switch and spend the money on improving the NAS.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Cat5e cable: UTP/FTP/STP?
    By eean in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 15th June 2009, 01:16 PM
  2. terminating CAT5E network cables in network cabinets
    By broc in forum Network and Classroom Management
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10th July 2007, 11:54 AM
  3. Gigabit Network technology
    By HodgeHi in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2nd May 2007, 09:32 AM
  4. Gigabit Fibre NIC's
    By tscnmuk in forum Hardware
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10th January 2007, 10:44 AM
  5. Gigabit network, should I or shouldn't I?
    By dezt in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 13th March 2006, 03:22 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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