My flatmates and I are unsure as how best to upgrade our LAN.
First, I'll describe the setup we have- a Netgear DG834, to which three PCs and a Linksys WAP54G are connected. We have various wireless devices connected as well.
Now, down to the conundrum!
Two of the three wired PCs have gigabit ethernet capability, and the third is just a cheap upgrade away from it.
If we bought a gigabit switch and connected the three PCs and the DG834 to it, using the DG834 as the internet gateway and DHCP server, could we achieve gigabit transfer speeds between the PCs connected to the switch?
My flatmates say no- all data still has to pass through the router, but I'm unconvinced.
What does "gigabit transfer speed" mean to you? If it means 1000 Mb/s actual transfers, you're in for disappointment. If it means "a fair bit better than 100 Mb/s, e.g. the range of 200 Mb/s to 800 Mb/s", then yes, just adding a consumer gigabit switch should get you faster transfers among computers directly connected to the switch using gigabit NICs.
Gigabit switches are inexpensive these days, and typically perform very well. The rest of the system, however, including the hard drives, NICs, file transfer protocols, etc., will chip away from the theoretical 1000 Mb/s to whatever transfer rates you see. 30 MB/s (240 Mb/s) is a reasonable target when just starting out with average single drives, untuned hardware, etc., and this is still a good deal faster than the best 100 Mb/s (8-10 MB/s in practice).
What does "gigabit transfer speed" mean to you? If it means 1000 Mb/s actual transfers, you're in for disappointment. If it means "a fair bit better than 100 Mb/s, e.g. the range of 200 Mb/s to 800 Mb/s", then yes, just adding a consumer gigabit switch should get you faster transfers among computers directly connected to the switch using gigabit NICs.
That is not new to gigabit. That is, it is a rare network that performs at its maximum theoretical bit rate in real-world throughput tests. A well-designed 100Mbps network will achieve a sustained 70-80 Mbps actual throughput. Add clients and workload, and things go down from there. A well-designed 54Mbps 802.11g wireless will achieve a sustained 15 - 20 Mbps throughput. Add multiple wireless users, other nearby networks, and moderate distance, and things go down (sometimes well down) from there.
Two things are different about gigabit compared to these others.
1) Marketing hype is vastly exaggerated (well, I guess that is not a difference compared with wireless hype!). Device manufacturers are adding a gigabit compatible chipset to their NIC and doing little or nothing else to actually achieve that performance level. This is especially true of low-end NAS manufacturers.
2) 1000Mbps exceeds the sustained throughput level for ATA100 hard drives or SATA 150 hard drives (which, following the truism, is much less than 100MB/sec or 150MB/sec), so for the first time the network is (theoretically) faster than the computer's hard drive controller / hard drive.
I've also seen lots of posts to the effect "why don't I get 100 MB/s?" Or "man, they lied to us!", which is why I try to be up-front about actual throughput experienced. Gigabit is much more challenging to the system than 100 Mb/s, so you'll easily see 80% efficiency with 100 Mb/s, but rarely with gigabit. The problem in practice is more acute with gigabit. People who deal with this stuff know this well; newcomers not necessarily.
I've also seen lots of posts to the effect "why don't I get 100 MB/s?" Or "man, they lied to us!", which is why I try to be up-front about actual throughput experienced. Gigabit is much more challenging to the system than 100 Mb/s, so you'll easily see 80% efficiency with 100 Mb/s, but rarely with gigabit. The problem in practice is more acute with gigabit. People who deal with this stuff know this well; newcomers not necessarily.
100% agree. I wasn't disputing anything you said, only adding to it.
The connections would only have to go via the router if the PCs were on seperate Networks, or VLANS. If they are all on the same network ID then the connection will be via the switch.
In order to get the increase in speed you will need to enable Jumbo frames, these are typicaly 9000 bytes instead of 1500 for the standard frame size. Its worth checking if the switch you have supports this, and if so what size it supports.
If you are getting a Gigabit ethernet card I would look at the intel ones. I just bought 4 of these. According to the reasearch I did it offers lower cpu overhead, and is very well supported.
only enable jumbo frames if all your PCs can support them, and.. only if you are transferring large files, else the over heads + wasted space in the packets makes it slower.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.