This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Wasn't it Realtek who made 1GbE popular as well by making the cheap 8111 IC over two decades ago?
And fucked it up by releasing the 8169 with a stepping change that added power management.
The kernel driver didn't know this, so links would silently not come up, and you wouldn't know why till you googled and learned you had to rebuild your kernel for your new motherboard.
Great to (maybe) see 10GbE coming and the initial price sounds reasonable compared to currently avaipable 2.5G and 5G Realtek adapters.
Apparently Linux 6.16 will have the driver included.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-6.16-Realtek-RTL8127A
Realtek itself has demonstrated its RTL8127 NIC working with an unknown switch using cheap CAT5E cables, and the company’s representatives at the booth emphasised this fact. However, we do not know which switch or router the company used. Yet, most 10GbE routers and switches are designed for CAT6 cabling.
Funny update about the cabling they used during the demo. There's really no reason Cat 5e couldn't work for short enough distances with little interference. It's more about the guaranteed minimum distance you can get, 55m with Cat 6 and the full 100m for any rating beyond that.
I am just wondering if it would be better to go straight to fiber instead of ethernet as most have fiber to the home anyway. That should help with future speed upgrades beyond 10Gbit as well.
Fiber is also more power efficient? Why not?
You need more than10Gb/s at home? I mean we all know the 640Kb meme but I'm curious here :-)
I frequently transfer data over the LAN at a higher rate than my internet connection.
Kinda wish it was easier to test the connection speed between devices tbh, unless someone knows a good way of doing it but many devices are so locked down I am not sure how you would.
Even when doing that, the bottleneck is the storage write speed. you can have 1Tb internet connection and it wouldn’t matter unless you have enough users in a home.
NVMEs are claiming sequential write speeds of several GBps (capital B as in byte). The article talks about 10Gbps (lowercase b as in bits), so 1.25GBps. Even with raw storage writes the NVME might not be the bottleneck in this scenario.
And then there's the fact that disk writes are buffered in RAM. These motherboards are not available yet so we're talking about future PC builds. It is safe to say that many of them will be used in systems with 32GB RAM. If you're idling/doing light activity while waiting for a download to finish you'll have most of your RAM free and you would be able to get 25-30GB before storage speed becomes a factor.
That is true, given everyone uses good quality nvmes, which is not always the case, but honestly, 1Gbps fiber is enough for a home with multiple users. Even if, assuming the storage is not the bottleneck, unless you need often very large lan transfers, should be more enough with 1Gbps.
Anyway, I guess i’m sidestepping the initial topic. bottom line: cool cheap tech for companies, not so much for home users.
edit: wording
We don't all have 1Gbps fiber though, but even without it I can still benefit from 1Gbps ethernei
Not all data transfer is sending stuff to storage, streaming your display live at a high bitrate for example never needs to go into storage.
Is more than 1Gbps needed for that? That seems insane, but I'm old and watch stuff in full HD so what do I know.
Low latency means low compression. Low compression means high bandwidth.
1080p60 NDI will be 200mbps. If you are doing 2160p60, that's 800mbps (which is about the limit I would run 1gbe at). Doesn't leave much overhead for anything else, and a burst of other traffic might cause packet drops or packet rejection due to exceeding the TTL.
2.5gbps would be enough.
But I see 2.5gbps and 5gbps as "stop-gaps". Data centers standardised on 10/40gbps for a while (before 25/100 and 100/400) - it's still really common tbh - so the 10gbps tech is cheap.
I don't see the point in investing in 2.5/5gbps
At least it's not Marvell. But, man, can we pay another 17c and get .... I guess not Broadcom as they're waxing seriously dinkish, but who else?
Intel is probably still the gold standard. I'd pay a few bucks more to have something much more reliable.
Intel is probably still the gold standard.
I guess you're not familiar with the i225-v and its variants. Intel burned their reputation for good NICs with that fiasco.
Serious question: What do you use a 10GbE adapter for? Are there ISPs which offer 10gigabit bandwidth? I suppose it would be useful on a LAN
edit:
Yeah, imagine a network backup system that could actually back up your 20 TB media center in a few hours rather than several days.
E.g., NAS on my LAN, especially for streaming high res video to devices in my house.
you're streaming over a Gb worth of video? even a full 4k blu ray rip is less than 1/10 of that.
Well, no I'm not. You're right. I miscalculated how much data was needed for video streaming. Even multiple simultaneous hi-res streams should stream fine with 1GbE.
But as an abstracted idea, you might want high throughput within your LAN for some reaosn, even if an ISP doesn't offer 10Gbps to your house.
I want it cause number is higher…
LAN for sure.
