Winning the Race to Nationwide 5G Connectivity Matters in the Long Run

[scojer]

If you need to transfer large amount of data, wireless will never come close to a wire connection.
Wireless is shared, Wired is not (if using switches).

When I run updates while setting up a new laptop, I'll plug it into a 1gb wired connection. Wireless takes several times longer to download the updates from my server.

When we setup equipment for a training class, and need to copy 40GB's to each training machine, even 1gb ethernet is too slow. We use an external USB 3.0 SSD drive.

Wireless is definitely slower. But, what if there is new equipment that can keep up with it?
We won't know until it's out.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

If you need to transfer large amount of data, wireless will never come close to a wire connection.

While this is strictly true in a technological sense, it's not always true in a consumer availability sense- for a 'stupid' example, see consumer routers greatly exceeding 1Gbps WiFi while still stuck at 1Gbase-T wired. Super-high-bandwidth connections using wide, super-high-frequency channels can easily compete with high-speed wired data links while completely skipping the cable and connector standard mess.

Wireless is shared, Wired is not (if using switches).

While also absolutely true, wireless always being one broadcast domain while each cable link between switched ports is its own, separate broadcast domain, super-high-frequency wireless has such a distance limitation that devices would have to approach wireless charging distances for the highest speeds.

This distance limitation in turn has the effect of creating small broadcast domain 'zones', effectively separating transceiver pairs into separate broadcast domains. Think of the wireless adapters for VR headsets as a basic though perhaps slower/longer range example; you could very likely operate one wireless VR headset per room, even adjacent, whereas the level I'm really stabbing at is even higher frequency and even shorter range (hence the 'wireless charging' example), such that say each cubicle might serve as a separate high-bandwidth-wireless network.

The overall limitation of course is that as distance increases you run into the shared-domain problem of WiFi with devices on your network, and with other networks.

 

[TheOne&OnlyZeke]

Are we all forgetting that none of this will matter
Once 5G launches, all our insides will cook and we will die

those who are left can enjoy super fast speeds due to the culling of the population

 

[nutzo]

Wireless is definitely slower. But, what if there is new equipment that can keep up with it?
We won't know until it's out.

By then I'll be using 10gb wired ethernet, so no, it will not be able to keep up.

 

[IcePickFreak]

This will be a huge milestone for civilization - finally we'll be able to watch a movie, argue with someone 3000 miles away, and "drive" 2-tons of metal & plastic down the road at 70mph AT THE SAME TIME!

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

If you need to transfer large amount of data, wireless will never come close to a wire connection.
Wireless is shared, Wired is not (if using switches).

When I run updates while setting up a new laptop, I'll plug it into a 1gb wired connection. Wireless takes several times longer to download the updates from my server.

When we setup equipment for a training class, and need to copy 40GB's to each training machine, even 1gb ethernet is too slow. We use an external USB 3.0 SSD drive.

Well, part of the problem is that in general, except for us few extremists on here, the consumer market has moved completely away from wired ethernet. Wires are considered old fashioned uncouth and undesirable. In the consumer market people just don't believe that wired connections tend to be more stable, more reliable, faster and lower latency, because wires=old, terrible and ugly. They can't possibly be better, and no one is interested in hearing you try to explain it.

Because of this, consumer demand for wired products is nearly non-existant compared to wireless solutions. This is why consumer Ethernet has been stuck at 1 gigabit for so long. the 100mbit standard was made final in 1995. By 1999 the gigabit standard came out, and we all had it in our motherboards by like ~2005 or so. Since then wired ethernet has languished on the consumer front 10Gbit, 40Gbit and even higher standards exist, but the demand in the consumer market just hasnt been there, so no one has bothered to developed cheaper consumer products that use them, and they languish as high priced enterprise products.

5G is supposed to have a max bandwidth of about 20Gbit, double that of 10Gbit, which - unless you buy enterprise hardware like I have - you probably won't have in your home by the time 5G becomes commonplace.

In the consumer market wireless is about to overtake wired solutions in the performance category, not because wired isn't better, it is by far, but because lowest common denominator consumers don't care, and hate wires, so these faster wired products just aren't developed for the consumer market.

 

[Darunion]

Well, part of the problem is that in general, except for us few extremists on here, the consumer market has moved completely away from wired ethernet. Wires are considered old fashioned uncouth and undesirable. In the consumer market people just don't believe that wired connections tend to be more stable, more reliable, faster and lower latency, because wires=old, terrible and ugly. They can't possibly be better, and no one is interested in hearing you try to explain it.

Because of this, consumer demand for wired products is nearly non-existant compared to wireless solutions. This is why consumer Ethernet has been stuck at 1 gigabit for so long. the 100mbit standard was made final in 1995. By 1999 the gigabit standard came out, and we all had it in our motherboards by like ~2005 or so. Since then wired ethernet has languished on the consumer front 10Gbit, 40Gbit and even higher standards exist, but the demand in the consumer market just hasnt been there, so no one has bothered to developed cheaper consumer products that use them, and they languish as high priced enterprise products.

5G is supposed to have a max bandwidth of about 20Gbit, double that of 10Gbit, which - unless you buy enterprise hardware like I have - you probably won't have in your home by the time 5G becomes commonplace.

In the consumer market wireless is about to overtake wired solutions in the performance category, not because wired isn't better, it is by far, but because lowest common denominator consumers don't care, and hate wires, so these faster wired products just aren't developed for the consumer market.

Sad but true. I will say I have had great experiences migrating people who stream video or game over to wired. They didn't think it would be as good but have had less perceivable lag (when they would previously due to over saturated wifi) and less connection issues.

Only thing wireless in my house is obviously cell phones and tablets.


Wireless is such a marketing game it is disgusting. The sheer amount of people that think 5GHz is better than 2.4GHz in all areas is terrible. "my wifi box is just in the next room, why does my signal suck?" "because most of it bounces off your wall".....

I kind of want to get a 10 or 20gbit backbone to my lan just for the sake of doing it.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I kind of want to get a 10 or 20gbit backbone to my lan just for the sake of doing it.

Ditto, but because of the low volumes compared to gigabit Ethernet, due to the aforementioned lack of consumer adoption, the switches are disgustingly expensive.

Because of this most of my network is still on gigabit on my old managed 24 port ProCurve.

I ran a single dedicated 10Gbit line between my main workstation and my NAS server in My basement to speed that up.

I got a pair of relatively ancient copper "Intel Corporation 82598EB 10-Gigabit AT2 Server Adapter" on eBay a couple of years ago.

Before that I tried to do the same thing with a set of brocade adapters, transducers and fiber, as copper adapters were super expensive, but I had nothing but problems with them.

One went in my desktop, the other in my NAS server, with a direct line between them.

Best I can tell from the PCIe info, they are 8x PCIe gen 1.x devices. (2.5GT/s is gen 1 right? It's funny because the Intel spec page says they are gen 2 and two port, but mine definitely aren't) Both on the desktop and on the server they have the full 8x available to them, and I have had them hit damned near full 10Gbit speeds during file transfers.

02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82598EB 10-Gigabit AT2 Server Adapter (rev 01)
    Subsystem: Intel Corporation 82598EB 10-Gigabit AT2 Server Adapter
    Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
    Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
    Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes
    Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 26
    Region 0: Memory at fa640000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K]
    Region 1: Memory at fa600000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256K]
    Region 2: I/O ports at d000 [disabled] [size=32]
    Region 3: Memory at fa660000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=16K]
    Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3
        Flags: PMEClk- DSI+ D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold-)
        Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=1 PME-
    Capabilities: [50] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
        Address: 0000000000000000  Data: 0000
    Capabilities: [60] MSI-X: Enable+ Count=18 Masked-
        Vector table: BAR=3 offset=00000000
        PBA: BAR=3 offset=00002000
    Capabilities: [a0] Express (v2) Endpoint, MSI 00
        DevCap:    MaxPayload 256 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <512ns, L1 <64us
            ExtTag- AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset-
        DevCtl:    Report errors: Correctable+ Non-Fatal+ Fatal+ Unsupported+
            RlxdOrd- ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+
            MaxPayload 256 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes
        DevSta:    CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr- TransPend-
        LnkCap:    Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, ASPM L0s L1, Exit Latency L0s <4us, L1 <64us
            ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- ASPMOptComp-
        LnkCtl:    ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk+
            ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
        LnkSta:    Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x8, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt-
        DevCap2: Completion Timeout: Range ABCD, TimeoutDis+, LTR-, OBFF Not Supported
        DevCtl2: Completion Timeout: 16ms to 55ms, TimeoutDis-, LTR-, OBFF Disabled
        LnkCtl2: Target Link Speed: 2.5GT/s, EnterCompliance- SpeedDis-
            Transmit Margin: Normal Operating Range, EnterModifiedCompliance- ComplianceSOS-
            Compliance De-emphasis: -6dB
        LnkSta2: Current De-emphasis Level: -6dB, EqualizationComplete-, EqualizationPhase1-
            EqualizationPhase2-, EqualizationPhase3-, LinkEqualizationRequest-
    Capabilities: [100 v1] Advanced Error Reporting
        UESta:    DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
        UEMsk:    DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
        UESvrt:    DLP+ SDES- TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
        CESta:    RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr-
        CEMsk:    RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+
        AERCap:    First Error Pointer: 00, GenCap- CGenEn- ChkCap- ChkEn-
    Capabilities: [140 v1] Device Serial Number xx-xx-xx-xx-xx-xx-xx-xx
    Kernel driver in use: ixgbe
    Kernel modules: ixgbe

 

[IdiotInCharge]

5G is supposed to have a max bandwidth of about 20Gbit, double that of 10Gbit, which - unless you buy enterprise hardware like I have - you probably won't have in your home by the time 5G becomes commonplace.

We're seeing more common implementations of Aquantia's AQ-107 in higher-end consumer motherboards, and at least a few 'consumer' routers from ASUS (and possibly Netgear). These have two 10Gbase-T ports usually with the base application idea not different from yours, a workstation and a NAS, but with the further utility of providing single-port access to both as well as access to and from other wired and also wireless clients at lower speeds.

Actually picked up a board with one on it for my 8700k, as selling the current one and getting the new one made more financial sense than just grabbing one on a NIC and having that grab PCIe lanes from other stuff constantly, or trying to find 10Gbase-T SFP+ transceivers for everything- or compatible DAC cables in a mixed environment.

Better to just bite the bullet and go straight to 10Gbase-T.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

We're seeing more common implementations of Aquantia's AQ-107 in higher-end consumer motherboards, and at least a few 'consumer' routers from ASUS (and possibly Netgear). These have two 10Gbase-T ports usually with the base application idea not different from yours, a workstation and a NAS, but with the further utility of providing single-port access to both as well as access to and from other wired and also wireless clients at lower speeds.

Actually picked up a board with one on it for my 8700k, as selling the current one and getting the new one made more financial sense than just grabbing one on a NIC and having that grab PCIe lanes from other stuff constantly, or trying to find 10Gbase-T SFP+ transceivers for everything- or compatible DAC cables in a mixed environment.

Better to just bite the bullet and go straight to 10Gbase-T.

Nice. Been a while since I went motherboard shopping, so I didn't realize this was the case.

(My x79 [email protected] keeps soldiering on, Iv'e had no reason to upgrade)

10Gbase-T Switches, last time I checked, were still ridiculously expensive.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

10Gbase-T Switches, last time I checked, were still ridiculously expensive.

Yup. You can get SFP+ for next to nothing used on ebay, and I have one- but actual RJ-45 is hard to come by. I went with a smaller HP that still cost an arm and a leg, but it's at least managed, and also has a few SFP+ that I'll figure out how to trunk to an access switch (might have to get some cheap used optics and short fiber patches if fs.com can't build the DACs I ordered).

Main reason was to get it in place as a workstation backplane so I can have the desktop on 10Gbit and perhaps another server on 10Gbit connected to a 10Gbit NAS. May not ever have more than that, but there's just some stuff that is better learned with multiple physical servers and that at a minimum needs a switch .

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

We're seeing more common implementations of Aquantia's AQ-107 in higher-end consumer motherboards, and at least a few 'consumer' routers from ASUS (and possibly Netgear). These have two 10Gbase-T ports usually with the base application idea not different from yours, a workstation and a NAS, but with the further utility of providing single-port access to both as well as access to and from other wired and also wireless clients at lower speeds.

Actually picked up a board with one on it for my 8700k, as selling the current one and getting the new one made more financial sense than just grabbing one on a NIC and having that grab PCIe lanes from other stuff constantly, or trying to find 10Gbase-T SFP+ transceivers for everything- or compatible DAC cables in a mixed environment.

Better to just bite the bullet and go straight to 10Gbase-T.

Nice. Been a while since I went motherboard shopping, so I didn't realize this was the case.

(My x79 [email protected] keeps soldiering on, Iv'e had no reason to upgrade)

10Gbase-T Switches, last time I checked, were still ridiculously expensive.

Actually, I just went to Newegg (because their product pages are easy to search) to update myself. I learned two things.

1.) Under the "Consumer Networking" category, there is no longer a subcategory for "wired networking". Everything is wireless/Wifi.

2.) If you go to the enterprise networking section, and filter on 10 Gig switches, full on, 24+ port 10gig switches are still prohibitively expensive, but if you can live with only 10x 10gig ports, you can get a $900 Netgear. There are also a handful of 24x gigabit switches with two 10gig "uplink" ports that are pretty affordable. This didn't used to be the case.

I guess things are moving along faster than I thought.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Yup. You can get SFP+ for next to nothing used on ebay, and I have one- but actual RJ-45 is hard to come by. I went with a smaller HP that still cost an arm and a leg, but it's at least managed, and also has a few SFP+ that I'll figure out how to trunk to an access switch (might have to get some cheap used optics and short fiber patches if fs.com can't build the DACs I ordered).

Main reason was to get it in place as a workstation backplane so I can have the desktop on 10Gbit and perhaps another server on 10Gbit connected to a 10Gbit NAS. May not ever have more than that, but there's just some stuff that is better learned with multiple physical servers and that at a minimum needs a switch .

I had so much trouble with my brocade BR1020's fiber and SFP+ transducers that I don't ever want to think about that stuff again.

 

[IdiotInCharge]

but if you can live with only 10x 10gig ports, you can get a $900 Netgear.

If you can live with eight, HP has you covered for less- I was set on Netgear until I ran across horror stories with their support, which is supposed to be one of their selling points. HP being HP and being cheaper, and still more ports than I need, it'll get trunked to a 48-port Gigabit switch, sealed the deal.

I had so much trouble with my brocade BR1020's fiber and SFP+ transducers that I don't ever want to think about that stuff again.

The stories I've heard... and what it takes to make used Brocade switches reasonably tolerable in the same room, yeah, I moved on from them too.

If I were purely labbing, they'd be perfect, and that'd be quarantined away from living space, but I'm in an apartment currently and when I move to a house I'm not guaranteed that I'll get that space regardless.

 

[Dekoth-E-]

Oh I'm sorry, when did we actually start getting real 4G speeds here in the US? Last I checked no cell provider was even remotely close to delivering 100mbs much less the 1gbps max speed that actual 4g. So frankly 5G is just marketing bullshit as far as I'm concerned. Verizon can barely deliver more than 12mbps regularly.

 

[Darunion]

Oh I'm sorry, when did we actually start getting real 4G speeds here in the US? Last I checked no cell provider was even remotely close to delivering 100mbs much less the 1gbps max speed that actual 4g. So frankly 5G is just marketing bullshit as far as I'm concerned. Verizon can barely deliver more than 12mbps regularly.

They stopped bragging and advertising the actual speeds. That was only important when getting people to switch from 3G. After enough time and everyone switched over, people forget.

 

[nutzo]

Well, part of the problem is that in general, except for us few extremists on here, the consumer market has moved completely away from wired ethernet. Wires are considered old fashioned uncouth and undesirable. In the consumer market people just don't believe that wired connections tend to be more stable, more reliable, faster and lower latency, because wires=old, terrible and ugly. They can't possibly be better, and no one is interested in hearing you try to explain it.

Since then wired ethernet has languished on the consumer front 10Gbit, 40Gbit and even higher standards exist, but the demand in the consumer market just hasnt been there, so no one has bothered to developed cheaper consumer products that use them, and they languish as high priced enterprise products.

For home use, I don't see much of a need for more than gb Ethernet.

For the office, I've been disappointed at how expensive the 10GBase-t products still are.
It's a small office, so I don't need expensive managed equipment, can't justify $20k for a switch, just need something with a basic web interface.

 

[liffie420]

GPS has a 31 or so satellites, and it's common enough for most of them to be obscured.
Musk is going to put up thousands of satellites. That'll will make a big difference.

Yes I TOTALLY trust Musk to follow through with his wild ideas. Once Tesla has a decade of profitability I might have a bit more faith. I like Musk I really do, I think he has done the almost impossible with Tesla which is to make electric cars more or less viable for the majority of people, even if most still cant afford one, you try actually finding the mythical $35k Model 3. But at the same time he has a VERY bad problem of saying he will do all these things and them never materialized. Hyperloop, never going to happen, yes they have companies working on prototypes of the vehicles, but securing row rights to build the tunnels is probably more monumental than starting Tesla.

 

[pcgeekesq]

Yes I TOTALLY trust Musk to follow through with his wild ideas. Once Tesla has a decade of profitability I might have a bit more faith. I like Musk I really do, I think he has done the almost impossible with Tesla which is to make electric cars more or less viable for the majority of people, even if most still cant afford one, you try actually finding the mythical $35k Model 3. But at the same time he has a VERY bad problem of saying he will do all these things and them never materialized. Hyperloop, never going to happen, yes they have companies working on prototypes of the vehicles, but securing row rights to build the tunnels is probably more monumental than starting Tesla.

Musk isn't afraid to fail. That's why he succeeds.