Just wait till we talk about total bits and bytes and throughput v. payload throuput and Gibibits v. Gigibits...

So even if something is advertised at 1000, it's possible it will never get that? Even if all the hardware it's connected to is not the issue? I mean, fair enough if you design your switch to be at 1000 speed, but the hardware that's connected to it aren't optimised properly and don't quite make it that far.

It can never get to that. Here's why.

When you move a piece of data from one device to another, that's not all that has to be used. In a standard network, there are many layers to ensure that the data reaches the intended device.

Let's say that you have a piece of data 1KB in length which is being sent over TCP/IP on an Ethernet network. This is known as the packet payload. The payload is supplied a TCP header which provides critical information on the exact conversation in use. This header/payload combination then gets an IP header which provides information on which networks are in use. This packet is then encapsulated in an Ethernet frame for use on the local subnet.

At a minimum, the TCP header adds 20 bytes, the IP header adds another 20 bytes, and the Ethernet frame adds 38 bytes, for a total minimum overhead of 78 bytes. Technically, this is part of the transfer, but in effect, it reduces your payload throughput. In the above 1KB example, you lose about 3.7% of your bandwidth on just the one packet. There are other things that get in the way such as ARP requests and replies, the initial handshake to start the conversation, retransmits, and so forth.

In practice, one should never plan to get more than 90% of link bandwidth, and that's often generous. Many chips max out at about 80% to 85% just for 100Mbps, and it's been around for 15 years or so. Gigabit chips, as stated before, still often do not get up to the higher speeds, and then it often requires using jumbo frames (which can be up to 9KB in size, compared to the norm of about 1.5KB) to reduce overhead.

And as you said, the hardware all has to be able to feed it at this speed. Hard drives can't provide the data that fast except in very expensive, high-end RAID arrays. A data bus might not be able to pass the data that fast even if it is supplied, and the NIC may fall short. Even the CPU becomes a factor in some cases. Then you have the equipment on the other side -- it has to be able to accept the data, pass it to its own storage, and write it that fast. It's all very hard to do at such speeds.

Ah, well if I can at least get up to HDD transfer speed, that would be super. Mostly because:
a) There won't be much point in getting a faster switch for streaming if my HDD can't provide it the data that quickly!
b) The video don't lag when I watch them on my PC, so HDD speed seems to be enough.

So you think the average 1000 rated switch should get up to at least HDD speed?

Rated? Maybe. Like I said, some gear rated for 1000 is slower than some rated for 100. Check reviews for throughput -- that's what I meant by research. Find out how others have used them and look for the ones that work.

Gah, I can't find a decent review for these switches, all the websites Google gives me are those "combined review" type of sites that pulls it's information from Amazon and the like.

Anyway, I'm thinking either the Netgear or D-Link switch. msy doesn't tell me the model of the switches, but I've noticed that Netgear and D-Link's websites each only lists one 5 port gigabit switch, so I can assume that this is them. About the only decent information I've been able to find comes from the manufactures' websites. In terms of performance, the D-Link says:
"The D-Link DGS-1005D 10/100/1000 Mbps Gigabit Switch features a non-blocking switching architecture that filters and forwards packets at full wire-speed for maximum throughput. An 8,000 MAC address table provides scalability for even the largest networks."

While the Netgear says:
"# 10x faster than Fast Ethernet—Gigabit Ethernet delivers speeds of up to 1000 Mbps†
# Significant boost in performance for bandwidth-intensive applications like video conferencing, video streaming, and gaming
# Eliminates bottlenecks in your network"

The "full wire-speed" thing in the D-Link sounds impressive, but that's probably just marketing speak. The D-Link is the most expensive one at $4 more, so I can assume it's the better one? Maybe? Who knows?

My experience has been that NetGear's consumer lines have slipped badly in quality over the last few years, while D-Link has become one of the major players. Given a choice between the two, I'd go with D-Link.

Yep, I was thinking the D-Link too. Might go pick one up and see how it goes. Anything else I need to know? I can just plug my existing cables in and we're good to go? How can I test it's speed?

Also, I get the feeling I might be able to use this new switch to solve my current problem of my router not allowing access to the rest of the network. Would it be possible to rig my network in such a way that my PC is able to access the network, while still getting internet from my router? The tricky point is, access to the network, as well as PPPOE for the internet, use the same network jack.

The switch merely passes traffic. It requires a router to get traffic to anywhere other than the current subnet. When you get it, you need to run a cable from one of the switch ports on the router (basically, one of the internal network interfaces) to an interface on the switch (any of them -- it doesn't matter). You can then plug other devices into the switch, or into the remaining internal network interfaces on the router, and everything will be able to connect to everything else.

To test the speed, copy a file from one device to another over the network. If you get speeds in excess of 12MB/sec, that's in excess of 100Mbps (12MB/sec * 8b/B = ~100Mb/sec), and anything in excess of that is gigabit speeds. You'll need to use large files to measure the exact speeds -- DVD ISOs work well -- but anything exceeding 200Mbps is good for consumer gear.

I don't know what's causing your access issues for the other systems, but what you can do is connect the switch where you currently connect your PC, and connect the PC to the switch just like you connect the other devices.

Just picked up the D-Link switch, plugged it it, worked right away! It even has little lights on the front that tell you what speed each port is running at, and it will even tell you if the cable is damaged! I'm getting the "1000" light on my PC and PS3 (but only 100 on the router obviously), and I just tried streaming a 1080p video to my PS3. Not only that, but I turned on the "lossless quality, crazy bitrate" setting in PS3 media server, which normally makes videos lag like the dickens. The video played perfectly fine, not a single stutter! Problem solved! Thanks guys!

As to my network setup, it looks like this:
Server room (with routers, switch etc)>cable to my room (consisting on a network plug in the wall)>router>new switch>PC. Any computers that are before my router (i.e connected to the server) cannot be seen by my PC, nor can they see me. If I connect my PC to the plug in the wall, and bypass the router entirely, I can see the other computers.

Yes, the way that network is set up, that would be expected (you wouldn't be able to see PC's outside the router, nor would they see you).

I once had a Belkin router that let me see the other PC outside of the router, but not with this Netgear one. I can't, like, use a splitting thingy to plug the switch and the router into the wall at the same time? Actually, that's probably not a good idea, as I'll probably end up sharing my internet with the entire network

Switches have no protection against the outside. In addition, your ISP would see multiple requests for ISPs coming from your modem, which is probably a violation of your terms of service. (If you have Telstra, I think you get the death penalty for that, too.) Switches should always be inside the router's network.

Martin Blank wrote:Switches have no protection against the outside. In addition, your ISP would see multiple requests for ISPs coming from your modem, which is probably a violation of your terms of service. (If you have Telstra, I think you get the death penalty for that, too.) Switches should always be inside the router's network.

Yep, Telstra are harsh like that.

Damn, I was hoping to find a solution better than plugging my PC directly into the network in order to view other people's shares.

I think I've solved the networking issue. What I've done is connected the wall cable into the switch where my PC and PS3 are connected. I can no longer share internet to my PS3, however I can still stream videos to it, and view other people's shares. In order to access the internet, I just need to login to the PPPOE connection as I used to do pre-router. Is this secure? Like, people can't access my PPPOE connected internet via my switch or something?