I look forward to the video with your Pi cluster connected to a Teralynx 10. On a more realistic note have you tested an AQC113 with any of the nvme breakout boards yet?
In my homelab I run a Nextcloud for the family with 25 users, 10 wireguard vpns to remote networks I manage and about 50 services for personal use. There's about 40 computers regularly phoning in through openvpn. And all that on a 75Mbit down/35Mbit up dsl with zero complaints from any user.
Does it lag or throttle if all 25 users are doing video calls (nextcloud talk)? I was thinking of using a raspberry pi4b to run a nextcloud home server
I started off at the student dorm with 512/64... kbit/s. 12 rooms, 16 port switch, one mini-itx server and a hacked modem. Only got complaints when one of the guys used torrents because that saturated the memory of the modem due tot the high amount of connections for the LAN-address translation. Of course, back then you didn't have video streams - just a few guys downloading movies up to 1 GB in size or so. Still biggest jump I remember for home internet because it was just *always there*... Now getting speeds that are at least 8100 times higher (4 Gbit/s symmetrical) because it is the same price. Struggling to get the right cheap / low power LAN setup though.
That transition to the Micro Center bit was smooth. I've been watching a lot of computer/tech 'tube recently and that was one of the best I've seen. Clever, natural segway to the sponsored portion, it make sense and fit with the narrative of the episode.
I dream of being able to do that, but limited to 70Mbs where I am currently (FTTC). Proper FTTP is due in a year or so, so I'll keep dreaming until then ... 😀
Frontier Internet here in DFW, TX. I have their 500 Mbps plan and it works great for me and the Wife. My brother is on their 2 Gbps plan but I told him even with him, his wife, and their son all streaming 4k videos they're still nowhere close to saturating their pipe (they're all Wi-Fi so that's an extra layer of possible speed issues), so they are basically wasting money and that 1 Gbps is a much more economical plan to choose.
I'd be ecstatic if I could get 500/500 where I'm at. I'm limited to cable and their highest is 1000/35. I'm on 600/20. Abysmal upload speeds for NAS backups and file uploads to servers :/
@@Crystawth This is criminal. I think the bare minimum should be upload speed at least 25% of download speed. 50% of download speed is a good compromise to residential connection. Of course, symmetric is the best, but 50% of the download speed is a realistic compromise, and most people would be ok with this.
If you’re going to get 1Gbps or of course higher make sure your LAN supports 2.5Gbps at the least because most ISPs do over provision so if you do have 1Gbps you’re leaving potential performance on the table(notwithstanding as mentioned in the video the lowest common denominator) if you don’t.
A couple of years ago, I upgraded my local network from 100Mb to 1Gb and thought WOW, this is pretty cool, after all transferring files at 115MB/s compared to 11.5MB/s was quite a jump. Recently I bumped up from 1Gb to 2.5Gb and oh man was that worth the investment. All my equipment comes with the standard 1Gb Ethernet ports, but everything I have on my network also has a bunch of unused USB3.0 ports... So Amazon had a sale on 2.5Gb to USB3.0 adapters... and $75 bucks later, I've increased my local file transfers from 115MB/s to 280MB/s (which is I believe as fast as my spinning rust drives will go). I'm a happy camper and I should've done this a long time ago.
I have a gigabit internet plan but my Fios gateway comes with a 10 Gbe and 3x 2.5Gbe ports; I didn’t have to upgrade my WAN speeds to get 2.5 or even the 10Gb speeds on my *local* network though
@@Rushil69420 I might've tried for 10Gb but since USB3 is limited to 5Gb, using 2.5Gb adapters was the best I could do. All my machines are mini PC's (Beelink SER5, 2 x S12, GMKTec G3 and a Jonsbo N2 with a N100 mini itx) so putting NIC cards isn't possible in my case.
@@Rushil69420 True, but with these PC's only having only a single M.2 PCIE. I'm not aware of any M.2 PCIE adapters that are 10Gb and offer some sort of storage or do you have something specific in mind?
Agree with your conclusion. I spent a lot of money on Intel 10Gb NICs and a prosumer 10Gb switch and, in the end, it worked but rarely made a difference day to day. It might make sense if you're copying big video files between systems regularly. I settled on 2.5Gb which is more budget friendly, runs cooler, and is silent since 2.5Gb usually doesn't need fans.
One usecase might be to separate SSD storage from your workstation. Point-to-point links over 10G can make sense if you have a SAN. The SAN handles backups and allows you to mess with your workstation without worrying about your data.
Full 10Gig local network but watching to help you with the UA-cam algorithm 😀 UniFi Cable Internet UMD Pro SE FS S5860-24XB-U (Wish Unifi had a switch with 10G + POE on all ports ) UMD Pro SE U7 Pro Max CalDigit 10GB thunderbolt Synology NAS RS 1619+ w/10G card
Also people don’t understand throughput is the potential for a medium to carry data.. the more devices you have, the less bandwidth to go around. Also, the pipe coming to your house also has a bandwidth that you share with all your neighbors
I have Comcast's 'basic' offering while I'm waiting for some work to be done in my area to get fiber, 90% of the time it's fine but that other 10% is painful. Internal network is 10GbE, I've played with a couple 40GbE switches but they were all too loud for my apartment dwelling self, here's hoping Mikrotik comes out with a switch with more than 2 QSFP+ ports sometime soon. Also worth mentioning if you don't mind SFP+ 10GbE can fairly inexpensive, Mellanox CONNECTX-3 cards and fiber patch cables/DAC's are pretty cheap and there are a couple 8 port 10GbE SFP+ switches out there you can get for under $300.
@@marcusbrown1853 Yeah it's kind of weird how little it get's mentioned by a lot of tech tubers when talking about 10GbE networking, even 40GbE Mellanox connectX-3 cards are pretty cheap but finding a switch in my case is a bit more of an issue. If you can put up with the noise and higher power consumption (i.e. network stuff in a garage or basement) or you can find something like a mellanox sx6012 for a good price even 40GbE isn't that expensive if you go second hand.
2.5g frustrates me because 10g predates it (by like a decade) and if they put 10g on everything like they do 2.5, it would be just as cheap as 2.5, unfortunately that's not the situation we find ourselves in, so motherboards with 10g onboard are rarer and way more expensive typically :( - if you're like me, and fairly constantly moving large volumes of data from machine to machine that are nvme equipped (or have large arrays of hard drives and good caching) 10g is certainly the way to go... you can get switches for reasonable prices (unlike 40g and 100g) and at the end of the day, it's still only 1.25GB/s which for large files (like a project full of 4k video files for example) is still pretty slow, especially when the underlying pcie4 nvme drives can do bursts up to 7GB/s (56gb/s), or on my pcie5 nvme drives, up to 14GB/s (112gb/s). Another really big issue is the lack of pcie lanes on modern consumer cpus. they barely give you enough for a nice gpu, the onboard stuff (like (usually 1g) ethernet, sound, usb,etc)), and like 3 or 4 nvme drives and that's it. I really wish they'd start giving us somewhere in the neighborhood of 64(ish) pcie lanes (at least enough for a 16x (video) card, 2 8x cards, 4 (x4) m.2 slots,, plus the normal suite of onboard devices.
I don't think it's so much of a problem for the average user, or even IT Pro's really. What you are describing is a niche case really. If you want built in 10Gb Nics and masses of PCIe lanes then you need professional workstation gear. Threadrippers etc... I had 10Gb setup for a while between my main PC and main NAS, but realised it just wasn't necessary. Have settled on 2.5Gb for my main PCs and NAS now and it's fine. Obviously if you have specific needs for moving large amounts of data round a network, then it's time to get the credit card out! The vast majority of users don't really need that though.
@@dwinterx 10g is 4x faster than 2.5g, 10x faster than 1g... why would someone argue against that? and as i said, 10g is STILL WAAAY slower than what modern ssd's can do...
@@joshhardin666while I also wish more consumer grade devices came with 10 Gbe there are very good reasons 2.5Gbe was much more quickly and widely adopted then 10. Firstly, the first few generations of 10Gbe NICs were insanely power hungry and ran incredibly hot. A few years ago I bought a used server 10Gbe NIC from around 2010, because it was just getting affordable on the used market. I put it in my (desktop case) Proxmox machine and it had stopped responding by the time Proxmox had booted. I looked at the logs and it had hit over 100 degrees Celsius within 30 seconds of power on. This thing needed a tornado of airflow just to run in an idle state. Obviously subsequent chipsets (eg X520, X540) were not as bad in terms of heat and power consumption, but they (the X520 in particular) still needed plenty of cooling, more than a typical desktop could reliably be counted on to have. They'd have very little chance in an SFF or USFF format case, unless you strapped a 10k rpm fan on them, which most consumers wouldn't accept for noise reasons. It is only very recently that we are finally starting to see very low power 10Gbe NICs that could run in pretty much any PC case with limited cooling (and therefore be capable of getting a manufacturer warranty for consumer use) eg the AQC107 and later chipsets. But those are still 4x or more the price of 2.5Gbe NICs, and most people don't have a NAS so are just not willing to pay the premium for a feature they don't perceive they have a need for. The other big thing is existing cabling. 10Gbe really wants Cat 6 if you're going further than a few centimetres, whereas 2.5Gbe will run on Cat 5e across any distance you would be likely to find in an ordinary house.
@@joshhardin666 I also feel you on the pcie lane thing - I would looooove a consumer grade, high single thread speed, 6 or 8 core CPU with chipset (eg AMD Ryzen7700X with X670, i7 13700 with Z790 etc) with, like 64+ pcie lanes. I would even take, eg 80 Gen 3 lanes over the 40 or so Gen 4/5 lanes we can currently get with top end chipsets, because I could add lots of Gen 3 nvme drives (even if they're slower than Gen 4, they're fast enough for network storage IMHO) and still have plenty of lanes for 10Gbe or faster adapters. But it seems you and I are in the minority, most people seem to want no more than 24 pcie lanes (one GPU, plus a maximum of 2 nvme drives) and they just want those lanes to be as fast as possible, even if there's nothing out there that can actually use the bandwidth. Given that this is what the majority of buyers seem to want, I understand chipset and motherboard manufacturers going after the mainstream market. After all they're running a business. So I think people like you and me just need to open our wallets and go for refurbished servers.
@@joshhardin666 not arguing against it, but it's not as simple as 10Gb = automatically better. You're cabling for a start will need to be of a higher standard, switches etc. If I wanted to do 10Gb from the front of my house to my garden office, it would cost a fortune and would probably need fiber due to the length of the runs. However I can still achieve 2.5 over the same distance with Cat5e.
Great video, but you missed somthing vital: symmetric bandwidth. Most people going over 100mbit down need more than 10 up mostly due to the potential to saturate with the idle traffic from multiple smart devices.
My main issue is the asymetric download/upload. You have to jump to the most expensive plan to get 40 mb/s upload. Anything else is 20 and that's not enough to host streaming stuff and game servers on. 40 mb/s works but I'm not about to pay 2.5x for a measly 20 mb/s increase. Guess I'm stuck waiting for docsis 4 to roll out in my area by the end of the decade.
I mean, my ISP (Orion Telekom in Serbia) charges $16 for their cheapest, 1Gbit/sec package and $18 for their most expensive 4.5Gb/sec , so I decided to go wild and spend that 2 extra dollars for the 4.5 GB, even though I will never actually use it, but YOLO and all of that that kids say :-)
I went with mine that charges around $25 for 10 gigabit in Spain and yeah, the speeds are great but I hate not being able to get the PPPoE credentials of my router 😭
@@playlist5455 Bruh in Kuwait 400 Mbps FTTH plan cost 125USD and this is the fastest in the country, but using 5G with montly data cap 10TB cost 32USD and speed from 850Mbps to 1.3Gbps DL and 175 Mbps upload😅
I'm moving into a new house, and part of the reno is running wiring. As I have a server rack, I'm intending to run 10G within the rack, with two 10G feeds out to a pair of 2.5G switches, one for each floor. While I know this kind of topology isn't the best (should all be running back to a central switch) I don't think my client traffic's going to be high enough to notice, especially with a 10G backhaul. As for WAN speed, my ISP caps out at 1Gbit fibre (Thanks SaskTel), so that's what I'm going to end up with.
I remember a lot of self hoster forums talking about Cat6E, Cat7 and using 10gb this and that and how to "future Proof". When I point out most consumer end products are 1gb limit the 10gb is useless and also not including the bottlenecks of I/O speeds. People are so into their feelings. I enjoyed your informative video of not shaming the 1gb plebs.
Excellent presentation. Thank you. Latency and upload speeds are really critical once you get over 150-200m download speeds. Spectrum in our area now defaults to 400+ downloads but they have never, ever, increased the uploads from 10m over the past two decades. You cant host anything significant or even do off-site backups with 10m upload speeds. The latency with Spectrum can get pretty rough too with 80-100ms times being fairly common in my area.
Not that I have 100GbE in my home, we have some customers with that speed LANs and ya, I know how to configure all that nastyness. I watched this and your other videos because it is always informative content, easy to listen to with a good pace . Regardless if I know the content or not, your videos are some of the better tech videos. It has been nice to see your channel grow. I can remember you be in a live stream saying you don't expect to grow too big. Look at you grow! Love your channel My Guy.
In Switzerland, I can get 10Gbit/s internet connection (not symmetrical though) for roughly 45 $ and I was already able to download at around 500 MB/s from a public server.
I think this video is great. I have met so many people who have said something along the lines of I just got the 5 gig (or 10gig) plan because it's faster for streaming or websites load faster. I always tell them that they're wasting money. Most family's could use 500 mb to 1 gig and be perfectly happy. Furthermore they wouldn't use any more than that. I live by myself and my daily use is about 10mb. It'll peak around 20 mb unless I'm downloading a game. I have 500 mb for my apartment and the only reason I went that high was because the only plan with less bandwidth was 300 mb and it's the same price and it came with a lower spec's router.
Currently going for 4 gbit because the intro price is the same for any speed, I get a fast modem, and after the year I can downgrade and get a lower price. But it is a struggle to get the local networking for a reasonable price. Upgrading the connectors on the cable and the wall mount. Getting a 10 Gbit switch (MikroTik just released a managed 4 port UTP for 200). Getting cheap Intel 540's 10 Gbit/s NIC's but finding out that they don't conserve power on idle (and they are PCIe v2.1 8-lane cards!). Realtek fortunately now has released a low power 5 gbit/s chip which I can put in my main PC, but Linux drivers require the latest kernel. I would not recommend it for the average person, sticking to 1 or 2.5 Gbit/s is currently the sane option. Interestingly, if you're going to put down new cables in a house you might want to consider fiber for that too. SFP+ modules (so far not a real consumer thing) are cheaper and use less power for fiber connections. I still have too much UTP stuff already in the house, including 6A for the home office.
With example of games it would be limited by how Steam or whatever you use to download games is implemented. Steam's download process is heavily CPU bound and on slower CPU you won't be able to utilize even a gigabit, and even on fastest ones you'll get capped by CPU way before you utilize 5.
This is interesting, but to the end consumer is just one more cost: now he have to buy the module too. Something like this may become popular in the next 5 - 7 years, when 10Gbps local fiber starts to get affordable and common. I don't think cooper scales well (local area network) much beyond 2,5Gbps - too much "ifs" and "don,ts". Fiber will be the way. And THEN, we could start to see SFP+cages - because one could buy 1, 2,5, 5 or 10 Gbps module - depending on use case. As of now, one 2,5Gbps ethernet adapter is cheap, uses the same CAT5e that we all already have and works with 1Gbps and 100 Mbps too. Would make very little sense to sell something with one SFP+ cage, outside of workstation/server market. 5 to 7 years from now? It may very well change.
WiFi is a hoot. Get 2500Mb/s all while connected to a 1000Mb/s network cable, they must be using some super secret quantum compression to get that performance. Modern Wi-Fi performance can be amazing at times but a simple network cable generally always wins.
I really liked the video. Best explanation on the basics of networking speeds. I really want to see the WiFi speeds video you mentioned. I just built my first NAS and am having issues understanding if the file transfer speeds I’m getting are good or not 😑. Your video is helpful though
I was watching this video with my 40Gbe internal network to hopefully find justification for going beyond. Realistically, most my high bandwidth workloads cap out at 25Gbe anyways, more than that takes some effort, but the extra headroom is nice. but yeah, going out to WAN, even gigabit can be over kill at times, though, again, very nice to have the headroom whenever possible.... just in case....
I have TB/USB4 on all my most recent laptops/Mini PC's and do full backups to TB4 NVMe 4.0 NVM 1.4 X4 SSD's, I'm just waiting for an affordable NVMe NAS solution with enough PCIe lanes and fast enough ports to cope with all that potential 4.0/5.0 bandwidth...;)
I've gotta agree with you. Anything over one gigabit is just a rooster measuring contest for most homes. Even on holidays with all my in-laws and their various electronics packed onto the same network, I've seen my router report very brief spikes of 600 Mbps utilization with about 55 on average.
10:34 - speaking of network-related content, please could you make a brief video on properly mounting+mapping external SMB/NFS shares in Docker containers (let's say Ubuntu Server on Proxmox host, with Dockge as GUI frontend)? it's still a mystery to me -_-
Thanks for the honest information that most people do not need super high speed Internet. I feel sorry for the parents whose kids constantly complain about slow Internet and the time it takes to download new games. As you show it does not require a very fast Internet connection to actually play online games. Years ago I used to host LAN parties and have over a dozen people playing online war games on a 8Mb connection without any issues. The problem is the short attention span and instantaneous gratification needs of our current generation of kids. Years ago online games came first on multiple CDs then DVDs and it took along time to install them (manually changing discs). The Internet has allowed game sizes to explode and that is now the only delivery option. Even in the example you showed (6.5 hours) if the game download was started before going to bed it would be done by the time you woke up. Today's kids cannot wait so families pay more than they need to just to shorten initial download times. It is like purchasing a Ferrari to go 150MPH to buy groceries that just set in the refrigerator when you get them home. Teach your kids some patience and go with a slower cheaper Internet plan. Once they get out in the real world they are going to do a lot of waiting whether they like it or not.
Speed and quality varies greatly, ISPs use speed ad a measurement but quality is usually bad, saturation and latency is often with higher speed packages as they Do not care about quality.
Great video! I was going crazy thinking about this same topic, but you're right, there's no need to go overboard with my use case. I'll do just fine with 1G. I just hate that YT won't let me turn on the notification bell for some reason.
Perfect timing! I just re-subscribed to disney and was blaming the lag and buffering on my ‘paltry’ 1Gbs connection. Now I realize I should be peeved (more madder?) at disney for their server/compression/Quantumania
I have Netflix 4k. The MOST bandwidth I've ever seen it using is an average of 35Mbps for a high quality, detailed in motion background movie (a nightmare for image compression). Strictly speaking, someone alone, using the internet ONLY for Netflix, could watch this same 4k demanding movie on a 60Mbps connection without compromises. The 60Mbps are because the buffering isn't perfect, Netflix isn't happy to give us a steady streaming - they like much better to give us rapid bursts with nothing in between. So, I don't think they would give the same quality to someone with a 40Mbps connection - they would up the compression, in order to keep their bursty nature. With 60Mbps I think (THINK, I don't know, as I have 500/500) they would be happy enough to stream at high quality 4k.
Moving to 25g from 10g. But more because I can than because I need it. You know, “mine’s bigger blabla”. And same for internet, have 5G but same, because I can. Oh and yeah to please arr suite for the Linux iso collection 🙈
For basic web and streaming you will not notice anything much once past 20mbps. As the video states latency then becomes the factor that makes a connection feel faster or slower. Unfortunately I don't think there are any home broadband providers that honestly try and differentiate on this basis. Now, as a self-employed nerd working in IT, I have the fastest connection available to me (1.2 Gbps) as I regularly transfer 1 to 2 TB of data per month. Also just finished the migration of my home network to 10G now that the switching equipment is finally starting to reach a reasonable point for price and power efficiency. I do however conceed that the 10G home lan was mostly a vanity project and that it makes almost no difference to my day-to-day experience.
Im happy with the 300/170 Mbit plan... but is expensiv in my country but it can go up to 1.1Gbit/s But internel between NAS and Main system i need the 10Gbit/s+ On the secound System i need around 1Gbit/s or max. 2.5Gbit/s All the Support systems for Home automation, Pi hole and more ther need only 1Gbit/s but PoE as long the Uplink to Main and Secound system is high enough to handel the communication.
I always amaze my coworkers when I say I only have about 90 to 100 Mbps when on Zoom and Teams calls, they have been talked into that high end plan being pushed when stating work from home. They are the ones with audio and video issues because of latency and bufferbloat.
I can't believe how much better the USA internet is compared to Australia. We are severely limited on upload speed because the government doesn't want people hosting things. Fiber to the home but most people on 50-100mbit plans.
We have 200gb plan. If I’m online MSFS and wife is streaming 4K Netflix, along with the smart home stuff connected to the house we’ve never gone over 30mb/s. I think a lot of people pay for the 500mb/1gb stuff and they never use a quarter of it. Just throwing money away.
You can still use a 10g line when your router en switch have atleast one 10g poort and the rest is one 1g. For any one client 1g is enough (that is why everything's in my house is 10g😂) to keep it short if you have 10 clients using 1g it can use up the total line
Imop the Right Answear is "It Depends" Both on what you do and where (Lan VS WAN) Edit: I`d say that everything over Single Gig stuff gets complicated for End Users
Yeah totally depends on your country and location. And on the stuff you are doing: it isnt the same to download a steam game than to download files from mediafire or similar, you wont gain anything if the server limits your speed below 1Gbit. But local speeds are another thing, having a local NAS and server is fun.
WAN 1Gb/130Mb passive fibire which is quickest provider have LAN 2.5G and experiment 10G between budget am5 all nvme storage pod and a am5 processing node (going to skip 9950X and keep 7950X until zen6 ) Those 10G a bit power hungry and likely get downgraded soon 😅
I havent watchednthemwhole video but one limiting factor is the storage in your PC as well I have a 2/2 connection but I have never gotten over 1.4gb on steam due to PC limitations
Wow, surprised at your internet prices. I always thought you guys did WAY cheaper than us (UK) when it came to tech.... I suddenly love my 900Mbps @ £29/$38 a month, a whole lot more. Nice vid to put things in context. 👍
standard 4K BluRay has a bitrate around 40Mbit, 1080p high quality videos are well below 20Mbit, streaming services are using shitty quality compression to save costs on their servers, artificially pretending their content has high quality, anyone who downloads stuff should probably have own local storage server or NAS, as mentioned in the video you can even download whole game overnight and be ready next day
Only have 300/30 mbps on wan side. Have considered going to 1G/50M on wan side. LAN side is 1G/2.5G to end devices. 10G for servers, my desktop, and between most switches.
I have 6 Mbps, which is plenty for streaming 1080p content from UA-cam, TikTok, etc. It would probably be too slow for 4K streaming, but I don't have a 4K TV. Watching this video at 1080p is only using about 1 Mbps. I still struggle to comprehend how people use 160x as much bandwidth.
I am honestly surprised to see that we're finally getting 2.5GbE on motherboards. Got used to having 1GbE on literally every motherboard I've seen or used in the past decade that it just seemed like it would never happen lol
This is a game i like to play. With a 100 Mbit connection, you have, roughly 10MB per second, and that translates to about 800GB per day, 24 TB per month, and 288TB per year. Even using half of that, with 150 TBytes you can download 2250 UHD Blu-ray per year (at 70Gbytes a piece), which is about half of the Marvel movies. You have to watch of those movies per day, so good luck. At 200GB per game, you'll have to buy 750 games per year. If you ignore your large downloads, you'll find out that your connection mostly fiddles with its thumbs. As someone brilliantly said, you cannot wait any faster. So, even a well setup 50Mbit connection will get you more than 99% of the users will ever need. Speed is fun, though, even if it is a short lasting drug. I still remember, from the dialup days, when I got my first flat ISDN connection. That feeling was 100 times more intense than when I got a 1 GBit connection. Still, I would not mind at all that 50Gbit! Anyway, this channel is fun. Thank you!
??? I’ve got a 100Mbit connection, and that’s hardly how I feel about it. Most game downloads take at least an hour, but I still remember that downloading GTA V took most of sunset to sunrise, especially when my connection was throttling down to 50mbit for part of it. Loading up my steam library on my new laptop (before steam family sharing helped with download speeds) took forever. And whenever I’m downloading something, it uses the full 100Mbit (because that’s hardly much to expect from a website or steam or whoever in this day and age) and so everyone else’s internet slows to a crawl, may as well be dial-up. So I’ve got to time my downloads to when no one else is using it, again like it’s some dial-up and I have to worry about not hogging the phone line. Honestly, arguing against fast internet speeds feels like you’re arguing for a POS Chromebook: how much do you really do anything other than web browsing? You don’t really need anything more powerful than a RasPi, do you? Also, I’d argue that networking is a lot like FPS: you don’t _feel_ the average, you feel the 1% and 0.1% lows. So what if a gigabit is wildly overkill for the however many hours of the day that my network usage is basically 0, the time where I’m actually using my network connection is the only time that really matters. Again, dial-up is still wildly faster than 0Mbit/s.
I have 1gig internet and 1gig lan and the geek in me really wants 10gig lan, however I also monitor my network with librenms and it clearly shows that I'm utilising about half a percent of my current bandwidth, I totally don't need anything faster than what I have. I'm no where near hitting the limits of my current setup. The only time I max out my current network is for 5-6 minutes at 3am when my servers does backups or when I've ripped a bluray and spend a couple of minutes uploading it to my nas, the rest of the time I'm using less than 1% of what my network is capable of. As for my wan connection I have never, ever managed to max out my 1gig connection, even torrenting something popular roughly 300 mbit/s is about the highest I've seen. Doesn't change the fact that my inner geek still craves 10gig, but I have absolutely no rational reason to upgrade.
I have a very nice UniFi setup with 2.5gbe to my APs and I can barely get 900 mbps on my 1gbe fiber connection when on WiFi. When moving local files I can get about 1400 mbps though. (6ghz wifi)
I run 2 Gig internet because if one of my machines decides to max out its 1gig port, i still have plenty of bandwidth left over for all my other devices.
I have 5gig internet with Google fiber. The only servers that I see hit near 5gig is Google servers. Next best is battlenet at 2.5 gig. Next is steam at 2gig. And it downhill from there. Most everything server that i can download something big enough to hit its max speed on, their end tops out at 1gig. I have heard of some people getting faster speeds from steam.
I need about 1000/200mbps and yes, I know mbps*8 = megabyte. Reason for this: Downloading & Uploading stuff, since my both Selfbuild-NASes (CSE-826 case) are at two different colos near my house. Reason for this is, that I want my equip to be cooled sufficiently and for Cloud-Gaming, since I have beefy GPUs in my Servers.
Pretty jealous of those 2,5, and 10gb prices...Not a chance I need nor could benefit from it. But come on! We don't even have a 2 gb option where I am, yet.
That thing with ping over lte/5g, ive had for 6 years dsl hybrid from Telekom which just is dsl, mine was 16 mbit/s, and lte which i had the maximum that was aviable at the tower, 50mbit/s, and my ping was only around 30ms over lte. so yeah over lte/5g is not that bad as everyone says. Now i have fibre gigabit and the pingis abviosly lower, bit at 500 mbit/s it was the same
The highest use case I would have personally is three people streaming 4K video while a fourth person is doing some web browsing. So 100 Mbps should be just fine if I can get that speed reliably all the time.
Hahahaha in Germany we can be happy to get 50 Mbit/s or more. Even 16k is a great Connection in offside regions. (I am Lucky and have a fibre to the Home with 500/300.)
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Please pin my comment
A great point...
Is that all it takes?!
@@JeffGeerling Can I do the same on your channel? 😂
lol
Well, you know 800 GbE exists now...
Don't tell my wallet that
Well now we know what Bret's next video will be on....
@@RaidOwlif you're concerned about Jeff Geerling revealing secrets to your wallet, you may need to speak to someone about your mental health
I look forward to the video with your Pi cluster connected to a Teralynx 10. On a more realistic note have you tested an AQC113 with any of the nvme breakout boards yet?
@@andrewharwood7843yes! Can get 5-6 Gbps
The JPEG compression on the video compression chart was a nice touch.
In my homelab I run a Nextcloud for the family with 25 users, 10 wireguard vpns to remote networks I manage and about 50 services for personal use.
There's about 40 computers regularly phoning in through openvpn. And all that on a 75Mbit down/35Mbit up dsl with zero complaints from any user.
Does it lag or throttle if all 25 users are doing video calls (nextcloud talk)?
I was thinking of using a raspberry pi4b to run a nextcloud home server
I started off at the student dorm with 512/64... kbit/s. 12 rooms, 16 port switch, one mini-itx server and a hacked modem. Only got complaints when one of the guys used torrents because that saturated the memory of the modem due tot the high amount of connections for the LAN-address translation. Of course, back then you didn't have video streams - just a few guys downloading movies up to 1 GB in size or so. Still biggest jump I remember for home internet because it was just *always there*... Now getting speeds that are at least 8100 times higher (4 Gbit/s symmetrical) because it is the same price. Struggling to get the right cheap / low power LAN setup though.
That transition to the Micro Center bit was smooth. I've been watching a lot of computer/tech 'tube recently and that was one of the best I've seen. Clever, natural segway to the sponsored portion, it make sense and fit with the narrative of the episode.
Not gunna lie, being able to download the newest video game release in 4-5 minutes on Steam is really nice.
Big tru
I dream of being able to do that, but limited to 70Mbs where I am currently (FTTC). Proper FTTP is due in a year or so, so I'll keep dreaming until then ... 😀
Before i didn't bother downloading games that i wanted to test when i had slow internet, now it's so easy.
Frontier Internet here in DFW, TX. I have their 500 Mbps plan and it works great for me and the Wife. My brother is on their 2 Gbps plan but I told him even with him, his wife, and their son all streaming 4k videos they're still nowhere close to saturating their pipe (they're all Wi-Fi so that's an extra layer of possible speed issues), so they are basically wasting money and that 1 Gbps is a much more economical plan to choose.
I'd be ecstatic if I could get 500/500 where I'm at. I'm limited to cable and their highest is 1000/35. I'm on 600/20. Abysmal upload speeds for NAS backups and file uploads to servers :/
I hate the asymmetric plans...
@@Crystawth This is criminal. I think the bare minimum should be upload speed at least 25% of download speed. 50% of download speed is a good compromise to residential connection. Of course, symmetric is the best, but 50% of the download speed is a realistic compromise, and most people would be ok with this.
If you’re going to get 1Gbps or of course higher make sure your LAN supports 2.5Gbps at the least because most ISPs do over provision so if you do have 1Gbps you’re leaving potential performance on the table(notwithstanding as mentioned in the video the lowest common denominator) if you don’t.
A couple of years ago, I upgraded my local network from 100Mb to 1Gb and thought WOW, this is pretty cool, after all transferring files at 115MB/s compared to 11.5MB/s was quite a jump. Recently I bumped up from 1Gb to 2.5Gb and oh man was that worth the investment. All my equipment comes with the standard 1Gb Ethernet ports, but everything I have on my network also has a bunch of unused USB3.0 ports... So Amazon had a sale on 2.5Gb to USB3.0 adapters... and $75 bucks later, I've increased my local file transfers from 115MB/s to 280MB/s (which is I believe as fast as my spinning rust drives will go). I'm a happy camper and I should've done this a long time ago.
I have a gigabit internet plan but my Fios gateway comes with a 10 Gbe and 3x 2.5Gbe ports; I didn’t have to upgrade my WAN speeds to get 2.5 or even the 10Gb speeds on my *local* network though
@@Rushil69420 I might've tried for 10Gb but since USB3 is limited to 5Gb, using 2.5Gb adapters was the best I could do. All my machines are mini PC's (Beelink SER5, 2 x S12, GMKTec G3 and a Jonsbo N2 with a N100 mini itx) so putting NIC cards isn't possible in my case.
@@bokami3445 Eh, don’t be so sure: You can make miracles happen with M.2 PCIE adapters lol
@@Rushil69420 True, but with these PC's only having only a single M.2 PCIE. I'm not aware of any M.2 PCIE adapters that are 10Gb and offer some sort of storage or do you have something specific in mind?
Agree with your conclusion. I spent a lot of money on Intel 10Gb NICs and a prosumer 10Gb switch and, in the end, it worked but rarely made a difference day to day. It might make sense if you're copying big video files between systems regularly. I settled on 2.5Gb which is more budget friendly, runs cooler, and is silent since 2.5Gb usually doesn't need fans.
Congrats on 100K Subs!!!
57 away!
One usecase might be to separate SSD storage from your workstation. Point-to-point links over 10G can make sense if you have a SAN. The SAN handles backups and allows you to mess with your workstation without worrying about your data.
Full 10Gig local network but watching to help you with the UA-cam algorithm 😀
UniFi Cable Internet
UMD Pro SE
FS S5860-24XB-U (Wish Unifi had a switch with 10G + POE on all ports )
UMD Pro SE
U7 Pro Max
CalDigit 10GB thunderbolt
Synology NAS RS 1619+ w/10G card
Yeah 10G is the sweet spot for enthusiasts
Is that switch really $3k+ (shows $5k CAD) That's a big chunk
I'm going to be using this video for clients... You did such a good job explaining it with all of the pretty graphics
Also people don’t understand throughput is the potential for a medium to carry data.. the more devices you have, the less bandwidth to go around. Also, the pipe coming to your house also has a bandwidth that you share with all your neighbors
I hate that I caught the little easter egg at 1:30 😂 that was slick lol
Shame shame shame
@@RaidOwl Is it some sort of bow-chicka-wow-wow thing?
@@acubley you could say that
Thought it was the walls speaking 😂
disliked for being unnecessarily vulgar
I have Comcast's 'basic' offering while I'm waiting for some work to be done in my area to get fiber, 90% of the time it's fine but that other 10% is painful. Internal network is 10GbE, I've played with a couple 40GbE switches but they were all too loud for my apartment dwelling self, here's hoping Mikrotik comes out with a switch with more than 2 QSFP+ ports sometime soon.
Also worth mentioning if you don't mind SFP+ 10GbE can fairly inexpensive, Mellanox CONNECTX-3 cards and fiber patch cables/DAC's are pretty cheap and there are a couple 8 port 10GbE SFP+ switches out there you can get for under $300.
10gig LAN segments with SFP+ over fiber and DACs and some used NICs was a lot cheaper than I would have guessed.
@@marcusbrown1853 Yeah it's kind of weird how little it get's mentioned by a lot of tech tubers when talking about 10GbE networking, even 40GbE Mellanox connectX-3 cards are pretty cheap but finding a switch in my case is a bit more of an issue. If you can put up with the noise and higher power consumption (i.e. network stuff in a garage or basement) or you can find something like a mellanox sx6012 for a good price even 40GbE isn't that expensive if you go second hand.
2.5g frustrates me because 10g predates it (by like a decade) and if they put 10g on everything like they do 2.5, it would be just as cheap as 2.5, unfortunately that's not the situation we find ourselves in, so motherboards with 10g onboard are rarer and way more expensive typically :( - if you're like me, and fairly constantly moving large volumes of data from machine to machine that are nvme equipped (or have large arrays of hard drives and good caching) 10g is certainly the way to go... you can get switches for reasonable prices (unlike 40g and 100g) and at the end of the day, it's still only 1.25GB/s which for large files (like a project full of 4k video files for example) is still pretty slow, especially when the underlying pcie4 nvme drives can do bursts up to 7GB/s (56gb/s), or on my pcie5 nvme drives, up to 14GB/s (112gb/s). Another really big issue is the lack of pcie lanes on modern consumer cpus. they barely give you enough for a nice gpu, the onboard stuff (like (usually 1g) ethernet, sound, usb,etc)), and like 3 or 4 nvme drives and that's it. I really wish they'd start giving us somewhere in the neighborhood of 64(ish) pcie lanes (at least enough for a 16x (video) card, 2 8x cards, 4 (x4) m.2 slots,, plus the normal suite of onboard devices.
I don't think it's so much of a problem for the average user, or even IT Pro's really. What you are describing is a niche case really. If you want built in 10Gb Nics and masses of PCIe lanes then you need professional workstation gear. Threadrippers etc... I had 10Gb setup for a while between my main PC and main NAS, but realised it just wasn't necessary. Have settled on 2.5Gb for my main PCs and NAS now and it's fine. Obviously if you have specific needs for moving large amounts of data round a network, then it's time to get the credit card out! The vast majority of users don't really need that though.
@@dwinterx 10g is 4x faster than 2.5g, 10x faster than 1g... why would someone argue against that? and as i said, 10g is STILL WAAAY slower than what modern ssd's can do...
@@joshhardin666while I also wish more consumer grade devices came with 10 Gbe there are very good reasons 2.5Gbe was much more quickly and widely adopted then 10.
Firstly, the first few generations of 10Gbe NICs were insanely power hungry and ran incredibly hot. A few years ago I bought a used server 10Gbe NIC from around 2010, because it was just getting affordable on the used market. I put it in my (desktop case) Proxmox machine and it had stopped responding by the time Proxmox had booted. I looked at the logs and it had hit over 100 degrees Celsius within 30 seconds of power on. This thing needed a tornado of airflow just to run in an idle state. Obviously subsequent chipsets (eg X520, X540) were not as bad in terms of heat and power consumption, but they (the X520 in particular) still needed plenty of cooling, more than a typical desktop could reliably be counted on to have. They'd have very little chance in an SFF or USFF format case, unless you strapped a 10k rpm fan on them, which most consumers wouldn't accept for noise reasons.
It is only very recently that we are finally starting to see very low power 10Gbe NICs that could run in pretty much any PC case with limited cooling (and therefore be capable of getting a manufacturer warranty for consumer use) eg the AQC107 and later chipsets. But those are still 4x or more the price of 2.5Gbe NICs, and most people don't have a NAS so are just not willing to pay the premium for a feature they don't perceive they have a need for.
The other big thing is existing cabling. 10Gbe really wants Cat 6 if you're going further than a few centimetres, whereas 2.5Gbe will run on Cat 5e across any distance you would be likely to find in an ordinary house.
@@joshhardin666 I also feel you on the pcie lane thing - I would looooove a consumer grade, high single thread speed, 6 or 8 core CPU with chipset (eg AMD Ryzen7700X with X670, i7 13700 with Z790 etc) with, like 64+ pcie lanes. I would even take, eg 80 Gen 3 lanes over the 40 or so Gen 4/5 lanes we can currently get with top end chipsets, because I could add lots of Gen 3 nvme drives (even if they're slower than Gen 4, they're fast enough for network storage IMHO) and still have plenty of lanes for 10Gbe or faster adapters. But it seems you and I are in the minority, most people seem to want no more than 24 pcie lanes (one GPU, plus a maximum of 2 nvme drives) and they just want those lanes to be as fast as possible, even if there's nothing out there that can actually use the bandwidth. Given that this is what the majority of buyers seem to want, I understand chipset and motherboard manufacturers going after the mainstream market. After all they're running a business. So I think people like you and me just need to open our wallets and go for refurbished servers.
@@joshhardin666 not arguing against it, but it's not as simple as 10Gb = automatically better. You're cabling for a start will need to be of a higher standard, switches etc. If I wanted to do 10Gb from the front of my house to my garden office, it would cost a fortune and would probably need fiber due to the length of the runs. However I can still achieve 2.5 over the same distance with Cat5e.
1GbE WAN with 10GbE LAN is enough for me right now. Excited to see what the future holds, in terms of fun reasons to improve consumer network infra.
Great video, but you missed somthing vital: symmetric bandwidth. Most people going over 100mbit down need more than 10 up mostly due to the potential to saturate with the idle traffic from multiple smart devices.
My main issue is the asymetric download/upload. You have to jump to the most expensive plan to get 40 mb/s upload. Anything else is 20 and that's not enough to host streaming stuff and game servers on. 40 mb/s works but I'm not about to pay 2.5x for a measly 20 mb/s increase.
Guess I'm stuck waiting for docsis 4 to roll out in my area by the end of the decade.
I mean, my ISP (Orion Telekom in Serbia) charges $16 for their cheapest, 1Gbit/sec package and $18 for their most expensive 4.5Gb/sec , so I decided to go wild and spend that 2 extra dollars for the 4.5 GB, even though I will never actually use it, but YOLO and all of that that kids say :-)
I went with mine that charges around $25 for 10 gigabit in Spain and yeah, the speeds are great but I hate not being able to get the PPPoE credentials of my router 😭
1gig is between $70 & $100 a month here in the the USA. 😢
@@playlist5455 Bruh in Kuwait 400 Mbps FTTH plan cost 125USD and this is the fastest in the country, but using 5G with montly data cap 10TB cost 32USD and speed from 850Mbps to 1.3Gbps DL and 175 Mbps upload😅
3:04 --> Now that's the Internet service I want :-)
1:28 You didn't 😂
Idk what you’re talking about 🙃
🤣
I totally didn’t catch that lol
I'm moving into a new house, and part of the reno is running wiring. As I have a server rack, I'm intending to run 10G within the rack, with two 10G feeds out to a pair of 2.5G switches, one for each floor. While I know this kind of topology isn't the best (should all be running back to a central switch) I don't think my client traffic's going to be high enough to notice, especially with a 10G backhaul. As for WAN speed, my ISP caps out at 1Gbit fibre (Thanks SaskTel), so that's what I'm going to end up with.
I remember a lot of self hoster forums talking about Cat6E, Cat7 and using 10gb this and that and how to "future Proof". When I point out most consumer end products are 1gb limit the 10gb is useless and also not including the bottlenecks of I/O speeds. People are so into their feelings. I enjoyed your informative video of not shaming the 1gb plebs.
Setting up a faster cluster for NASes and video-editing workstations is probably all that is needed outside overall 1 Gigabit home set-up
People buy high bandwidth networking only for fun. If you don't run a datacenter, 1gb LAN will be plenty for a while.
Excellent presentation. Thank you. Latency and upload speeds are really critical once you get over 150-200m download speeds. Spectrum in our area now defaults to 400+ downloads but they have never, ever, increased the uploads from 10m over the past two decades. You cant host anything significant or even do off-site backups with 10m upload speeds. The latency with Spectrum can get pretty rough too with 80-100ms times being fairly common in my area.
Not that I have 100GbE in my home, we have some customers with that speed LANs and ya, I know how to configure all that nastyness.
I watched this and your other videos because it is always informative content, easy to listen to with a good pace . Regardless if I know the content or not, your videos are some of the better tech videos. It has been nice to see your channel grow.
I can remember you be in a live stream saying you don't expect to grow too big. Look at you grow! Love your channel My Guy.
In Switzerland, I can get 10Gbit/s internet connection (not symmetrical though) for roughly 45 $ and I was already able to download at around 500 MB/s from a public server.
Man, when he said "Network", I really felt that.
Same
I think this video is great. I have met so many people who have said something along the lines of I just got the 5 gig (or 10gig) plan because it's faster for streaming or websites load faster. I always tell them that they're wasting money. Most family's could use 500 mb to 1 gig and be perfectly happy. Furthermore they wouldn't use any more than that. I live by myself and my daily use is about 10mb. It'll peak around 20 mb unless I'm downloading a game. I have 500 mb for my apartment and the only reason I went that high was because the only plan with less bandwidth was 300 mb and it's the same price and it came with a lower spec's router.
bruh, us in australia consider 100mbps to be fast internet, if you have 250mbps, you're living like a god
Currently going for 4 gbit because the intro price is the same for any speed, I get a fast modem, and after the year I can downgrade and get a lower price. But it is a struggle to get the local networking for a reasonable price. Upgrading the connectors on the cable and the wall mount. Getting a 10 Gbit switch (MikroTik just released a managed 4 port UTP for 200). Getting cheap Intel 540's 10 Gbit/s NIC's but finding out that they don't conserve power on idle (and they are PCIe v2.1 8-lane cards!). Realtek fortunately now has released a low power 5 gbit/s chip which I can put in my main PC, but Linux drivers require the latest kernel. I would not recommend it for the average person, sticking to 1 or 2.5 Gbit/s is currently the sane option.
Interestingly, if you're going to put down new cables in a house you might want to consider fiber for that too. SFP+ modules (so far not a real consumer thing) are cheaper and use less power for fiber connections. I still have too much UTP stuff already in the house, including 6A for the home office.
With example of games it would be limited by how Steam or whatever you use to download games is implemented. Steam's download process is heavily CPU bound and on slower CPU you won't be able to utilize even a gigabit, and even on fastest ones you'll get capped by CPU way before you utilize 5.
Normalize putting SFP+ ports in a motherboard!
This is interesting, but to the end consumer is just one more cost: now he have to buy the module too. Something like this may become popular in the next 5 - 7 years, when 10Gbps local fiber starts to get affordable and common. I don't think cooper scales well (local area network) much beyond 2,5Gbps - too much "ifs" and "don,ts". Fiber will be the way.
And THEN, we could start to see SFP+cages - because one could buy 1, 2,5, 5 or 10 Gbps module - depending on use case. As of now, one 2,5Gbps ethernet adapter is cheap, uses the same CAT5e that we all already have and works with 1Gbps and 100 Mbps too. Would make very little sense to sell something with one SFP+ cage, outside of workstation/server market.
5 to 7 years from now? It may very well change.
“People saying they’re fine with 100Mbit”
Mate the majority of Australians on NBN can’t even get that 😭
My heart hurts for you
WiFi is a hoot. Get 2500Mb/s all while connected to a 1000Mb/s network cable, they must be using some super secret quantum compression to get that performance. Modern Wi-Fi performance can be amazing at times but a simple network cable generally always wins.
Imma data hoarder. Cloud backups need lots of bandwidth if you actually want to complete one!
Currently on 250 Mbps up/down WAN and upto 100 Gbps IB on LAN. :)
We went for 2.5 Gigabit Google fiber but cut back to 1 gigabit. Unless you're running your own server or homelab, you don't need more than that.
Must be nice to have a MircoCenter... we don't have those in Arkansas!!
I think Little Rock needs one
I really liked the video. Best explanation on the basics of networking speeds.
I really want to see the WiFi speeds video you mentioned. I just built my first NAS and am having issues understanding if the file transfer speeds I’m getting are good or not 😑. Your video is helpful though
The symmetric upload speed for the fiber connection is what we like the most.
I was watching this video with my 40Gbe internal network to hopefully find justification for going beyond. Realistically, most my high bandwidth workloads cap out at 25Gbe anyways, more than that takes some effort, but the extra headroom is nice. but yeah, going out to WAN, even gigabit can be over kill at times, though, again, very nice to have the headroom whenever possible.... just in case....
Like that Houston store.
Same
I absolutely love my 10Gbe connection from my NAS to my Mac. After buying all the Unifi kit, it only set me back just over 2000€ 🤣
😭
I have TB/USB4 on all my most recent laptops/Mini PC's and do full backups to TB4 NVMe 4.0 NVM 1.4 X4 SSD's, I'm just waiting for an affordable NVMe NAS solution with enough PCIe lanes and fast enough ports to cope with all that potential 4.0/5.0 bandwidth...;)
I've gotta agree with you.
Anything over one gigabit is just a rooster measuring contest for most homes.
Even on holidays with all my in-laws and their various electronics packed onto the same network, I've seen my router report very brief spikes of 600 Mbps utilization with about 55 on average.
For me the upload speed is more important than the download speed. Headroom for peak times is also something to bear in mind. Great vid though
10:34 - speaking of network-related content, please could you make a brief video on properly mounting+mapping external SMB/NFS shares in Docker containers (let's say Ubuntu Server on Proxmox host, with Dockge as GUI frontend)? it's still a mystery to me -_-
Thanks for the honest information that most people do not need super high speed Internet.
I feel sorry for the parents whose kids constantly complain about slow Internet and the time it takes to download new games.
As you show it does not require a very fast Internet connection to actually play online games. Years ago I used to host LAN parties and have over a dozen people playing online war games on a 8Mb connection without any issues.
The problem is the short attention span and instantaneous gratification needs of our current generation of kids. Years ago online games came first on multiple CDs then DVDs and it took along time to install them (manually changing discs). The Internet has allowed game sizes to explode and that is now the only delivery option.
Even in the example you showed (6.5 hours) if the game download was started before going to bed it would be done by the time you woke up. Today's kids cannot wait so families pay more than they need to just to shorten initial download times. It is like purchasing a Ferrari to go 150MPH to buy groceries that just set in the refrigerator when you get them home.
Teach your kids some patience and go with a slower cheaper Internet plan. Once they get out in the real world they are going to do a lot of waiting whether they like it or not.
Speed and quality varies greatly, ISPs use speed ad a measurement but quality is usually bad, saturation and latency is often with higher speed packages as they Do not care about quality.
Great video! I was going crazy thinking about this same topic, but you're right, there's no need to go overboard with my use case. I'll do just fine with 1G. I just hate that YT won't let me turn on the notification bell for some reason.
Perfect timing! I just re-subscribed to disney and was blaming the lag and buffering on my ‘paltry’ 1Gbs connection. Now I realize I should be peeved (more madder?) at disney for their server/compression/Quantumania
I have Netflix 4k. The MOST bandwidth I've ever seen it using is an average of 35Mbps for a high quality, detailed in motion background movie (a nightmare for image compression).
Strictly speaking, someone alone, using the internet ONLY for Netflix, could watch this same 4k demanding movie on a 60Mbps connection without compromises. The 60Mbps are because the buffering isn't perfect, Netflix isn't happy to give us a steady streaming - they like much better to give us rapid bursts with nothing in between. So, I don't think they would give the same quality to someone with a 40Mbps connection - they would up the compression, in order to keep their bursty nature. With 60Mbps I think (THINK, I don't know, as I have 500/500) they would be happy enough to stream at high quality 4k.
Moving to 25g from 10g. But more because I can than because I need it. You know, “mine’s bigger blabla”. And same for internet, have 5G but same, because I can. Oh and yeah to please arr suite for the Linux iso collection 🙈
Another charming and lovely video. Thanks a lot. Tim. 😊
As an Australian, damn you all.
You have earned a subscriber. 👍🏻
Grats on 100k subs bro
2.5 G usb 3 dongles are king.
Yeah big fan
For basic web and streaming you will not notice anything much once past 20mbps. As the video states latency then becomes the factor that makes a connection feel faster or slower. Unfortunately I don't think there are any home broadband providers that honestly try and differentiate on this basis.
Now, as a self-employed nerd working in IT, I have the fastest connection available to me (1.2 Gbps) as I regularly transfer 1 to 2 TB of data per month. Also just finished the migration of my home network to 10G now that the switching equipment is finally starting to reach a reasonable point for price and power efficiency. I do however conceed that the 10G home lan was mostly a vanity project and that it makes almost no difference to my day-to-day experience.
Im happy with the 300/170 Mbit plan... but is expensiv in my country but it can go up to 1.1Gbit/s
But internel between NAS and Main system i need the 10Gbit/s+
On the secound System i need around 1Gbit/s or max. 2.5Gbit/s
All the Support systems for Home automation, Pi hole and more ther need only 1Gbit/s but PoE
as long the Uplink to Main and Secound system is high enough to handel the communication.
I always amaze my coworkers when I say I only have about 90 to 100 Mbps when on Zoom and Teams calls, they have been talked into that high end plan being pushed when stating work from home. They are the ones with audio and video issues because of latency and bufferbloat.
I can't believe how much better the USA internet is compared to Australia. We are severely limited on upload speed because the government doesn't want people hosting things. Fiber to the home but most people on 50-100mbit plans.
the pace of innovation for networking equipment is like a snail.
Smooootttth as heck ad read. Nicely done :)
I'd scope out Microcenter if the nearest one wasn't ten hours away (Dallas, Denver, or Tustin, pick one)
The demand is real
We have 200gb plan. If I’m online MSFS and wife is streaming 4K Netflix, along with the smart home stuff connected to the house we’ve never gone over 30mb/s. I think a lot of people pay for the 500mb/1gb stuff and they never use a quarter of it. Just throwing money away.
This video was phenomenal
You can still use a 10g line when your router en switch have atleast one 10g poort and the rest is one 1g. For any one client 1g is enough (that is why everything's in my house is 10g😂) to keep it short if you have 10 clients using 1g it can use up the total line
I have 10g to home... 400 4k Netflix streams... But when I need to move 20TB Imax films, it's priceless.
Imop the Right Answear is "It Depends" Both on what you do and where (Lan VS WAN)
Edit: I`d say that everything over Single Gig stuff gets complicated for End Users
Yeah it definitely depends but that’s no fun for the video lol
Yeah totally depends on your country and location. And on the stuff you are doing: it isnt the same to download a steam game than to download files from mediafire or similar, you wont gain anything if the server limits your speed below 1Gbit.
But local speeds are another thing, having a local NAS and server is fun.
WAN 1Gb/130Mb passive fibire which is quickest provider have
LAN 2.5G and experiment 10G between budget am5 all nvme storage pod and a am5 processing node (going to skip 9950X and keep 7950X until zen6 )
Those 10G a bit power hungry and likely get downgraded soon 😅
Thanks for the demo and info. You sir are certified at 1GB lol, Have a great day
Subbed. Can you please do one on Wi-Fi ??
I havent watchednthemwhole video but one limiting factor is the storage in your PC as well I have a 2/2 connection but I have never gotten over 1.4gb on steam due to PC limitations
Wow, surprised at your internet prices. I always thought you guys did WAY cheaper than us (UK) when it came to tech.... I suddenly love my 900Mbps @ £29/$38 a month, a whole lot more. Nice vid to put things in context. 👍
standard 4K BluRay has a bitrate around 40Mbit, 1080p high quality videos are well below 20Mbit,
streaming services are using shitty quality compression to save costs on their servers, artificially pretending their content has high quality,
anyone who downloads stuff should probably have own local storage server or NAS, as mentioned in the video you can even download whole game overnight and be ready next day
Only have 300/30 mbps on wan side. Have considered going to 1G/50M on wan side.
LAN side is 1G/2.5G to end devices. 10G for servers, my desktop, and between most switches.
I have 6 Mbps, which is plenty for streaming 1080p content from UA-cam, TikTok, etc. It would probably be too slow for 4K streaming, but I don't have a 4K TV. Watching this video at 1080p is only using about 1 Mbps. I still struggle to comprehend how people use 160x as much bandwidth.
I remember when it took forever for the industry to standardize from 100mpbs to 1gb network cards on PCs. 😭
Wow. I went up to 200mbit but reverted back to 100 as it turned out to be enough for the family for what we need 99% of the time.
I am honestly surprised to see that we're finally getting 2.5GbE on motherboards. Got used to having 1GbE on literally every motherboard I've seen or used in the past decade that it just seemed like it would never happen lol
This is a game i like to play. With a 100 Mbit connection, you have, roughly 10MB per second, and that translates to about 800GB per day, 24 TB per month, and 288TB per year. Even using half of that, with 150 TBytes you can download 2250 UHD Blu-ray per year (at 70Gbytes a piece), which is about half of the Marvel movies. You have to watch of those movies per day, so good luck. At 200GB per game, you'll have to buy 750 games per year. If you ignore your large downloads, you'll find out that your connection mostly fiddles with its thumbs. As someone brilliantly said, you cannot wait any faster. So, even a well setup 50Mbit connection will get you more than 99% of the users will ever need.
Speed is fun, though, even if it is a short lasting drug. I still remember, from the dialup days, when I got my first flat ISDN connection. That feeling was 100 times more intense than when I got a 1 GBit connection. Still, I would not mind at all that 50Gbit!
Anyway, this channel is fun. Thank you!
???
I’ve got a 100Mbit connection, and that’s hardly how I feel about it. Most game downloads take at least an hour, but I still remember that downloading GTA V took most of sunset to sunrise, especially when my connection was throttling down to 50mbit for part of it. Loading up my steam library on my new laptop (before steam family sharing helped with download speeds) took forever. And whenever I’m downloading something, it uses the full 100Mbit (because that’s hardly much to expect from a website or steam or whoever in this day and age) and so everyone else’s internet slows to a crawl, may as well be dial-up. So I’ve got to time my downloads to when no one else is using it, again like it’s some dial-up and I have to worry about not hogging the phone line.
Honestly, arguing against fast internet speeds feels like you’re arguing for a POS Chromebook: how much do you really do anything other than web browsing? You don’t really need anything more powerful than a RasPi, do you?
Also, I’d argue that networking is a lot like FPS: you don’t _feel_ the average, you feel the 1% and 0.1% lows. So what if a gigabit is wildly overkill for the however many hours of the day that my network usage is basically 0, the time where I’m actually using my network connection is the only time that really matters. Again, dial-up is still wildly faster than 0Mbit/s.
I have 1gig internet and 1gig lan and the geek in me really wants 10gig lan, however I also monitor my network with librenms and it clearly shows that I'm utilising about half a percent of my current bandwidth, I totally don't need anything faster than what I have. I'm no where near hitting the limits of my current setup. The only time I max out my current network is for 5-6 minutes at 3am when my servers does backups or when I've ripped a bluray and spend a couple of minutes uploading it to my nas, the rest of the time I'm using less than 1% of what my network is capable of. As for my wan connection I have never, ever managed to max out my 1gig connection, even torrenting something popular roughly 300 mbit/s is about the highest I've seen.
Doesn't change the fact that my inner geek still craves 10gig, but I have absolutely no rational reason to upgrade.
I have a very nice UniFi setup with 2.5gbe to my APs and I can barely get 900 mbps on my 1gbe fiber connection when on WiFi. When moving local files I can get about 1400 mbps though. (6ghz wifi)
I run 2 Gig internet because if one of my machines decides to max out its 1gig port, i still have plenty of bandwidth left over for all my other devices.
I have 10Gbps fiber. Highest I have seen from a real server was about 3.1Gbps from a steam server. No home user can really saturate 2.5gbps
Speed is distance over time, you need a low latency (time).
I’ll take 100Mbps with 2ms of latency with an AS path average of 5
This was so good...thx!
I have 5gig internet with Google fiber. The only servers that I see hit near 5gig is Google servers.
Next best is battlenet at 2.5 gig.
Next is steam at 2gig.
And it downhill from there.
Most everything server that i can download something big enough to hit its max speed on, their end tops out at 1gig.
I have heard of some people getting faster speeds from steam.
I need about 1000/200mbps and yes, I know mbps*8 = megabyte.
Reason for this: Downloading & Uploading stuff, since my both Selfbuild-NASes (CSE-826 case) are at two different colos near my house. Reason for this is, that I want my equip to be cooled sufficiently and for Cloud-Gaming, since I have beefy GPUs in my Servers.
And yes, I only have a 5G connection, still getting about 1Gib/200Mbps ping is about 9ms to the servers.
Terabyte/s or what is the point ☝🏿
Pretty jealous of those 2,5, and 10gb prices...Not a chance I need nor could benefit from it. But come on! We don't even have a 2 gb option where I am, yet.
That thing with ping over lte/5g, ive had for 6 years dsl hybrid from Telekom which just is dsl, mine was 16 mbit/s, and lte which i had the maximum that was aviable at the tower, 50mbit/s, and my ping was only around 30ms over lte. so yeah over lte/5g is not that bad as everyone says. Now i have fibre gigabit and the pingis abviosly lower, bit at 500 mbit/s it was the same
The highest use case I would have personally is three people streaming 4K video while a fourth person is doing some web browsing. So 100 Mbps should be just fine if I can get that speed reliably all the time.
Hahahaha in Germany we can be happy to get 50 Mbit/s or more. Even 16k is a great Connection in offside regions. (I am Lucky and have a fibre to the Home with 500/300.)
Yeah it’s crazy what’s “normal” in different parts of the globe