Nice video, but thus test was probably best done using, a more optimized pcie 2.5gb ethernet controller that would eliminate noise, not a USB 3.0 port. I never really trust USB 3 for anything other than maybe temporary lash drive file transfer and/or peripherals.
"attenuation" isn't really the best word to use to describe why you have a slower bitrate at longer distance. Yes it is a factor but what affects the system more it "bit error rate" which ends up causing more transmit errors and retransmissions. This is why you see the longer the cable is, the more wave-like the transfer rate looks.
Tons of Cat5e already in walls and other areas and it's usually quite difficult or impossible to just replace. But Cat5e is capable of supporting 2.5 GbE or 5 GbE.
Can confirm. Cat5e under 100 feet will do 5 gig
There are already 5 GbE PHY that can do 5 GbE with the full 100 meters over Cat5e.
Nice video, but thus test was probably best done using, a more optimized pcie 2.5gb ethernet controller that would eliminate noise, not a USB 3.0 port. I never really trust USB 3 for anything other than maybe temporary lash drive file transfer and/or peripherals.
Thanks for your suggestions~
"attenuation" isn't really the best word to use to describe why you have a slower bitrate at longer distance. Yes it is a factor but what affects the system more it "bit error rate" which ends up causing more transmit errors and retransmissions. This is why you see the longer the cable is, the more wave-like the transfer rate looks.
AI generated
Hello, the voice is AI voice, but the videos are all actually shot by us.😄
The AI voice over just ruins it.@@QSFPTEK_official
@@QSFPTEK_official HOnestly a thickly accented human voice with subtitles >> any AI bullshit
Why they dont go for CAT6
Cat6 can be chosen, but we want to know the feasibility of Cat5e.😄
Tons of Cat5e already in walls and other areas and it's usually quite difficult or impossible to just replace. But Cat5e is capable of supporting 2.5 GbE or 5 GbE.
dislikes bugged.