cat5 v cat5e

[videoholic]

What\'s the difference?

WHy is e so much more expensive?

If you were wiring a house today would you get the e?

[Kurt Angle]

Cat5 = up to 100Mbps
Cat5e = up to 1Gbps

Cat5 is easily fast enough as no internet connection has reached anywhere near those speeds yet.


Check out this link for more info

http://www.derose.net/steve/guides/wiring/

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

Yea, cat5e is used for Gigabit Ethernet (1000mbit). Atm its pretty useless unless u have all systems running on 1000mbit connections and you\'re doing a lot of lan parties.  Cat5 is fast enough to do anything u could want atm.

I run cat 5e. That way I have the option of running gigabit. If I were running cable for a new house. I would prob run cat 6. Having to re-wire your house 10 years from now would be a major pain.

[videoholic]

another question.

If I do build this house next to my parents, can I run a wire from their house to mine?  Would be pretty cool to share their cable internet by taping into their router.

What distance can a line run?  Do I need an amplifier or anything like that?

Read that link!

Yes, yes you can unless it\'s further than 100 feet (which it shouldn\'t be, right?)

But... cable isn\'t made for outdoor weather, or to be buried, so you need to bury a conduit.

[Paul2]

Wow...i learned something new today and pretty much everday.

Again, from what I skimmed through from that link, I think Cat5 is good enough for a decade or more to go (10 years).

100 Mbits per second is great for now as there are still many internet users still using 56k modem (myself included).  Even DSL is only about 384 Kbits per second or maybe 512 kbits...
either way, it will be a very long way before the mainstream consumers go broadband....

[videoholic]

Yeah, it will be more than 100 feet.  Probably about 150 feet.

Then you gotta go up to coax or better... I used to have that running at my parents.. a coax network was a bit more irritating to set up, but the cable is a little sturdier and easy to use... more expensive tho.  Wireless won\'t go that far unless you can put the base station right inbetween your houses, and that will be stretching the limits of it, especially in bad weather.  You could also put a hub half-way, and run your cabling from there, but if that\'s outside, you would need some sort of shelter for the router/modem, etc.

When I had a coax network, it was mixed, so, basically two networks, that were connected at one computer which had two NICs one RJ45 and one Coax.  You could do something like that...

100mbit/sec is still kinda slow when you get down to it.  My home network is multimedia heavy and transferring big files still takes much longer than I\'d like.

Running Cat5 from 2nd floor network to the basement.  Don\'t wanna fool with Wi-Fi until I get a laptop.

almost all NICs are still 100 mbit/sec... so there\'s no real point installing faster UNLESS you are going to do a really good job, and plan to keep it for the future (it is more expensive afterall, and more sensitive to installation mistakes).  

At 100 mbit/sec you\'re transfering over 700 megs a minute.. which should suffice for most home needs

100 megabits = 12.5 megabytes

http://www.digitaldutch.com/unitconverter/index.htm

edit- ah see you wrote minute instead of seconds.  A minute is too long to wait for data transmission in this instant gratification age

riiiiiiight...

and 12x60 is.....

720 megs/minute...

or

over 700 megs a minute

I know my units


*EDIT* for your edit

a minute is too long to wait for data in this instant gratification age

Man... even a fast CD drive, say 52x max will read at average over the whole disk at about 40x... that\'s 6000 k/s - or roughly 6 megs a second.. which means it takes longer twice as long to copy an entire CD to your hard drive than it would take to get over your network.  If you want to spend the money for real high speed... go ahead.. but it\'s really not worth the money/care it takes right now to actually hit speeds over 100mbits.

Ethernet can go 100 meters without an amplifier

Originally posted by FatalXception
Man... even a fast CD drive, say 52x max will read at average over the whole disk at about 40x... that\'s 6000 k/s - or roughly 6 megs a second.. which means it takes longer twice as long to copy an entire CD to your hard drive than it would take to get over your network.  If you want to spend the money for real high speed... go ahead.. but it\'s really not worth the money/care it takes right now to actually hit speeds over 100mbits.

Good point, you know your stuff

I\'d like to tell myself I\'m overreacting, especially after reading that, but there\'s been many times I transferred huge ass files between computers and I had to sit there and wait for it to copy over.  Just call me hard to please... I still think computers are still too damn slow.

Getting back on topic I run 100\' of Cat5 and don\'t need an amplifier.