Unmanaged Gigabit Ethernet Switch Round-Up

[bit_user]

Speaking of citing references, here's HDD performance data from 3 years ago. I wanted a capacity & vintage HDD that would reflect what a typical power user likely has, for bulk data:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd4001faex-4tb-review,3368-2.html

Note that even the slowest HDD tested has an interface bandwidth 75% higher than palladin9479's claimed 128 MB/sec. The fastest was ~3.5x that.

 

[InvalidError]

And that's not a real world workload, or does your day consist of coping the Windows ISO back and forth all day?

Now try to copy an entire directory structure containing a few thousand files but of similiar size to that ISO.

How many people spend their whole day copying millions of 4KB files? Not many either. Your example is no more "real-world" than mine.

However, I strongly suspect that the bulk of people with multiple TBs worth of data on spinning disks have TBs worth of videos and other files over 200MB a piece. I know that between the ~5TB worth of HDDs I own, about half of it is large files and my large files get shuffled around the most.

 

[tsnor]

...

Good points, but I just wanted to mention that it'd be easier to read if you'd use the [ quote ] and [ / quote ] tags (remove the spaces), instead of double-quote characters.

You are right. It is more readable, and easier to see the linkage when I use [ quote ] and [ / quote ] tags.

 

[nigelivey]

Can you run NTttcp and post all your results please. Also talking about disks is very relevant to this post and certainly if we're talking real world scenarios.

 

[mapesdhs]

... or does your day consist of coping the Windows ISO back and forth all day?...

No, but people often have to copy image/video archives around for backup, etc. I did it the other day, 140GB, and btw it flew along at 180MB/sec using a Seagate Enterprise drive.

Again my argument is that 10GbE is completely unnecessary in real world consumer usage scenarios. ...

Unnecessary for you maybe, but it's daft to insist it's useless for everyone else aswell. Note the distinction: you're saying nobody needs it, which is bizarre. If someone else regards having the tech as being worthwhile so the waiting they endure atm for whatever task is reduced, then that decision is up to them. You're basically saying your idea of that value judgment is more valid than anyone else. Where would we be if nobody bought the leading edge tech when it first comes out... there'd be no enthusiast market, that's for sure.

Is it worth spending thousands to be able to render an animation in 4 hours instead of 5? Many normal users would say no, but I know plenty of movie people who say absolutely yes, because that time saving has knock-on effects elsewhere. A sideways example, but the point is it's about viewpoint. Why do you insist your idea of what's necessary should apply to everyone? Sure, most of the time I'm not moving large files around, but when I do, and it takes ages, that's annoying. I'd happily buy 10GigE tech to ease such issues.

Every argument made so far as dodged that statement entirely.

You made a statement, but it wasn't an argument, because the rationale was missing. It's just your opinion. If you don't need 10GigE, fine, don't buy it, or support the idea of it becoming cheaper, but it's weird to make such a noise about nobody else needing it even though multiple people have posted here saying they'd love to have 10GigE if they could buy the tech at an affordable price.

Today I'm replacing my brother's PC with an X79 setup (old PC is P55). Need to copy over some 2TB of data. Would be great if I could just shove in a couple of 10GigE NICs, join my home group and copy it all across, which btw does work well with 1GigE (copying 3DMark archives between my own systems the other day was maxing out the switch).

If I have any gripe with these latest products it's the manufacturers describing them as 10GigE switches at all. To me, unless all the ports can do 10GigE then it's a bit misleading, but I know this kind of marketing is normal.

Ian.