10-base-T or 100 Hub ?

[AAA]

I want to network two computer using Win 98 SE so I can share a printer and files between computers.

Is the 10-base-T Mini-Hub good enought for the job? Or should I get a 100 Hub?

Thanks!

 

[JackMDS]

Assuming that your NICs are 10/100Mb/sec. (b=bit, B=Byte 8bits=1Byte).

10Mb/sec=1.25 MB/sec.

Transferring files with 10Mb/sec Hub will yield a speed of 800-900 KB/sec.


100 Mb/sec. = 12.5MB/sec.

100Mb/sec hub (or better off switch), will yield 8-9 MB/sec.

The difference in price, between 10Mb/sec Hub to 100Mb/sec. is one time expense of $8.

Well, you figure out.

 

[janlievens]

<<10Mb/sec=1.25 MB/sec.>>
<<100 Mb/sec. = 12.5MB/sec.>>

😀 wrong 😀
please note that network speeds are expressed in base 10 rather than base 2 (the same goes for hard drive space)
so 1 Kb/s = 1000 bits/s (not 1024 bits/s)
10 Mb/s = 1.19 MB/s
100 Mb/s = 11.92 MB/s

ok ok, I know it's only a smal difference...😉

30 GB harddrive = 30,000,000,000 Bytes = 27.94 GB

 

[Garion]

Only one thing to add - Hubs are half duplex, meaning they are collision-based. When two computers try to talk at the same time and their communications "collide" they both stop, back off and wait a bit, then try to retransmit again.

Switches are full duplex. They can both send and receive at the same time and each computer has it's own dedicated connection. There are no collisions, so they can use the full bandwidth available.

Because of this, a theoretical 1.25MB/s on a 10Mb/s hub gets chopped down by about 50% for most typical traffic. The only time you'll see anywhere near 1.25Mb/s is when you only have two devices on the wire communicating - One sending traffic and one receiving it.

So. In reality, the hub will give you somewhere around 400Kb/s. A 100BaseT Switch will give you closer to full speed, or 8-9MB/s - 20X as fast. Switches are especially good if you have more than two computers that communicate between themselves at the same time. Definitely worth the purchase!

- G

 

[Garion]

Janlievens,

So far as I know, hard drives are the ONLY devices that measure themselves on their bastardized version of the kilobyte system. Every network performance tool that I've ever used has used 1KB=1024 bytes.

Edit: Looks like some misguided manufacturers indeed do call a megabit 1000 KB. Odd.

Anyhow, Jack's math is still exactly on.

According to you, 1KB = 1000 bytes.

10Mb/s = 10,000Kb/s. Divde that by 8 to get KB/s and you get 1,250 or 1.25 MB/s.
Same goes for the 100BaseT calculations.

Actually, this number goes UP, not down if you use the real numbers - 1KB = 1024 bytes. You end up with 1.28MB/s for 10BaseT.

Is this new math we're working on here? I have NO idea how you ended up with 1.19.

- G

 

[janlievens]

in network terminology 1 Kb = 1000 bits, and 1 Mb = 1,000,000 bits
in computer terminology 1 KB = 8192 bits ( = 1024 x 8 ), and 1 MB = 8,388,608 bits ( = 1024 x 1024 x 8 )

so if 10 Mb/s (network) = 10,000,000 bits ( = A )
and 1 MB = 8,388,608 bits ( = B )

A is the amount of bits per second
B is the amount of bits per MB

A / B = is the amount of MB per Mb

and A / B = 1,192 MB/s

all using calculator.exe 🙂

note:
1) Network terminology uses a different size for Kilo and Mega and Giga and Tera, because when telcos first entered the digital era, they didn't think it had anything to do with computers or data, all they did was push bits of audio stream over a wire...
That's also why they (still) calculate everything in bits and not in bytes.
2) Network technology is notorious for not using multiples of 2.
example: phone lines (POTS) sample audio in 7 bit at 8 KHz = 56 Kb/s ( = 6,84 KB/s ). Notice how the Kilo comes from KHz and in KHz ( as in all other scientific notations, except computers ), Kilo equals 1000.

<<Every network performance tool that I've ever used has used 1KB=1024 bytes.>>

Which is perfectly normal...since it's a computer program made by computer people who - correctly - respect the use of computer units.