• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

10 gigabit finally coming down in price!!!!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
seepy83 said:
It's obvious to me, and to most of our executive-level staff, that a 5 second delay is completely acceptable and does nothing to slow down the actual productivity of someone. But, it's very telling that end-users are starting to notice this type of delay and are not always accepting of it.
Click to expand...

Why should they be? For a normall office desktop user, at this point, using modern but not particularly super-high end desktop PCs, servers, and a standard gigE network, why should something synchronously block you for five seconds saving a file? That's entirely something that doesn't have to be an issue if the system as a whole was designed differently.

Windows, SMB, and Office... they suck. Really. And when they were the only game in town, people didn't know any different. But now I can do Gmail/Google Apps on my smart phone over a slow 3G link, and it looks instant to me. Different design hides the network/server limitations from the user, gets all that out of the user's way, so it looks more "instant." Why shouldn't we expect our office equipment, which is orders of magnitude more powerful and better connected, to be able to do the same?
 
drebo said:
I wouldn't put one of those NetGear switches in my business if you paid me to. If you need that many 10gbe ports, you can afford a Nexus 5k for them.

In regards to speeds, these Ethernet speeds follow the SONET standards. OC192 is four OC48s, and each OC48 is roughly 2.5gbps...thus OC192 is roughly 10gbps...so 10GbE uses 4x 2.5gbps channels to get 10gbps.

40gbps works the same...OC768 is 4x OC192...you get the idea.
Click to expand...

You would compare a Layer 2 Lite 10Gbe switch to a 12 grand converged infrastructure Layer 3 switch?

Wut? Why would you even say something like that?
 
thecoolnessrune said:
You would compare a Layer 2 Lite 10Gbe switch to a 12 grand converged infrastructure Layer 3 switch?

Wut? Why would you even say something like that?
Click to expand...

Because 10 gig is still a datacenter/interconnect thing.

This is the same patten followed by 100 and gig ethernet. Same patten, same adoption areas.

First 10/100 switch I put in was 12 ports and 25000 dollars.
 
spidey07 said:
Because 10 gig is still a datacenter/interconnect thing.

This is the same patten followed by 100 and gig ethernet. Same patten, same adoption areas.

First 10/100 switch I put in was 12 ports and 25000 dollars.
Click to expand...

Im not sure what you're going on about. This article is about a a cheaper Layer 2 Lite switch. Drebo says he wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot poll and says that if you need 10Gbe, you need a Layer 3+ Nexus 5k switch. That makes no sense in any capacity. If that were the case "back when", then why do we have the Catalyst 29xx series when obviously the only place to start looking is the 3750?

Different requirements use different equipment at different price points. What you guys are suggesting isn't even a valid logic leap, its just silly elitism towards inanimate objects along with the inability to see outside a very small set of use cases.

But please, do tell me how every 10Gbe implementation requires converged FCoE. 🙄
 
Umm. The 5k and 55k are l2 only unless you want advanced features.

This is switch in chip technology and if you want l2 switching you can get it on the cheap.

It remains a niche technology for end stations.

Just like 100. Just like 1000. Same pattern.
 
Last edited:
spidey07 said:
Umm. The 5k and 55k are l2 only unless you want advanced features.

This is switch in chip technology and if you want l2 switching you can get it on the cheap.

It remains a niche technology for end stations.

Just like 100. Just like 1000. Same pattern.
Click to expand...

You keep saying "same pattern" "same pattern", and I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you so I'm not sure why you keep feeling some need to repeat it. The issue was drebo saying that a Nexus 5k is the first step into 10Gbe being worthwhile, which is completely false.

Saying the 5k is "only" a Layer 2 switch is equally silly since it's a gimped Layer 3 switch until you pay the Cisco Tax, not the other way around. Comparing a Layer 3 *capable* FCoE *capable* Converged Ethernet switch to a Layer 2 Lite switch is ridiculous, plain and simple. I'm not sure how much more simply that can be put.
 
thecoolnessrune said:
The issue was drebo saying that a Nexus 5k is the first step into 10Gbe being worthwhile, which is completely false.
Click to expand...

drebo has his pearls of wisdom, but he also writes some incredibly stupid shit sometimes. The same with spidey. It's the inevitable result of them being absolutists with no ability to see beyond their own unique use cases.

Don't dwell on it too much.
 
theevilsharpie said:
drebo has his pearls of wisdom, but he also writes some incredibly stupid shit sometimes. The same with spidey. It's the inevitable result of them being absolutists with no ability to see beyond their own unique use cases.

Don't dwell on it too much.
Click to expand...

What it really is, is experience. That and completely different applications.

The experience piece comes from getting burned way hard. Inthe grand scheme of things cost of network gear is but a drop in the bucket of overall cost.
 
spidey07 said:
The experience piece comes from getting burned way hard. Inthe grand scheme of things cost of network gear is but a drop in the bucket of overall cost.
Click to expand...

These Netgear switches are aimed at the SME market, and I can guarantee you that the price difference between a Cisco Nexus and a Netgear is not going to be a "but a drop in the bucket" in that market, especially when you consider the ongoing maintenance and support costs of Cisco's products. A Fortune 500 firm may not care, but Netgear's switches aren't aimed at them.

Thanks for demonstrating my point, though.
 
you do realize that packet loss and latency just doesn't work out with high bandwidth. It's like ethernet over power, you need 100GB with that kind of loss to get 10GB of realized performance.


What kind of deals you guys got going on in the high speed networking arena??

Anyone want to do some trading?
 
Last edited:
This is great to hear! I can see it being useful for SAN environments and core switching/routing mostly, but unless specific needs arrise I don't see it being used for client machines. Heck, you can get away with 10 or 100 for client machines in most environments where files don't get transferred around all the time, it's just that gigabit is so cheap may as well use it. So the same may happen with 10g at some point too, it will just be the standard, but think we're still far from there.

At home I can actually saturate gigabit though if I try, but as far as every day use I don't really need faster, so if I was to buy 10g stuff it would be more for the bling factor. 😛
 
VulgarDisplay said:
So your NAS can maintain 1250mbps? That thing must be ungodly expensive and not something average joe will need for years.
Click to expand...

You mean MBps. capitalization actually matters when you're talking about units. 1.25GB/s sequential is pretty damned easy to hit with spinning disks.

Not considering SSD arrays since if you can afford a large SSD array, 5-8k for a full 10G network won't make you blink twice.

My own array at home can max out 2-trunked gigabit with ease. (transfering to/from both desktop and laptop to the NAS)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top