Etherfast Lan Cards???

[Smitty1963]

Hello All!

I just purchased an Asus P4PE Motherboard with on-board Lan. The chip on the MB: Broadcom BCM4401. Apparently, the Gold version MB has the Broadcom BCM5702. Does anyone have any experience using the BCM4401. If so, does it work ok, or do you recommend purchasing and add-in card. I am getting ready to build a new system with this MB. I currently have an add-in PCI Linksys 10/100 Lan Card (LNE100TX).

If you were to purchase an add-in card, which one would you purchase? I am willing to spend $100.00 or less.

I want my speeds to be as quick as possible.

I have cable internet service and network 3 computers.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Guy

 

[n0cmonkey]

I purchase Intel cards usually. Do a search on the topic, there are plenty of threads about it.

 

[Koing]

if you just want a network with no special features the onboard on will work.

You won't have to spend $100 to buy a decent network card.

 

[Muse]

I have what's probably the same Linksys NIC. It seems very fast, even faster than my Intel NIC, which is actually a Kingston but Win 2000 sees it as an Intel 21143 because it has that chip. Many in these forums have endorsed this Linksys NIC. Since you have this NIC, you can test its speed against the built in networking and decide if it's adequate. If you want top notch stuff for some reason, the Intel or 3Com NICs are ones you could look at, but you'll pay more. I got my Linksys for $5 after MIR, hard to beat. You won't find deals like that on that high end stuff.

 

[skyking]

I would try out the onboard NIC first. Keep in mind, the maximum continous transfer of files will probably be limited by harddrive access speeds, not network speeds.

 

[JackMDS]

Every single week this type of post come around and it is always ?Déjà vu all over again?

Some people have to justify their product of choice (even if the choice is based on Mega store rebates) and thus what ever they have ?Rules?

Some people got a bad piece of specific individual hardware gizmo, and thus every thing done by this brand ?sux?

Some people will put you down, knowing that you are talking about small home Network, and they are relating to Cooperate Network (e.g. "NetBEUI bogs by rebroadcast." Yeah right, when the Network consists of three computers).

Some people just like to kid around.

Some people make facts from stories heard from a friend.

Some people just do not know what they are talking about. (Like me).

Some people do not like to read an answer that is longer then 10 words. (They did not get to this line).

=========================================================

We are talking about small networks 2-5 computers.

Here are two links that tested and reported the differences

http://www6.tomshardware.com/network/01q3/010820/nic-11.html#conclusion

Network Card Roundup - Which is the Best PCI Network Card?

Do you know a Link to a site with similar review, and other results?

Please post here.


Otherwise, if your Mobo's NIC is faulty.

This is the Card of the week:

SpeedStream PCI 10/100 Ethernet Adapter $10.99-$10 (rebate )= 99 cents.

=======================================================

However if it is a clinical issue with a rapid necessity to reduce anxiety.

Intel?s NIC seems to be the product of choice.

 

[cmetz]

Unless I'm confused, the BCM5702 is a gigabit (10/100/1000) all-in-one chip and works very well. It's also known as a "Tigon III". It's nearly the same as the 3c996b (5701). It's about the best performing 32-bit / 33MHz PCI gigabit controller currently available. You'll easily spend $100 to get as good a board. If you plan on doing gigabit networking between PCs (maybe not today, but even in a few years), it might really be worth it.

If you have no such plans at all, then save your money. The built-in lower end chip is probably fine for 100Mb/s. For generic home networking and sharing a cable modem, any of it will work fine.

 

[Smitty1963]

Thanks for all the help!

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: skyking
I would try out the onboard NIC first. Keep in mind, the maximum continous transfer of files will probably be limited by harddrive access speeds, not network speeds.

Yesterday I tested my network throughput on my newly installed first-time network. I transfered a 1.048 GB file firstly between 2 UDMA 5 configured ATA66 80 GB (8 MB cache) WD HDDs on the SAME machine and it took about 40 seconds. Between similar drives on different machines connected to my new D-Link DI-704p router by 65' and 100' cat5e, it took about 110 seconds. I calculate that to be about 68 Mbps. I had to conclude that the HD speeds are not the bottleneck, or am I missing something. Anyway, I'm pleased by the speed. I'm quite inexperienced so I don't know if this is good or bad or mediocre, maybe I can get some comments. I am able to listen to MP3s using one machine reading off the other and even watch a ripped DVD off the other machine. The throughput should be fine for backups and the speed is so good I can compute against data on the other machine if I want or need to. However, as a general rule, I won't want both machines on at once due to energy consumption.

 

[Smitty1963]

Muse,

I am using the onboard lan and it seems to work fine. I do not believe i'm too limited by my hardrive, It spins at 15000 rpm's with a 3.9 ms access time.

Thanks!

 

[skyking]

I should have qualified my statement with the phrase "typical file transfer". a Gig plus is the equivalent of 400 or so mp3's, almost a complete win2k install, etc. Typical transfers are in the range of a few hundred Kb to a couple hundred Mb.