Not all data transfer is sending stuff to storage, streaming your display live at a high bitrate for example never needs to go into storage.
Comment on Realtek's $10 tiny 10GbE network adapter is coming to motherboards later this year
hornedfiend@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks agoEven when doing that, the bottleneck is the storage write speed. you can have 1Tb internet connection and it wouldn’t matter unless you have enough users in a home.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
Valmond@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Is more than 1Gbps needed for that? That seems insane, but I’m old and watch stuff in full HD so what do I know.
towerful@programming.dev 5 weeks ago
Low latency means low compression. Low compression means high bandwidth.
1080p60 NDI will be 200mbps. If you are doing 2160p60, that’s 800mbps (which is about the limit I would run 1gbe at). Doesn’t leave much overhead for anything else, and a burst of other traffic might cause packet drops or packet rejection due to exceeding the TTL.2.5gbps would be enough.
But I see 2.5gbps and 5gbps as “stop-gaps”. Data centers standardised on 10/40gbps for a while (before 25/100 and 100/400) - it’s still really common tbh - so the 10gbps tech is cheap.
I don’t see the point in investing in 2.5/5gbpsKorhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 weeks ago
Yep, and then add multiple streams at that rate… Although it also depends on how your network is setup for how much that will matter. With the right arrangement of switches/cables you might manage it if you always stream between the same devices by just making sure that connection doesn’t share an ethernet cable. But easier to go 10Gbps and not have to worry about it.
Although so far I only do 1 stream and its over wifi. Its fine but obviously ethernet would be better. Mainly use it for sticking a few games on the TV, keep talking and nobody explodes and jackbox games.
Valmond@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Thanks for the info, didn’t think the limit was so close.
My box has 2.5Gbps but I’m with you on that one regardless of my real needs, I’ll wait it out til 10Gbps. If even my geek needs flare up I mean :-)
patatahooligan@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
NVMEs are claiming sequential write speeds of several GBps (capital B as in byte). The article talks about 10Gbps (lowercase b as in bits), so 1.25GBps. Even with raw storage writes the NVME might not be the bottleneck in this scenario.
And then there’s the fact that disk writes are buffered in RAM. These motherboards are not available yet so we’re talking about future PC builds. It is safe to say that many of them will be used in systems with 32GB RAM. If you’re idling/doing light activity while waiting for a download to finish you’ll have most of your RAM free and you would be able to get 25-30GB before storage speed becomes a factor.
hornedfiend@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
That is true, given everyone used good quality nvmes, which is not always the case, but honestly, 1Gbps fiber is enough for a home with multiple users. Even if, assuming the storage is not the bottleneck, unless you need often very large lan transfers should be more enough with 1Gbps.
Anyway, I guess i’m sidestepping the initial topic. bottom line: cool cheap tech for companies, not so much for home users.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
We don’t all have 1Gbps fiber though