6 ms·

First I haven't a clue why anyone would run cat 6, either do good 5E or standard 6A. 6 is well not really useful.. All that said, the article does manage to sk

First I haven't a clue why anyone would run cat 6, either do good 5E or standard 6A. 6 is well not really useful.. All that said, the article does manage to skim over a few things it should have talked about. There are actual physical differences between the cabling specs which are a result of the 6A signalling requirements. The termination is _MUCH_ stricter and likely the cause of 99% of the failures in cases where the cables actually are 23AWG, properly twisted and isolated. Its these latter three things which will allow you to identify "real" cat6A rather than the stuff being relabeled by cable manufactures claiming to have found some secret method of making what are basically cat5E cables 6A. (back to my 5e comment. The thing to keep in mind about a lot of this is that the standards specify minimums. The whole cat5E grouping was one where there was a race to out-specify everyone else, which is why you can find cat 5E 500Mhz labeled cabling, although most places just renamed it to cat 6 and charged a few cents more per foot. The other thing to keep in mind is that these specifications end up being given in loss/crosstalk per foot, so its quite possible to run higher data speeds on short cables that are non compliant per foot, particularly if they are terminated properly. Hence other comments I've made on this site about running 10GbaseT in my house on cat5E without any apparent signally/packet loss due to the runs all being very short.).

forbiddenlake 8y ago
Why is 6 not useful and why is 5E/6A better?
- ixf 8y ago
  6 is useful for non-dense high-bandwidth environments where you might need to get 10G-BASET a little further than 5e will manage, but 6 doesn't address enhanced alien crosstalk. This means in dense environments it may struggle. 6A does, via shielding, and so will work better in dense environments (where you're likely to see 10G-BT anyway).
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    Shielding's optional for 6A so be careful where you buy if you want that.
  - mcv 8y ago
    Isn't shielding separate from the category? I recall seeing stuff like Cat5 FTP and Cat6 STP or some combination like that. I'm no cable expert, but from what I understand, STP means shielded and FTP has some other kind of shielding. I think I put Cat6 STP or FTP in my home. Whichever it was, I wanted to have the best cable I could possibly find, because I don't want to have to redo this every 10 years.
- GordonS 8y ago
  If for no other reason, price - why pay more for something that's not any better than 5e?
  - apple4ever 8y ago
    I've always found 6 cheaper than 5e, or at least the same price. And why not give myself some extra headroom?
    - GordonS 8y ago
      Firstly, I should have been clearer that I specifically meant cat6a, rather than cat6. I haven't actually bought an ethernet cable for several years now, but cat6a always used to be quite a bit more expensive than cat5e. I just had a quick look, and here in the UK it seems it still is, at least for shielded cables: - 30m UTP cat5e cable is £12 - 30m STP cat5e cable is £47 - 30m UTP cat6 cable is £14 - 30m STP cat6a cable is £100
- StillBored 8y ago
  Its not that 5E is better, its about the application. Either you need near full length runs of 6A for 10G, and you need to have it carefully terminated (which is a large problem in a lot of installs, more so than the actual cable) or you have short runs which will work just as well over just about anything that isn't completely screwed up. Maybe another way to put it is this: doing a poor CAT6 install (as this article points out most are) isn't buying you anything over cat 5E, your spending money for nothing.
  - ccostes 8y ago
    How long is "long" in this context? 5ft? 50ft?
    - chx 8y ago
      10GBASE-T over Cat 5e works pretty well up to 100 ft and 150 ft is doable if you carefully run avoiding electronic noise sources (like a wall power outlet). NBASE-T IMO is much more interesting for end users because by now USB adapters for those should be out and I fully expect them any week to drop. 5gbit/s runs up to 300 ft on Cat 5E. Also, while five gigabit is certainly doable for laptops with NVMe disks (last three years, since Skylake), ten gigabit is not necessarily so if you have PCIe 3.0 x2 (or equivalent) bottlenecks here and there. See, many Intel U chip laptops run the on chip bus between PCH and CPU at only a PCIe 3.0 x2 equivalent speed (aka 16 gbit/s) and the U chips provide PCIe lanes only off the PCH so if your data streams needs to cross into the CPU and if you are burning 10 out of the 16 for just Ethernet, not a lot will be left. And most of the time you need to cross the On Package Interconnect because the system memory hangs off the CPU side of it and all the peripherals the PCH side of it (northbridge vs southbridge, to use older terms). There's no such problem with 5gbit/s, you can even put twice of that on a 2GT/s OPI and still have bandwidth to spare. Another potential such bandwidth choking point is the Thunderbolt controller, althought that might be past by now, because there is no JHL 7240 or Titan Ridge LP -- there was an Alpine Ridge LP which only used a PCI 3.0 x2 connection to the host meaning if you wanted to have a 5gbit/s USB A connection on your dock and you wanted 10 gbit/s Ethernet, you are already hitting all the constraints. Once again, 5gbit/s eases this problem. In about five years when PCIe 4.0 and USB 3.2 are ubiquitous, well established features in laptops, that's when we can begin to discuss whether ten gigabit makes sense at home/small office.
jpwgarrison 8y ago
I buy a lot of cables for work. A few years ago I tried to order a new batch from my supplier and they told me they now had CAT6 for the same price, but thinner. So since 2015 or so we've used CAT6. But never in lengths that matter, just in-rack patch cables. Initially I didn't really care about the diameter. Later we ran out of space in the cable trays where we had some older, thicker stuff and swapping it out made a tactile, physical difference. IMO 5/5e/6 is a wash anyway, if you need distance you probably just need fiber.
kps 8y ago
I ran “Cat6” in my house, and followed the Cat6 guidelines. It's not because I realistically expect Cat6 performance — it's because I want Cat5e performance, and expect that vendors lie out of their ass, and hope that going ‘one better’ is enough.
ip26 8y ago
If you're ripping open your walls to do it, the difference in cost between 6 and 5e is probably a rounding error, and there's a strong desire to do it once.
- dbdjfjrjvebd 8y ago
  I have costed it. The cable itself is indeed a rounding error. I would suggest getting plastic piping installed with the cable inside and some strings. Then you can pull more cable when need to.
  - vagab0nd 8y ago
    Damn, that's a good idea. I wish I'd done that for my new house. I'm beating myself up for not running enough cables between rooms. Not sure if I'm able to pull more wires (sometimes they tie the wires down to the frames)
  - xte 8y ago
    Perhaps it not comply to USA regulation but for my home I opt to design custom interior wall (simple commercial iron profile instead of classic plasterboard structure) and countertops with wood planks and joint covers (from nearest wood store) so I can open nearly anything and nearly anything look like reasonably well. Interior walls are simply heavy cut-ed 60x30x1.5mm vertical beams with horizontal ligatures made of flat iron 40x2mm covered with "insulation scotch" for noise reduction purpose. Wood planks are coupled vertically three/four maximum in the garage with a simple bar to hang furniture as a horizontal joint. Skirting and ceiling joint covers permit insertion and remove thank to the interior "female side" of the last wood planks cut-ed out before mount. It was far more complex than what I consider at start (and I still have to finish many parts) but IMO it's cheap, good-looking and comfortable enough to being worth it. With that any kind of implant can be accessed directly without brake anything and when it's time to repaint it can be done again in the garden/garage instead of cover up anything inside...
    - sekh60 8y ago
      Are you able to share any pictures of your setup? I am having a hard time visualizing it.

forbiddenlake 8y ago

Why is 6 not useful and why is 5E/6A better?

ixf 8y ago
6 is useful for non-dense high-bandwidth environments where you might need to get 10G-BASET a little further than 5e will manage, but 6 doesn't address enhanced alien crosstalk. This means in dense environments it may struggle. 6A does, via shielding, and so will work better in dense environments (where you're likely to see 10G-BT anyway).
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  Shielding's optional for 6A so be careful where you buy if you want that.
- mcv 8y ago
  Isn't shielding separate from the category? I recall seeing stuff like Cat5 FTP and Cat6 STP or some combination like that. I'm no cable expert, but from what I understand, STP means shielded and FTP has some other kind of shielding. I think I put Cat6 STP or FTP in my home. Whichever it was, I wanted to have the best cable I could possibly find, because I don't want to have to redo this every 10 years.
GordonS 8y ago
If for no other reason, price - why pay more for something that's not any better than 5e?
- apple4ever 8y ago
  I've always found 6 cheaper than 5e, or at least the same price. And why not give myself some extra headroom?
  - GordonS 8y ago
    Firstly, I should have been clearer that I specifically meant cat6a, rather than cat6. I haven't actually bought an ethernet cable for several years now, but cat6a always used to be quite a bit more expensive than cat5e. I just had a quick look, and here in the UK it seems it still is, at least for shielded cables: - 30m UTP cat5e cable is £12 - 30m STP cat5e cable is £47 - 30m UTP cat6 cable is £14 - 30m STP cat6a cable is £100
StillBored 8y ago
Its not that 5E is better, its about the application. Either you need near full length runs of 6A for 10G, and you need to have it carefully terminated (which is a large problem in a lot of installs, more so than the actual cable) or you have short runs which will work just as well over just about anything that isn't completely screwed up. Maybe another way to put it is this: doing a poor CAT6 install (as this article points out most are) isn't buying you anything over cat 5E, your spending money for nothing.
- ccostes 8y ago
  How long is "long" in this context? 5ft? 50ft?
  - chx 8y ago
    10GBASE-T over Cat 5e works pretty well up to 100 ft and 150 ft is doable if you carefully run avoiding electronic noise sources (like a wall power outlet). NBASE-T IMO is much more interesting for end users because by now USB adapters for those should be out and I fully expect them any week to drop. 5gbit/s runs up to 300 ft on Cat 5E. Also, while five gigabit is certainly doable for laptops with NVMe disks (last three years, since Skylake), ten gigabit is not necessarily so if you have PCIe 3.0 x2 (or equivalent) bottlenecks here and there. See, many Intel U chip laptops run the on chip bus between PCH and CPU at only a PCIe 3.0 x2 equivalent speed (aka 16 gbit/s) and the U chips provide PCIe lanes only off the PCH so if your data streams needs to cross into the CPU and if you are burning 10 out of the 16 for just Ethernet, not a lot will be left. And most of the time you need to cross the On Package Interconnect because the system memory hangs off the CPU side of it and all the peripherals the PCH side of it (northbridge vs southbridge, to use older terms). There's no such problem with 5gbit/s, you can even put twice of that on a 2GT/s OPI and still have bandwidth to spare. Another potential such bandwidth choking point is the Thunderbolt controller, althought that might be past by now, because there is no JHL 7240 or Titan Ridge LP -- there was an Alpine Ridge LP which only used a PCI 3.0 x2 connection to the host meaning if you wanted to have a 5gbit/s USB A connection on your dock and you wanted 10 gbit/s Ethernet, you are already hitting all the constraints. Once again, 5gbit/s eases this problem. In about five years when PCIe 4.0 and USB 3.2 are ubiquitous, well established features in laptops, that's when we can begin to discuss whether ten gigabit makes sense at home/small office.

jpwgarrison 8y ago

I buy a lot of cables for work. A few years ago I tried to order a new batch from my supplier and they told me they now had CAT6 for the same price, but thinner. So since 2015 or so we've used CAT6. But never in lengths that matter, just in-rack patch cables. Initially I didn't really care about the diameter. Later we ran out of space in the cable trays where we had some older, thicker stuff and swapping it out made a tactile, physical difference. IMO 5/5e/6 is a wash anyway, if you need distance you probably just need fiber.

kps 8y ago

I ran “Cat6” in my house, and followed the Cat6 guidelines. It's not because I realistically expect Cat6 performance — it's because I want Cat5e performance, and expect that vendors lie out of their ass, and hope that going ‘one better’ is enough.

ip26 8y ago

If you're ripping open your walls to do it, the difference in cost between 6 and 5e is probably a rounding error, and there's a strong desire to do it once.

dbdjfjrjvebd 8y ago
I have costed it. The cable itself is indeed a rounding error. I would suggest getting plastic piping installed with the cable inside and some strings. Then you can pull more cable when need to.
- vagab0nd 8y ago
  Damn, that's a good idea. I wish I'd done that for my new house. I'm beating myself up for not running enough cables between rooms. Not sure if I'm able to pull more wires (sometimes they tie the wires down to the frames)
- xte 8y ago
  Perhaps it not comply to USA regulation but for my home I opt to design custom interior wall (simple commercial iron profile instead of classic plasterboard structure) and countertops with wood planks and joint covers (from nearest wood store) so I can open nearly anything and nearly anything look like reasonably well. Interior walls are simply heavy cut-ed 60x30x1.5mm vertical beams with horizontal ligatures made of flat iron 40x2mm covered with "insulation scotch" for noise reduction purpose. Wood planks are coupled vertically three/four maximum in the garage with a simple bar to hang furniture as a horizontal joint. Skirting and ceiling joint covers permit insertion and remove thank to the interior "female side" of the last wood planks cut-ed out before mount. It was far more complex than what I consider at start (and I still have to finish many parts) but IMO it's cheap, good-looking and comfortable enough to being worth it. With that any kind of implant can be accessed directly without brake anything and when it's time to repaint it can be done again in the garden/garage instead of cover up anything inside...
  - sekh60 8y ago
    Are you able to share any pictures of your setup? I am having a hard time visualizing it.