[lug] comparing cat 5e and cat 6 cables
blug-mail at duboulder.com
Tue Dec 27 17:18:19 MST 2005
Dean Brissinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:26 PM Matt Thompson wrote:
>>On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 11:56 -0700, Dean Brissinger wrote:
>>>On Monday, December 26, 2005 5:17 PM D. Stimits wrote:
>>>>What's the story about which cable to use and when? I'm interested
>>>>in comparing for both 100 Mbit and gigabit.
>>>Cat5E is all you need for 10/100/1000. Cat6 is said to support 10G
>>Or, you can go all out and the Cat 7+ cables on this page:
>>It's like the networking equivalent of audiophiles buying $1000 power
>>cords with tungsten in them or whatnot.
> Actually, worth mentioning a small source of possible confusion... Cat5
> is only rated for 100BT and in practice often only can handle 10. Cat5e
> on the other hand will handle up to GigE. Not sure if that's where the
> original confusion came from or not.
When GigE was first coming out, I remember reading that Cat5 cabling
was supposed to be good enough. This assumed that all 4 pairs were
used instead of 2 pairs being used for 100BT.
Has this changed? Netgear says 'UTP Category 5 or better cables' required
for the GS108, a full duplex 1000BT switch.
The wall jacks are a bigger concern for signal degradation than
CAT5 cable, even for 100BT. So is Cat5E/6 just marketing hype?
> Web Page: http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us port=6667 channel=#colug
More information about the LUG