New Build - Network Cabling

AdrianC

superblade said:

my FTTP is 900mbps but i'm getting about 500mbps over the bridge. Of course when i move to the new house I want to take full advantage of the 900mbps wherever possible

What on earth are you doing over the net that makes that anything but a totally irrelevant willy-wave number...?

A rough sense of proportion...
An HD movie is about 1.5GB. At 500megabit, that will download in about 35 seconds. At 900megabit, you'll save about 15 seconds.
An entire DVD is about 6GB, so we're talking about the difference between a minute and a minute 45.
Even a 30GB 4K-resolution movie (the biggest on Sky currently) will download in about 8 minutes at the lower speed.
https://dls-tech.co.uk/sky-q-how-big-are-the-4k-uhd-movies/

And, of course, you can watch the film as soon as it starts to download, there will be zero buffering even on a MUCH lower speed connection...

superblade

AdrianC said:

superblade said:

my FTTP is 900mbps but i'm getting about 500mbps over the bridge. Of course when i move to the new house I want to take full advantage of the 900mbps wherever possible

What on earth are you doing over the net that makes that anything but a totally irrelevant willy-wave number...?

A rough sense of proportion...
An HD movie is about 1.5GB. At 500megabit, that will download in about 35 seconds. At 900megabit, you'll save about 15 seconds.
An entire DVD is about 6GB, so we're talking about the difference between a minute and a minute 45.
Even a 30GB 4K-resolution movie (the biggest on Sky currently) will download in about 8 minutes at the lower speed.
https://dls-tech.co.uk/sky-q-how-big-are-the-4k-uhd-movies/

And, of course, you can watch the film as soon as it starts to download, there will be zero buffering even on a MUCH lower speed connection...

It's the upload speed that's most important to me as I do a lot of video editing and content that requires uploading to clients and the difference between the 500 and 900 is 50/110 upload speed which when you're uploading larger video files is twice as fast.
That being said, if you're paying for a 900mb service why wouldn't you want to get the benefit of it?

AdrianC

Your internal networking is not assymetric, like the external broadband - so if it's supporting 500megabit internally, there'd be no issue with 110megabit upload.

I presume you make sure to drive your car at its maximum speed on the motorway regularly, to make sure you're getting your money's worth.

superblade

AdrianC said:

Your internal networking is not assymetric, like the external broadband - so if it's supporting 500megabit internally, there'd be no issue with 110megabit upload.

I presume you make sure to drive your car at its maximum speed on the motorway regularly, to make sure you're getting your money's worth.

What a silly comment and entirely irrelevant to the point. Had you bothered to read my full reasons as to why I was installing CAT6 you would realise it is more than just for giving internet access to devices. 
I'm obviously aware internal isn't assymetric but you decided to come out with the 'willy-wangling' comment about the need for 900mb internet, when BT do a 900/110 and 300/50 - given upload is important to me that is the reason i am on the 900mb connection.
And yes, why on earth would i not want to make use of the 900mb connection if that's something i'm paying for?
But it's fine you keep on trolling mate.

AdrianC

superblade said:

AdrianC said:

Your internal networking is not assymetric, like the external broadband - so if it's supporting 500megabit internally, there'd be no issue with 110megabit upload.

I presume you make sure to drive your car at its maximum speed on the motorway regularly, to make sure you're getting your money's worth.

What a silly comment and entirely irrelevant to the point. Had you bothered to read my full reasons as to why I was installing CAT6 you would realise it is more than just for giving internet access to devices.

<shrug> Fine. I wasn't going to bother with those, which is why I snipped them, but...

HDMI over wifi is a thing, too. The vast majority of HDMI is only about 5gigabit, so no real issues there.

And if you think that even if you can persuade them to put a bit of internal cat around, they're going to be putting suitably located and protected patch points where you want them for CCTV cameras... Good luck with that...
(Personally, I like living somewhere CCTV isn't needed.)

I'm obviously aware internal isn't assymetric but you decided to come out with the 'willy-wangling' comment about the need for 900mb internet, when BT do a 900/110 and 300/50 - given upload is important to me that is the reason i am on the 900mb connection.
And yes, why on earth would i not want to make use of the 900mb connection if that's something i'm paying for?

And you would be getting 500 download - which is more than 300. The actual difference between 500 and 900 is irrelevant for all practical purposes.

Loads of internal networking is a nice to have for the small proportion of us who are geeks. There is no way you will ever persuade Joe Public that it's a thing worth paying for. And if you can't persuade Joe Public to simply walk away from houses without it, you are never EVER going to persuade developers that it's more hassle than benefit.

superblade

I agree, it isn't a joe public thing, but it is useful to have and has practical uses over and above internet connections is my main point. If the developers don't play ball thats fine, i'll just have to do it afterwards. The developers did state that it's something they're adding to their extras but not for this development so there must be a market for it.
Totally understand the point re 500 and 900 being negligible and it would be to me, if they did a 500/100 connection i'd have that. 
Re the CCTV - You'll only realise you need it after something has happened. I live in a very nice area, but criminals don't go after stuff in their own back yard do they? I had a car stolen once, they broke in and stole the keys in the middle of the night a few years back at an old house. I've had CCTV since. We shouldn't need it but that's the world we live in I suppose! If you don't have it, it's a good deterrent to have regardless.

Arfa__

AdrianC said:

Mickey666 said:

Cash-Cows said:

Seems shortsighted that this is not standard let alone an option. 

Absolutely!  indeed, I'd go one further and say it should be a requirement in building regulations for new builds.

It's still very, VERY much niche.

Let's face it, most people have most of their kit on wireless.
A lot of households don't even have a desktop computer - they just have mobile devices, phones/tabs. If they do have an actual PC, it's a laptop which a lot of the time they'll use on battery at the kitchen table.

Maybe I'm also niche, but I've owned Sony Playstations with ethernet, I've a Sony TV with ethernet, a bluray player with ethernet and a Mac mini with ethernet - and that's all just in the lounge. My youngest is into online gaming and appreciates decent ethernet to his room, I'm working from home and certainly appreciate reliable ethernet at my desk. Wifi is all great and I do use a much on wifi, but ethernet in the house is also great to have as well.

It's probably not enough to walk away from an otherwise dream house, I'd be looking at getting it fitted on the side or later on.

Mickey666

AdrianC said:

And if you think that even if you can persuade them to put a bit of internal cat around, they're going to be putting suitably located and protected patch points where you want them for CCTV cameras... Good luck with that...
(Personally, I like living somewhere CCTV isn't needed.)

You've fallen into the trap of judging others by your own blinkered requirements.

The whole point of structured cabling is flexibility, ie being able to support what ANYONE might want to use their home network for, not something that's tailored for just what YOU happen to want from it.

For example, your rather condescending comment about CCTV seems based on a personal assumption that it's only used for security purposes and you've presumably not thought about many other applications.  For example, I have four CCTV cameras monitoring wildlife sites on my land because I find it interesting watching a family of otters at play or a pair of swans hatching their cygnets - though I fully understand it would not interest many people.  I also have one monitoring our lane because the entrance is not visible from the house and if I'm in my workshops or garden I used to miss my frequent courier deliveries, but now I configure the camera software to trigger an alert to my smartphone whenever anything bigger than a cat (or deer!) crosses a 'virtual boundary' so I now never miss a delivery.

Similarly with gigabit network speeds.  Anyone routinely moving large files around their home network will want the fastest speed possible - it's not all about downloading 4k videos via the internet!  I frequently need to move multi-gigabyte project files across my home PCs (multi-track audio and video projects for example, or 25,000 jpegs to create a timelapse video) and the faster the better.  Besides, gigabit switches are pretty standard items these days so why not use them to their maximum?  There really is no downside to having a really fast network.

But you're right that not ALL activities require such speeds.  In fact, my external wildlife cameras run over around 150m of cat5e, which is way outside the 1000-Base-T spec, and the only way I can get them to work over that distance is to use the 'Extend' mode in my smart switch, which effectively throttles the cable speed to 10 Mbps but is fine for HD CCTV cameras.  Fortunately, the PoE function works fine over such distances, so that solves the problem of powering such remote cameras.

Again, it's all about flexibility and having a network infrastructure that can cater for ALL requirements, not just those that you think are needed.

iampetesmith

Mickey666 said:

AdrianC said:

And if you think that even if you can persuade them to put a bit of internal cat around, they're going to be putting suitably located and protected patch points where you want them for CCTV cameras... Good luck with that...
(Personally, I like living somewhere CCTV isn't needed.)

You've fallen into the trap of judging others by your own blinkered requirements.

The whole point of structured cabling is flexibility, ie being able to support what ANYONE might want to use their home network for, not something that's tailored for just what YOU happen to want from it.

For example, your rather condescending comment about CCTV seems based on a personal assumption that it's only used for security purposes and you've presumably not thought about many other applications.  For example, I have four CCTV cameras monitoring wildlife sites on my land because I find it interesting watching a family of otters at play or a pair of swans hatching their cygnets - though I fully understand it would not interest many people.  I also have one monitoring our lane because the entrance is not visible from the house and if I'm in my workshops or garden I used to miss my frequent courier deliveries, but now I configure the camera software to trigger an alert to my smartphone whenever anything bigger than a cat (or deer!) crosses a 'virtual boundary' so I now never miss a delivery.

Similarly with gigabit network speeds.  Anyone routinely moving large files around their home network will want the fastest speed possible - it's not all about downloading 4k videos via the internet!  I frequently need to move multi-gigabyte project files across my home PCs (multi-track audio and video projects for example, or 25,000 jpegs to create a timelapse video) and the faster the better.  Besides, gigabit switches are pretty standard items these days so why not use them to their maximum?  There really is no downside to having a really fast network.

But you're right that not ALL activities require such speeds.  In fact, my external wildlife cameras run over around 150m of cat5e, which is way outside the 1000-Base-T spec, and the only way I can get them to work over that distance is to use the 'Extend' mode in my smart switch, which effectively throttles the cable speed to 10 Mbps but is fine for HD CCTV cameras.  Fortunately, the PoE function works fine over such distances, so that solves the problem of powering such remote cameras.

Again, it's all about flexibility and having a network infrastructure that can cater for ALL requirements, not just those that you think are needed.

I think mine's been set up quite flexible, if I ever sell the house I'll leave it there for the new owners. Each bedroom has a double network socket, the dining room has a double network socket, there are 2 double sockets behind the TV at the front of the living room and another double socket at the back of the living room where the media PC and stereo are.

There are 2 spare POE sockets on the adapter that can be connected in the cabinet to make any of the wall sockets POE if needed, then the other 2 already power a CCTV camera each at the front & back.

I'd like to think anyone can move in, plug their router into any wall socket they want and it'll go back to the switch and give a cabled connection to every room in the house. Not planning on selling the house any time soon, but I've set it up so it can be used by anyone.

I only use the Gigabit connection for large data transfers between the machines like disk images, but it's good for that. I only get about 20 meg upload over the internet though, so when I back it up to the NAS at my parents house I occasionally send 100GB over it which has to be left on overnight. Mainly is just a few photos and other stuff, so that can be sent in minutes it's just when I've done disk images of the machines after a Windows feature update I could do with a faster upload speed.

keiratea

One thing I've not seen mentioned yet ... another reason to have wired Ethernet is not so much the bandwidth, but a consistently low "ping".

Often on Windows 10 using WiFi I find one frequently gets little ping spikes where there's a tiny extra delay - not noticeable for web browsing or watching videos - but very annoying for first-person-shooter gamers or if you are using remote desktop software or if you've "ssh-d" onto a remote server.

But personally instead of running cables everywhere I've found the TP-Link Deco Mesh products to be very good - they connect to each other via WiFi, but you can connect your equipment to them via Ethernet. And whatever the Deco nodes do to talk to each other seems much more reliable than normal WiFi.