What is Digg?26 Comments
- flex411, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0new for dynatem not others.
this just in linksys made a 4 port, thats right 4 port router my friends!! - osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yea, 10gb/s is probably way faster than any "computer" can send data. If you get enough disks together though, you can probably use more than one gig at a time.
Also, if you keep disks out of the picture and use ram, you can get some pretty good speeds. I admit this isn't targeted very well, 10 meters? That doesn't buy you too much.
It says server to switch connections... what switch will you connect it to?
Does anyone know if PCI-X will run anywhere close to 10gb/s, I thought it was much less than that. - vertigoblue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0yeah... isn't that too fast for most computers to transfer data? Hard drives don't spin that fast, do they???
- vernsan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Where in Japan are you yukevster? I've heard of this before, and why are we still slow here in the US?
- socket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0No PCI-X at 133 MHz peaks out at 1066 MB/s. You can double that for PCI-X 2.0 at 266 MHz naturally. If any bus can support it at even close to spec PCI-E with 32 lanes would support 8000 MB/s. So forget about PCI-X and think PCI Express.
This has no sane application for normal consumers. It'll find a better home in data centers and network infrastructure. - osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0socket, I agree there is no useful application for consumers. Furthermore, I would say this is just pretty cool physics but not practical in any way. Nobody really supports this speed on copper anywhere else, so what good is your network if you can't connect it to anything at that speed?
Also, why use this 10m application when you can just use fiber that ranges from 15m-80km?
I wonder what kind of crosstalk you will get with that thing anyway...? - bnolsen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0PCI-X....with PCI Express having been out for almost 2 years now I still can't freakin' believe there's like NOTHING out there for PCE Express server peripherals. At work we've been having bad problems with PCI-X being the bottleneck in our storage arrays, not the gigabit or storage. There are just a couple of PCI Express cards that have recently come out in the past couple of months, but the problem is these are lone vendors with no competition which allows them to ask whatever they want (which is usually some multiplier of the PCI-X part). Two years is a freakin' eternity in this market.
- yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Here is Japan I get 100 Mbps and as far as I know it won't be going above this (to the public) for some years yet. America is miles behind here anyway.
- yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Here is Japan I get 100 Mbps and as far as I know it won't be going above this (to the public) for some years yet. America is miles behing here anyway.
- thatsiebguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+010m? so thats what, from my desk to the next room..? Probably only worth going from a server to a switch in the same rack. I'd still go with fiber..
- RalphWiggum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This could be very useful for data centers with specialized hardware especially relating to backups where you may be transferring terrabytes over the wire. I agree that for the average user this technology doesnt fit well within standard computer architecture/limitations.
- eclectro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0might be good for your beowulf cluster
- lowbot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+010 meters. This is just for data centers and the like. Its not last mile home/small office consumer stuff.
- basegreen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sometimes... buildings have existing cables, and the cost of changing them is extreme. This is a good option for them, I think.
- drycounty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0the price is always steep whenever stuff like this comes out from a single manufacturer. Just wait until Netgear get their hands on the tech, and all will be well.
- BleckLord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+010GigE over copper is not new; its not even that exciting. If you have a data center that needs to backup terabytes, you better have already invested in fiber.
- alecks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0what they forgot to mention, is the liquid cooling system required for the 10meter runs of each cable to prevent them from bursting into flames after 2 milliseconds of use.
- jumjum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wonder if this will lower the price of optical cable & optical network models.
- danlin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i could really use this. my gigabit network max out at around 200 mbits in real-life throughput during file backups. maybe this theroretical 10-gbits will give me something closer to 1 gbit in real-life.
- nicks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow!?!? a whole 10 meters. That means i can transfer my data from here----------to here faster then ever!
- TheStooge1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Will this help my TI-994a load faster?
- mattcohn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0For everyone who says there is no commercial reason and computers disks can't deliver that data... may I point out that a video and even audio streaming machine can eat through that much bandwidth very easily. I am picturing a rack with a switch that supports 10Gbps over copper wire (yet to be developed) connected to a streaming computer serving thousands or tens of thousands of video and/or audio clients. Think that's unreasonable? It isn't. Worried by the fact that nothing else supports 10Gbps over Cooper yet? I'm not. It will be developed. And just the same way that no one could envision a need for broadband speeds way back in the day, people aren't seeing that this will most likely become standard in the coming years after the technology develops, the distance improves, and more devices are introduced which support it.
- pr0t3st, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0no fu&*ing way!
- Fourzero, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1*****
- gabeN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0thats sweet, I could see it getting used a lot in the commercial, or governmental sectors, but damn! $2000 is a little steep for me.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is