Julf
Facts are our friends
WiFi shouldn't cause human-detectable latency, unless there is routing/DNS/DHCP issues involved.
Ethernet or Wi Fi
- Thread starter nbaptista
- Start date
WiFi shouldn't cause human-detectable latency, unless there is routing/DNS/DHCP issues involved.
Julf
Facts are our friends
How do you know Cat6 is twice as fast? Wireless is of course wireless...
And yes, when you try to do hundreds or thousands of MHz, wire impedance, topology and design starts to matter.
Darth Vader
From the Dark Side
It doesn't. Electricity travels at the same speed through copper wire and its pretty fast approaching (mostly) that of light. No, cables attenuate AC be that pulses or sine waves due to resistance, capacitance and inductance. The higher the frequency the more effect that L & C will have. Thus with Cat6 cable data starts at 10Gbps for short cable runs but at 164' it is down to 1Gbps the same as Cat5e.
Oh did I fergit to mention crosstalk? That goes on a lot on pfm!
Cheers,
DV
Derek Wright
pfm Member
Hi rockingdoc - a name from the past (I think) on the other place.
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
Your Cat 5 cable runs at 100Mbps because it is being driven at 100Mbps. Assuming the cable is in good condition, terminated correctly, not excessively long and not exposed to excessive noise, it would probably support 1Gbps if driven by a gigabit switch. If you already have a gigabit switch, then it is likely that one or more of the above conditions has not been met.
Another fun fact is that wired Ethernet can be run full duplex or half duplex. Full duplex means that your 100Mbps Ethernet can carry 100Mbps in both directions simultaneously.
zippy
pfm Member
you might find the following interesting.
https://www.lifewire.com/how-fast-is-a-wifi-network-816543
I suspect your wifi is running 80211n
In the old days we used to assume wireless ran at 54 Mbps, and cabled at 100 Mbps
https://www.lifewire.com/how-fast-is-a-wifi-network-816543
I suspect your wifi is running 80211n
In the old days we used to assume wireless ran at 54 Mbps, and cabled at 100 Mbps
Julf
Facts are our friends
No mobile phone either?
Any pointers to research actually showing health issues? Seems the issue is controversial, to say the least...
The UK government doesn't seem to agree with you: Public Health England - Wi-Fi
Darth Vader
From the Dark Side
You do realise that the earth is flooded with photons some of which have very high energies indeed. Radio frequencies are relatively low energy by comparison. You can't escape them those pesky photons are everywhere.
Its the intensity that matters.
Cheers,
DV
You're just making life hard for yourself unnecessarily. It's not going to make a blind bit of difference to your health.
adamdea
You are not a sound quality evaluation device
It does, but only if you wear a tin foil hat at all times.
Strictly Stereo
Trade: Strictly Stereo
I found this on the Internet...
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (part of the World Health Organisation) has classified WiFi as "possibly carcinogenic", along with coffee, carpentry and pickled vegetables.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (part of the World Health Organisation) has classified WiFi as "possibly carcinogenic", along with coffee, carpentry and pickled vegetables.
No, I can´t configure. I didn´t see anything in the Nad settings.
Darth Vader
From the Dark Side
If you are receiving TV, films or audio streams over the Internet then buffering is a big advantage to have as it stops 'stuttering'. The Internet is designed for bursty traffic so the throughput varies depending on the loading. So if your device says gimme some more data but the Internet delays this you will experience stuttering. Buffering overcomes this by providing a steady stream of traffic to your CODEC's.
Cheers,
DV
