Gigabit ethernet card

[Pelicanjoe]

Hey, anyone upgrade their system to use a gigabit ethernet card? I have a gigabit switch, but currently have a 10/100 ethernet connection in my server. Just wondering if anyone has any positive or negative experience with such an upgrade.

It makes logical sense to do this upgrade, but many times I miss something less obvious. As a physicist once said "Practice always works in Theory, but Theory doesn't always work in Practice".

[trini0]

I've always used GigE in my servers. But it all boils down to what you're going to use it for.
For me I plan to have a few HD extenders around the home. Therefore I want to guarantee enough bandwidth on the pipe to the server.
But in the end its more a network design question, but you can put the card in if you have the need for it..

[freedml]

HD200s seem to have an elusive problem with Gigabit switches. It was better with 20090505 firmware, which is where some of us are stuck until Sage figures it out.

[Tomahawk51]

Originally Posted by freedml

HD200s seem to have an elusive problem with Gigabit switches. It was better with 20090505 firmware, which is where some of us are stuck until Sage figures it out.

Hmm, this is the first I have heard of this. Maybe this explains a problem I noticed? It seeems to start with newer firmware updates actually.

When I had the following topology, the HD200 would skip like crazy (HD100 was OK) on DVD rips, TV was fine.

Server ----> TrendNet Green GigEnet switch ----> HD200

When I switched to the following, it all started to work well:

Server ---> Apple 802.11n Airport Extreme router -----> HD200.

[PLUCKYHD]

Originally Posted by freedml

HD200s seem to have an elusive problem with Gigabit switches. It was better with 20090505 firmware, which is where some of us are stuck until Sage figures it out.

Hmm I haven't had any issues with latest firmware.

[Savage1701]

I don't seem to have any GbE issues with my HD200. But, I'd make sure I was installing that GbE card in an x1 slot (Or PCI-X if you are using server-grade boards). PCI 32-bit slot may help but will burn a huge amount of bandwidth taking care of that GbE card and may mess up any PCI tuner cards you have. PCI express is so unlimited (250MB/s or 2.5Gb/s per lane) it will never be what bottlenecks your system.

PCI-X dual GbE cards are dirt cheap, like $50 on the bay used. PCI express dual NIC cards are about $150-$200 and need x4 electrical lanes. 4-NIC PCI express cards are about $475 and need x8 electrical lanes. Ouch.

Single-NIC PCI express cards are about $50 and have have tons of bandwidth to spare, even accounting for overhead and such. I can routinely get 700+ Mb/s on my GbE NIC's transferring DV files - that's borderline for saturating almost any network out there.

I would not even attempt GbE via USB unless you have absolutely nothing on any USB port and even then I think that would be suicide.

I can't speak to wireless N for this sort of thing. Obviously, G and such would be out for HD streaming.

Just some thoughts from someone who's lived a few of those nightmares.

Cat 5e wiring is fine. Cat 6 wire is way too twitchy to punch down and make your own cables and ports with due to insulation and twist requirements and such. I've got successful tests of even Cat 5 with GbE if I am careful on my punchdowns and wall plate outlets and such.

And I think you are smart - I've never run anything other than GbE switches and routers and such. Cat 5e wiring is fine. Cat 6 wire is way too twitchy to punch down and make your own cables and ports with due to insulation and twist requirements and such. Its own internal insulation is also a pain to work with. Try to get a switch you can administrate so you can control QoS settings and such. Also, no matter what anyone says, a 16-24-32-48 port GbE switch is going to have much better, higher-capacity switching fabric than a $50 4-8 port consumer switch at Staples. On the other hand, I've never gone to layer 2 or layer 3. I think that's overkill. I try to stay with "smart switches" that allow a little more management than layer 1. I have messed with link aggregation and such, but have never had really great luck with it, except maybe for load balancing, which is pertinent to Sage if it is serving multiple clients. Most modern motherboards allow NIC teaming anyway for that sort of thing, but it sort of also needs to be supported at the switch level as well, so newer is better. If my MB had 2-4 integrated NIC's and I wanted to team, I'd go with load balancing and failover protection, not fat piping.

Better routers will offer better DHCP and static options, as well as reserverd IP address lists and such. This can help as you can always locate the same device on your network. It just holds a lease open for the MAC of the device and gives it the same IP when it sees it.

Just a few ramblings. Probably way more than you wanted to read. Best wishes on your networking.

[freedml]

Originally Posted by PLUCKYHD

Hmm I haven't had any issues with latest firmware.

Ok, we'll put you in the 'elusive' category.

Seems to me that if 20090505 works so much better with consumer gigabit switches (and, we are Consumers, aren't we?), why don't they go back to those network drivers??????? Or specify that you need "XYZ" in a gigabit switch. Or at least have a built-in network test (no, not something you have to jump through hoops to run and then more hoops to interpret).

There was also the user who put another gigabit switch next to each HD200. All of a sudden the problems disappeared. Presumably because the switches were sending the data over the long run and the HD200 only had to deal with a few feet of cable. I think this points to a hardware deficiency in the HD200 that was made worse by network driver firmware 'enhancements' since 20090505.

[JetreL]

now that's just sounds like a silly observation. Sounds like there was something wrong with the cable that the switch was able to overcome. (probably signal strength) Wrong cable type, pairing wrong, connections not making firm enough contact. Nothing that would be inherent to just the HD200 and Gigabit Ethernet.

[freedml]

Originally Posted by JetreL

now that's just sounds like a silly observation. Sounds like there was something wrong with the cable that the switch was able to overcome. (probably signal strength) Wrong cable type, pairing wrong, connections not making firm enough contact. Nothing that would be inherent to just the HD200 and Gigabit Ethernet.

Just as logically there is something wrong with the HD200 that the extra switch was able to overcome. People with both HD200s and HD100s only have problems with the HD200s using the same wires, switches, etc.

[Clift]

I have a D-Link Gigabit switch and haven't had any problems with the HD200, and I am running the latest firmware 0903

[stanger89]

My Netgear GS608 has been flawless as well.

[HelenWeathers]

My 3Com 3C1670800B Gigabit has no problems either, and it's a couple of years old.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by freedml

Ok, we'll put you in the 'elusive' category.

Seems to me that if 20090505 works so much better with consumer gigabit switches (and, we are Consumers, aren't we?), why don't they go back to those network drivers??????? Or specify that you need "XYZ" in a gigabit switch. Or at least have a built-in network test (no, not something you have to jump through hoops to run and then more hoops to interpret).

There was also the user who put another gigabit switch next to each HD200. All of a sudden the problems disappeared. Presumably because the switches were sending the data over the long run and the HD200 only had to deal with a few feet of cable. I think this points to a hardware deficiency in the HD200 that was made worse by network driver firmware 'enhancements' since 20090505.

Oh, never thought of that. I actually by chance have an 8-port managed Gbe switch 3 ft. from my HD200 and several other devices in my living room that needs ethernet and have no network issues per se, not that I have not had others !!!

It's actually kind of ashame that really good GbE testers/sweepers (think Fluke) go from a grand on up to 5k or 10k. Cheapest cable tester I could ever find that did more than find open/short/crossed pairs was around 1k. There's gotta be a better way. I will say that Sage has better discovery options and controls than BTV, but that's a back-handed complement and not helpful here.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by Savage1701

It's actually kind of ashame that really good GbE testers/sweepers (think Fluke) go from a grand on up to 5k or 10k. Cheapest cable tester I could ever find that did more than find open/short/crossed pairs was around 1k.

Yeah, I've been looking for the same thing. I don't suppose you have a part number, I doubt I'd buy it but I'm still curious.

[SandKicker]

For what its worth, here is my observation:

For a few years I'd been using a Netgear GS108 eight port gigabit switch. Since I set up SageTV last winter, I had no problem streaming Blu-Ray files through my HD200 extender. The picture was smooth as silk on the Pioneer Elite. I would update the server when I could and regularly checked for beta updates for the extender. Then in late July, my Netgear switch crapped out, so I picked up a D-Link DGS-1008D eight port "green" gigabit switch. Now my Blu-Ray playbacks where choppy, playing for a few seconds then freezing for a few seconds. After countless hours of troubleshooting, reading, swapping cables, reinstalling the server and pulling out my hair, I see there are other people experiencing this problem. I know I had newer updates on the extender since 20090505, but my problem didn't show up till I changed switches. So today, I decided, rather than try the old firmware and give up the latest features of the new firmware, I pulled out an old 10/100 D-Link four port hub and put it directly between the server and the extender, with another lead going back to the 1008D. Much to my delight, once again, the Blu-Ray files play flawlessly through the extender.

What I can see from all this, is that my D-Link DGS-1008D gigabit switch has an issue with my setup. Yet the older "non Green" switches, being gigabit or 10/100, don't flinch with the larger files. I think part of what makes the switch "green" is that it senses cable length and adjusts the signal strength accordingly, though that may not be the problem. For now, I'll just stick with my old hub as it works well.

[toddyus]

I find this whole conversation very interesting. Here's my experience. I have three HD200s. I was fooling around with a blu-ray rip I made the other day (first time trying this) and found the following:

HD200 #1 - bedroom: cable from server-->D-link gaming router (DGL-4300, I think)-->TrendNet gigabit switch; about 75 feet to switch and 30 feet from switch to HD200; this scenario produces choppy playback and audio sync problems

HD200 #2 - Kitchen: server-->gaming router-->35 feet to HD200; this scenario also produces choppy playback and sync problems

HD200 #3 -- basement: server-->gaming router-->6 feet to D-Link "green" 5-port gigabit switch --> 6 feet to HD200; this scenario produces flawless playback

In all these cases, DVD playback (ripped files through MC) works fine. The blu-ray source files are exactly the same in each scenario.

Until I read this thread, my suspicion was with the displays. In the flawless basement example, the HD200 is playing a 1080p file over HDMI on a native 1080p display. Kitchen HD200 is playing the same file over component to a native SVGA (800x600) display; Bedroom HD200 is playing over component to a 720p display. Incidentally, I have not tried the bedroom HD200 at 1080i output.

So many variables to test. If someone has a clear answer, great. Otherwise, I welcome any suggestions for a scientific approach to testing different scenarios. Will be messing with this, this weekend (if the baby allows me...)

Incidentally, per one of the posts in here. I have an old D-link, non-green 5-port 10/100 switch I can throw into the mix.

[freedml]

My first suggestion would be to leave the setup the same but move the HD200s around. I expect the problems will stay with the 'wire' not the HD200.

I think the HD200 network drivers that were changed after 5/5 now have a problem with some combinations of gigabit switches/routers and/or longer (but within spec) cable runs.

[toddyus]

Okay. I'll try that when I get home and report back.

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by stanger89

Yeah, I've been looking for the same thing. I don't suppose you have a part number, I doubt I'd buy it but I'm still curious.

Try Tech Tool Supply. They have some testers in the $500-$1000 range if memory serves. They are not fluke but they may get the job done. Some switches will test cable as well (My Linksys SW224P does).

[Savage1701]

Originally Posted by toddyus

I find this whole conversation very interesting. Here's my experience. I have three HD200s. I was fooling around with a blu-ray rip I made the other day (first time trying this) and found the following:

HD200 #1 - bedroom: cable from server-->D-link gaming router (DGL-4300, I think)-->TrendNet gigabit switch; about 75 feet to switch and 30 feet from switch to HD200; this scenario produces choppy playback and audio sync problems

HD200 #2 - Kitchen: server-->gaming router-->35 feet to HD200; this scenario also produces choppy playback and sync problems

HD200 #3 -- basement: server-->gaming router-->6 feet to D-Link "green" 5-port gigabit switch --> 6 feet to HD200; this scenario produces flawless playback

In all these cases, DVD playback (ripped files through MC) works fine. The blu-ray source files are exactly the same in each scenario.

Until I read this thread, my suspicion was with the displays. In the flawless basement example, the HD200 is playing a 1080p file over HDMI on a native 1080p display. Kitchen HD200 is playing the same file over component to a native SVGA (800x600) display; Bedroom HD200 is playing over component to a 720p display. Incidentally, I have not tried the bedroom HD200 at 1080i output.

So many variables to test. If someone has a clear answer, great. Otherwise, I welcome any suggestions for a scientific approach to testing different scenarios. Will be messing with this, this weekend (if the baby allows me...)

Incidentally, per one of the posts in here. I have an old D-link, non-green 5-port 10/100 switch I can throw into the mix.

IMHO this "green" crud is for the birds and that's not a shot at you at all. I personally would not trust Trend Net for quality. That's nothing personal or snobby, so please don't be offended by that comment. I've used inexpensive switches for simple networking, but I would not for streaming video. I'd spend the coin to get a good "smart" switch. Better than Layer 1 unmanaged, but you probably don't need Level 2 and certainly not Level 3. The better the switch the better the switching fabric AND the fabric capacity. This matters quite a bit. You will also get some quality of service options and such. I've used GbE 24-port and up switches with smart capabilities.

Watch out for Jumbo Frames. In theory, if all your switches and NIC's support the EXACT same size frame it will help. It rarely works out that way.

I still think that any onboard NIC or add-in NIC needs to be PCI-express or PCI-X. PCI burns too much bandwidth that gets divided amongst too many parts of the MB, including the PCI slots. A single GbE switch will burn most of the bandwidth of a 32-bit PCI bus. Most consumer boards dump firewire and other stuff onto that same PCI bus. Server-grade boards will at least give you 2 or 3 seperate PCI-X and/or PCI buses (think SuperMicro). I stick with Intel x1 NIC's if I don't want to use my onboard NIC's, which are usually Marvell. I would rate Marvell as so-so. Intel is far better. Broadcom was fine but is not seen much these days.

If you aggregate your NIC's make sure your switch can handle how you aggregate. I only use basic load balancing and failover on my on-board NIC's, so my switch does not need to be anything special. That helps when different clients tap my server. Load balancing works.

You can also try QoS settings on your switch if it allows it to allocate priority to the ports that serve your Sage clients. You can go to advanced load balancing and bandwidth aggregation if your switch can handle that as well. Honestly, GbE on a good switch (not a hub) ought to have so much bandwidth you could not use it. Sometimes altering TCP/IP offloading on the NIC can help, as can receive window size, etc.

Are you using good 5e cable for your runs and patch cables? I don't mess with Cat 6 as it's much harder to work with due to twist requirements to keep it in spec and heavy insulation. 5e is easier to punch down and make your own patch cables if you want to.

I'm guessing an average Blu-Ray maxes at 30-35Mb/s (if my PS3 bit meter means anything) and if memory serves ATSC goes at around 20Mb/s. GbE should saturate at around 750Mb/s on a good switch. I can't imagine you are saturating your network unless you have low-capacity switching fabric in your switch.

I've got a couple ripped .m2ts files (I think this falls under Fair Use since I own the discs) that I have tinkered with and tried editing - I guess I need to see how they play over my HD200 and maybe a software client.

Just thoughts.