Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 384 posts

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#341

Post by LoganDark »

Neywiny wrote: post #162
LoganDark wrote: post #148

I don't understand how a 10GbE adapter is possible without Thunderbolt, or why not being Thunderbolt makes it smaller. In my experience USB speeds faster than 3 don't happen in practice unless you have a Thunderbolt port and device. Maybe I just don't have devices that use the faster USB speeds, but Thunderbolt has always been the one and only way to exceed the speed of USB for me. I think USB 4 exists based on the T…

Because USB can do 2 lanes of 10 gbps. So that's 20gbps. 10 The reason it's smaller to go with USB is that AFAIK thunderbolt only bridges to other interfaces like USB or PCIe. So any thunderbolt NIC is actually thunderbolt -> PCIe, then PCIe -> Ethernet. USB is more often interfaced with directly. 2 big power hungry chips vs 1. 1 Thunderbolt also carries overhead vs oculink. Thunderbolt tunnels PCIe. The PCIe tunnels…

> Thunderbolt isn't part of the equation here because it's not a thunderbolt device or thunderbolt host (even if the port is thunderbolt capable).

The article directly states this device is smaller than a Thunderbolt adapter. I was not calling Thunderbolt part of the equation, just asking how it's possible to reach high speeds without it.

The rest of your explanation makes sense, thanks.

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#342

Post by LoganDark »

ac29 wrote: post #201
LoganDark wrote: post #148

I don't understand how a 10GbE adapter is possible without Thunderbolt, or why not being Thunderbolt makes it smaller. In my experience USB speeds faster than 3 don't happen in practice unless you have a Thunderbolt port and device. Maybe I just don't have devices that use the faster USB speeds, but Thunderbolt has always been the one and only way to exceed the speed of USB for me. I think USB 4 exists based on the T…

Thunderbolt 4 and 5 are just USB (40, 80 Gbps) with mandatory support for otherwise optional USB-C features like video and high power.

Now that USB 4 is just Thunderbolt with less features, yes. Mostly by definition, though.

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#343

Post by wolvoleo »

kd913 wrote: post #283
wolvoleo wrote: post #266

I remember getting my first laptop with gigabit ethernet in 2005, more than 20 years ago! I'm surprised 10gbit is still so uncommon and eyewateringly expensive. And I don't just mean the adapters which are coming down in price finally but also the switches. For more than 10 years we've had semi managed gigabit switches for 25€ like the TP-SG108E. 10gbit is still crazy expensive. Even though it is quite needed these d…

How often do you have to do fast transfers from computer to computer? Would argue for those purposes 40gig thunderbolt makes a lot more sense.

It would but none of my systems have thunderbolt and besides that my NASes are on the other side of the flat where the noise doesn't bother me. Thunderbolt only reaches a metre or two. I assume thunderbolt PCI cards are a thing but the distance is a bigger problem.

I need fast transfers pretty often. I do a weekly image of all my workstations as backup. Right now I do them overnight as it's limited to 110MB/s but this could be done within 15 minutes with 10gbit.

Also, huge media files.

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#344

Post by jshier »

tobinfricke wrote: post #288

How about 10 GbE switches/routers? I have 10 GbE fiber-to-the-home via Sonic, but so far just have it plugged into a Google Wifi router with gigabit ethernet. Would love to have 10 GbE wired to my desk.

Full, multiport 10GbE switches are still rather pricy. You could look at 2.5Gb or 5Gb port routers that have a 10Gb input. You won't be able saturate it with a single device, but you would using multiple devices. Ubiquiti has some nice stuff.

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#345

Post by numpad0 »

Someone1234 wrote: post #151
TomatoCo wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going by Fabien Sanglard's cheat sheet (who I trust uncritically) https://fabiensanglard.net/usbcheat/index.html it looks like 3.2 actually is a broader term than expected. Maybe there was some awful attempt at backwards compatibility? Or forwards?

Great site, thanks for the link. But holy heck, that "Also Known As" column is complete chaos. What the heck is wrong with the USB Consortium, do they have brain damage? Also, according to that table, "USB4 Gen 2×2" is a downgrade on "USB 3.2 Gen 2x2", since the cable length is 0.8m instead of 1m for the same speeds. Which is uhh unexpected.

It allows manufacturers to clear old stocks of cables by rebranding them as latest products.

USB 1+2/3/4 are basically unrelated standards under the same USB umbrella. USB4 especially is just Thunderbolt/PCIe x4 with features. If Betamax was branded as "VHS 2.0" instead of being a separate standard it would have been felt similar to the USB4 situation.

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#346

Post by 15155 »

jshier wrote: post #344
tobinfricke wrote: post #288

How about 10 GbE switches/routers? I have 10 GbE fiber-to-the-home via Sonic, but so far just have it plugged into a Google Wifi router with gigabit ethernet. Would love to have 10 GbE wired to my desk.

Full, multiport 10GbE switches are still rather pricy. You could look at 2.5Gb or 5Gb port routers that have a 10Gb input. You won't be able saturate it with a single device, but you would using multiple devices. Ubiquiti has some nice stuff.

https://store.ui.com/us/en/products/usw-aggregation

https://mikrotik.com/product/crs304_4xg_in

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DLGLRTGF

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#347

Post by namibj »

hdgvhicv wrote: post #83
hnlmorg wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t that only relevant for network topologies that rely heavily on broadcasting to multiple nodes. Eg token ring, WiFi and powerline adapters? For regular Ethernet, the switch will have a table of which IPs are on which NIC and thus can dynamically send packets at the right transmission protocols supported by those NICs without degrading the service of other NICs.

I’ve seen some vlans hit 1mbit BUM filters, I think we had about 800 users on that one. To saturate a 10m link would require a help of a lot of broadcast traffic. 100m is fine. 10m is fine but I can’t think of anything that negotiates 10m other than maybe WOL (I don’t use it enough to be sure from memory). If I didn ahve something esoteric it would be on a specialised vlan anyway.

10m is extended reach copper, you can do about triple the range of 100m with approximately the same transceiver analog prowess.

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#348

Post by namibj »

jburgess777 wrote: post #296
throwawaypath wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>10gb networking has been dead for over 10 years. Not even close to being true, unless you specifically mean 10Gbps over twisted pair (Cat6/7) cable. SFP+ is the default on a ton of network gear still.

I think the point he is making is that the industry first went with a 10g single link, and then 40g over 4 links. Then they figured out how to do 25g over a single link, and 100g over 4 links. Those 25g/100g are common for enterprise switches. It might be fairer to say 40g is dead, 10g still has use cases. Edit to add: If you want an example, these are the NVidia ConnectX nics available from FS.com, the lowest end on…

What they mean is that the cost per bit both capex and opex/power is worse for 10G than 25G for a while now as long as you talk about new hardware.

We're at the point where 25GBaud PAM4 is being replaced by 50GBaud PAM4. That's 50 to 100 Gbit/s.

But iirc the use of PAM4 for the faster ones than "only" 25Gbit/s lanes is a hindrance to managing bottom-barrel price-per-bit. PCIe 3 was 8, PCIe4 was 16, and PCIe 5 is 32 GBaud with a line code basically like the 10+ Gbit/s Ethernet links (well, it's 66b/64b for Eth and 130b/128b for PCIe).

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#349

Post by namibj »

jburgess777 wrote: post #301
ZekeSulastin wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just wish someone would come out with a PCIE 4x1 capable card with SFP - my main desktop’s non-GPU expansion slots are all 4x1 electrically and even the one you linked is a 3x2. As far as I can tell the only 4x1 cards available are RTL8127 or AQC113 RJ45 ones :( I suppose an NVME riser is also an option, albeit janky.

There are RTL8127 cards with SFP+, e.g. https://www.lekuo.com/product_view.php?id=659 edit: on looking closer, that still seems to be an x4 card.

Says electrically 3x2.

Re: New 10 GbE USB adapters are cooler, smaller, cheaper

#350

Post by sixdonuts »

rkagerer wrote: post #223
sixdonuts wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, 10gb over copper is not power efficient so any savings you get from getting a cheap 10gb switch will just go to your power bill. Most cost effective and flexible is a used 25gb switch. Most 25gb switches can do 1/10/25gb. 10gb networking has been dead for over 10 years.

Interesting observation about power use. How close do you think we are to it being practical to wire your whole home with fiber instead of CAT6 or whatever? If you're providing all your own equipment, are willing to purchase a high-end splicer for maintenance, etc. For laptops I assume you need USB/Thunderbolt adapters. (Still no SFP+ or SFP28 module for Framework?) For desktops you'd use an SFP28 card (taking up a P…

If you need 1G or 10GB over copper you can just use a SFP or SFP+ media converter in a 25GB SFP28 switch port. If you have a POE requirement, say for video cameras you either use a dedicated 1GB POE switch or power injector. A 10GBASE-T (RJ-45 copper) switch consumes 3-12 watts per port and a 24 port switch will idle at 50 to 60 watts and run hot. SFP+ and SFP28 ports use under 1 watt per port. I would never recommend a 10GBASE-T copper switch for any use case in this day and age, home or enterprise.
Post reply on HN