<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CAT 5e or CAT 6 cables for server gigabit speeds</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.megaburst.com/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.megaburst.com/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/</link>
	<description>High performance web site building</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 11:52:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.megaburst.com/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/comment-page-1/#comment-8195</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 11:52:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.megaburst.com/hardware/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/#comment-8195</guid>
		<description>yes, at least 90m Ethernet cables should be tested with cat5e and cat6e connectors. etc. cannot do tests like that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yes, at least 90m Ethernet cables should be tested with cat5e and cat6e connectors. etc. cannot do tests like that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aj</title>
		<link>http://www.megaburst.com/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/comment-page-1/#comment-2666</link>
		<dc:creator>aj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:44:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.megaburst.com/hardware/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/#comment-2666</guid>
		<description>Previous comments are true, but even still, would you not want to use cables that are much, much longer. No way you can get recordable results to compare with a 5ft cable.

Seriously though, good luck with you trials and learning. It&#039;s fun.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Previous comments are true, but even still, would you not want to use cables that are much, much longer. No way you can get recordable results to compare with a 5ft cable.</p>
<p>Seriously though, good luck with you trials and learning. It&#8217;s fun.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gunnar</title>
		<link>http://www.megaburst.com/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/comment-page-1/#comment-2257</link>
		<dc:creator>Gunnar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.megaburst.com/hardware/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/#comment-2257</guid>
		<description>People tend to forget research - the gigabit standard is based on the cat5e cabeling std, all network cards supporting Gbit are therefore also based on this.

I agree that cat6 may give you better margines in the signaling scheme (osi level 1) but that makes a difference only when you have a sloppy installation

since an installation of cat5e should include a test protocol - just like cat6, one might ask, why accept a sloppy installation? 

I find it more interesting comparing the physical comparison:
cat6 cabeling often includes a plastic core and has a minimum bend radius of 5 - 10 cm ( 2 - 4 inches) -depending on brand

cat5e cabeling has a more reasonable bend radius 1-2 inches

pls visualize which std is easiest to install correctly</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People tend to forget research &#8211; the gigabit standard is based on the cat5e cabeling std, all network cards supporting Gbit are therefore also based on this.</p>
<p>I agree that cat6 may give you better margines in the signaling scheme (osi level 1) but that makes a difference only when you have a sloppy installation</p>
<p>since an installation of cat5e should include a test protocol &#8211; just like cat6, one might ask, why accept a sloppy installation? </p>
<p>I find it more interesting comparing the physical comparison:<br />
cat6 cabeling often includes a plastic core and has a minimum bend radius of 5 &#8211; 10 cm ( 2 &#8211; 4 inches) -depending on brand</p>
<p>cat5e cabeling has a more reasonable bend radius 1-2 inches</p>
<p>pls visualize which std is easiest to install correctly</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Etherealmind</title>
		<link>http://www.megaburst.com/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/comment-page-1/#comment-476</link>
		<dc:creator>Etherealmind</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:21:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.megaburst.com/hardware/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/#comment-476</guid>
		<description>Your cables will not impact your testing at this level. The extra spectral bandwidth provided by Cat6 is not relevant to Ethernet throughput since it is defined at Layer 2 of the OSI model, and cabling will only be relevant at Layer 1. 

Unless you have a poor electrical environment, in which case, Cat6 is more likely to sustain throughput.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your cables will not impact your testing at this level. The extra spectral bandwidth provided by Cat6 is not relevant to Ethernet throughput since it is defined at Layer 2 of the OSI model, and cabling will only be relevant at Layer 1. </p>
<p>Unless you have a poor electrical environment, in which case, Cat6 is more likely to sustain throughput.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kai</title>
		<link>http://www.megaburst.com/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/comment-page-1/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Kai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:20:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.megaburst.com/hardware/cat-5e-or-cat-6-cables-for-server-gigabit-speeds/#comment-15</guid>
		<description>The test architecture was as follows:

Server1 -&gt; Switch -&gt; Server2</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The test architecture was as follows:</p>
<p>Server1 -> Switch -> Server2</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
