[nSLUG] Cat5e vs Cat6

Daniel Morrison draker at gmail.com
Sun Nov 1 21:07:30 AST 2009


I'm glad you mentioned the max length limit. I was going to say that
regular cat5 will also run gigabit at shorter cable run lengths. I've
seen cat5 behave a bit oddly (blinking link lights) but still transfer
masses of data just fine even when the twisted pairs are mis-wired,
again, at shorter than 100m cable runs. For very short patches, I'd
bet even cat3 would work (not that I'd recommend it, of course).

-D.

2009/11/1 Hatem Nassrat <hnassrat at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Ian Campbell <ian at slu.ms> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 02:12:23PM -0400, Hatem Nassrat wrote:
>>>
>>> Sometimes the network wiring itself may contribute to the speed. I
>>> recently found out that to use Gigabit one should use cat6e wiring.
>>
>> cat5e, although you can certainly use cat6 if you want.
>
> Yeah I was still confused, hence my mention of the imaginary cat6e.
> After chilling on Wikipedia (great when researching non controversial
> topics) I found out that cat5e works up to 1000Base-T
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_over_twisted_pair#Cabling)
> Ethernet, but to get to 10Gbit Ethernet
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Gigabit_Ethernet) you would need Cat6
> Cables (and there is a max length limit of 55m of cable
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_6_cable#Maximum_Length)
>
> --
> Hatem Nassrat



More information about the nSLUG mailing list