Why is consumer Ethernet stuck at 1 Gigabit? Why are 10 Gigabit

>>52466058
Because the vast majority of consumers don't need anything faster than gigabit and even those that have gigabit hardly ever actually use gigabit speeds or even have gigabit internet connections.

>>52466058
Because normies don't use home networks that much, so as long as it's faster than the internet speed, it's good enough.
Normies also moved to mostly wireless.

You don't need 10 Gigabit to stream YIFY encodes from your NAS.

10GigE is shitty and expensive, that's why.

>>52466088
>>52466091
>>52466168

All of these are true, I work for an ISP and most devices are interconnected at 1Gbps with no issue to the end user

>>52466237
>shitty
explain yourself.
you won't, of course

The same reason most consumers don't have a UPS in between their desktop computer and the wall - they don't need it

>>52466309
Too many different types of interconnects.
1GigE standardized on Cat5e and Cat6, with RJ45 connectors.
10GigE isn't standardized at all, and most of the interconnects are prohibitively expensive over long distances.

>>52466332
Everyone needs a UPS, normies just don't realize it.

>>52466335
It's basically standardized on Cat6/7 RJ45 for cheap hardware. Higher end hardware has standardized on SFP+ with DACs for short range (1-3m), copper and multi-mode fiber for medium range (3-30m), and single-mode fiber for long-ass hauls up to 40km.

>>52466058
Well one because most consumer networks aren't even using a full 1gbps at the moment, and further the NBASE-T standard is currently being looked at to extend the life of current CAT5e cable to 2.5gbps without a need to upgrade infrastructure.

>>52466370
Yeah, and it's still gonna be at least five years or so until that shit is cheap enough for mass deployment outside of high-grade datacenter usage.

Allow me to alter my original declaration:
10GigE is shitty and expensive at this point in time, but that will eventually change.

>>52466350
>normies

my favorite meme XD

>>52466058
because consumers don't need 10 gigabits you fucking idiot. grow a brain

why isn't there 100gb

>>52466474
>implying there isn't

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Gigabit_Ethernet

>>52466474
There is, but its not copper, its fibre optics.

Why does gigabit ethernet give more than 125MB/s bandwidth?

>>52466058
Because even on a heavy load network 10gig can drive a backbone connection.

>>52466536
Jumbo packets.

>>52466536
Because 8 bits. 1gbps is not GBps

>>52466407

intel is already getting the ball rolling

it will appear within the next 3 chipsets

>>52466088
I have a 500/500 connection, if my server downloads at my max speed I can only access my files at 50% speed. I kinda want 10Gbps.

>>52466681
the odds of you finding a server that will actually saturate that connection is rare enough for you not to concern yourself

>>52466748
It actually happens more often then you think, torrents not as quickly unless multiple ones but steam will hit the 500mbit easily, and we mostly use Usenet to download our entertainment and that easily saturates the line as well.

>>52466767
well then good thing 500mbits is less than 1 gigabit, meaning you still wont saturate your line in the first place