EdwardATeller wrote:


I spent some time testing my network, and you are exactly right.
Having the router plugged into the switch did not affect transfer
speeds between the gigabit-enabled computers. You are also right
about not coming close to gigabit transfer speeds. I moved a file,
listed by Windows as 2,189,264 KB, for the test. It took 215 seconds
using the gigabit adapters, and it took 267 seconds using the T100
adapters. That is less than a 20% improvement, so I am taking the
equipment back to the store. I guess I was thinking it would be 10
times faster, which would be worth it, but a small improvement like
that is not.

Maybe I could buy new cables and improve the situation, but much of
the cable run is behind drywall, so I will just be a little patient
while the files transfer and save a few bucks. Thanks for the help.

You're not trying hard enough :-)

I played with my two Gigabit equipped computers, and wanted to see
what they could do.

First step, was to set up a RAM disk on each computer. The purpose
of that, is to remove the hard drive performance from the equation.

The second step, was the network protocol. I selected FTP as the
most likely candidate to give me fat bandwidth numbers. I set up an
FTPD on one machine, and a client on the other.

By doing that, I was barely able to hit 40MB/sec on a Gigabit link.
But that was using Win2K on the computers, and Win2K isn't the best
at driving the network. Apparently WinXP can do better.

Give it another shot. Even if you don't bother with the RAM disks
on either end, FTP should allow you to do better than that.

I didn't get to use jumbo frames on my setup, because one of the
computers was running ICS at the time (two NICs). And with Win2K
holding me back, there wasn't much point anyway.

Paul