Getting Fiber 1 Gbps- network recommendations?

[wp746911]

So up until this point my home network has always been significantly faster than my internet connection. I'm in a new house now and am getting fiber installed on friday (C-spire), bumping my 50 Mbps cable internet speeds to 1000 Mbps. I'm not too excited to run ethernet cable throughout the house- would love to, just don't wanna spend the time or money at this point.

Right now I have a netgear r7000 nighthawk router located at my main TV (which is a 4k tv, which I occasionaly stream 4k shows)- the fiber will likely enter at this point and connect to the router here. This router broadcasts over my house (3300 sq. ft- about 10+ wireless devices connected at any one time- most ipads/ipods/imacs with built in access cards), with a 'main' pc (gaming, etc) connected via a usb AC1200 adapter (will install a PCE-AC68 adapter in a few days) and a ps4 and HD tv on the other side of the house which also connect.

I've considered 'upgrading' to a newer router (r8000?), just from what I can tell im not sure it will help me much more.

Get the AC5300 when its released (?$$$$$)?

Other options to consider is maybe another r7000 (or a few R7000s) as a bridges by my main computer and throughout the house (by other TVs etc)?

Any cheaper options than an r7000 as a bridge? I have the PCE-AC68 coming in a few days and I'll see how that works.

Any thoughts? Just faced with an interesting dilema of 'internet faster than local network'...

 

[L&LD]

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/rankers/router/result/1234-netgear-r7000-nighthawk


Assuming that the above results accurately describes your router with the current firmware, I don't see an upgrade as a good idea, unless you want to increase wireless throughput.

But you may be able to influence that more with better locating your router (not behind the TV for example) than simply switching to a new model.

 

[azazel1024]

Well, depending on how many and how high end the routers and how many rooms you'd need network connections in, it might be CHEAPER to run ethernet, even if you are paying someone to do it.

If you are doing it yourself, it is infinitely cheaper. For a 16 port semi-managed switch, patch panel, 500ft of Cat6, boxes, keystone jacks and face plates I think I probably shelled out a total of about $300 total to wire up 16 networking ports.

In my old townhouse to run 6 drops with an 8 port switch managing duties, it cost me all of about $100 for the Cat5e (with TONS left over), switch, boxes and jacks.

Even if you need to wire up a bunch of rooms, if you do it yourself, the cost is pretty minimal (less than an R7000 as router and an R7000 as a bridge, let alone a bunch of add on wireless adapters).

Even paying an electrician, if you are only looking to wire up maybe 3-4 locations, say where the router is going to sit, an access point location, your main entertainment center and an office/computer room, it might only be $300-500 to do...and then a lot faster speeds and more reliable than wireless (of course that is exclusive of maybe wanting/needing a network switch).

Just a thought.

 

[Samir]

Wow, I wish I had access to that type of bandwidth.

If you're truly going to be getting these type of speeds, then your wireless LAN is going to be your congestion point. And to solve it, you will need to figure out how to wire some stuff at gigibit speeds to make the best use of your WAN.

 

[wp746911]

Ok thanks for all the advice. Just to update you- the service install went GREAT-the guys were very helpful (3 guys worked for ~4 hours setting it all up). They were already gonna run cat6 to 2 outlets, so I paid $90x2=180 to have them add 2 extra outlets. So no more wireless worries! Now my wireless router is just for ipads/iphones- all my tvs, gaming systems, computers are on a wired network.

 

[Samir]

Ok thanks for all the advice. Just to update you- the service install went GREAT-the guys were very helpful (3 guys worked for ~4 hours setting it all up). They were already gonna run cat6 to 2 outlets, so I paid $90x2=180 to have them add 2 extra outlets. So no more wireless worries! Now my wireless router is just for ipads/iphones- all my tvs, gaming systems, computers are on a wired network.

Great to hear. Good God that's fast. What's the upload look like?

 

[wp746911]

It's actively testing upload in my picture- 895Mbps

 

[Samir]

It's actively testing upload in my picture- 895Mbps

Amazing. And here I am struggling to keep a site-to-site vpn link above 2Mbps.

 

[RogerSC]

I'd recommend doing the wiring, personally. I really wish that I could do that without rebuilding my house *smile*. While 1Gbps will most likely never be an issue here, wireless is fine where you have to use it, like in retrofitting. But having the opportunity to put some wires in the walls in conduit (that's what I'd do), I'd be glad to lay out the money to do that to get really reliable streaming. The best that I can do here (no attic to speak of, house on a slab) is to use MoCA, that uses the cable TV coax in the walls for getting ethernet from my router to my entertainment center. Wireless is fine, you have to have it for mobile devices (for example), but it just isn't as reliable as using cabled connections.

Having the cables installed also gives you the ability easily have AP's, which can really improve your wireless access throughout your house, too.

I envy you, building a new house, and having full 1Gb internet. Enjoy it!

 

[Samir]

The best that I can do here (no attic to speak of, house on a slab) is to use MoCA, that uses the cable TV coax in the walls for getting ethernet from my router to my entertainment center.

I've had all sorts of challenges when implementing Internet access and I can say that devices like MoCA can be a life saver.

But they're only the tip of the iceburg. We actually used 2 pair of a 100pr (that's right) untwisted, unsheilded, probably water logged, category nothing wire to get 10Mbps between 4 buildings that were built in the late 1980s. And we used these devices that can usually do 200Mbps (full duplex) over category 3 twisted pair--ie, most modern day telephone wires:
http://www.netsys-direct.com/product_p/nv-600ekit.htm

And they have other products like this that may be an improvement over your MoCA streaming experience:
http://www.netsys-direct.com/product_p/nh-310cekit.htm

 

[jesica]

I think I probably shelled out a total of about $400 total to wire up 18 networking ports.

 

[RogerSC]

I've had all sorts of challenges when implementing Internet access and I can say that devices like MoCA can be a life saver.

But they're only the tip of the iceburg. We actually used 2 pair of a 100pr (that's right) untwisted, unsheilded, probably water logged, category nothing wire to get 10Mbps between 4 buildings that were built in the late 1980s. And we used these devices that can usually do 200Mbps (full duplex) over category 3 twisted pair--ie, most modern day telephone wires:
http://www.netsys-direct.com/product_p/nv-600ekit.htm

And they have other products like this that may be an improvement over your MoCA streaming experience:
http://www.netsys-direct.com/product_p/nh-310cekit.htm

I'm sorry, with MoCA 1.1 devices quoting "speeds up to 270Mbps", I'm a little bit skeptical about the speeds shown in these advertisements.

Do you have practical experience with these devices using cable TV coax? What speeds did you see?

 

[somms]

Amazing. And here I am struggling to keep a site-to-site vpn link above 2Mbps.

FWIW: I wouldn't be able to achieve the site to site OpenVPN throughput shown above If not for
Municipal FTTH 100Mbps symmetrical connection via Utopia thru XMission!

 

[Samir]

I'm sorry, with MoCA 1.1 devices quoting "speeds up to 270Mbps", I'm a little bit skeptical about the speeds shown in these advertisements.

Do you have practical experience with these devices using cable TV coax? What speeds did you see?

These aren't consumer grade products, so they're not quote specs for marketing purposes. I've used the 600e-kit over lines that it should not have even worked on, moreless worked reliably. In fact, I tried several products from different manufacturers--and only black box had a solution that was as reliable but cost much more and was slower. I don't have any reason to think that their coax products are any different, especially in the relatively calm wiring environment of a typical home.

FWIW: I wouldn't be able to achieve the site to site OpenVPN throughput shown above If not for
Municipal FTTH 100Mbps symmetrical connection via Utopia thru XMission!

I've got 110/15 on one end and 17/3 on the other and even though the traffic flows from the 110/15 to the 17/3, it's still not as fast as I want it.

 

[System Error Message]

the cheapest cabling for gigabit ethernet is CAT5E. Make sure not to get CAT5.

The AC3200 solutions use 2 different radios on 5Ghz for more wireless bandwidth in total but theres no point in trying to stream 4K to devices that dont even have that much resolution however since your internet comes in where your router and TV is using ethernet to stream 4K would be ideal. Make sure to at least use CAT5e for ethernet, CAT6 is even better though. CAT5E supports 1Gb/s up to 100m and a semi managed switch with cat5e cabling could also be inexpansive as long as you're only using 1 switch for everything which would be cheaper than giving all wired devices AC wireless adapters.

The question to upgrading your wireless router to an AC3200 is if you have multiple devices that need lots of bandwidth at the same time.

Some use powerline adapters but they usually have lower bandwidth and may have their own limitations too.

You're quite lucky to get symmetric fibre optic gigabit internet. My router has SFP+ and the horsepower to do NAT at wirespeed but the fastest internet in the UK is only 150Mb/s down and 15Mb/s up. BT related offerings are lower but offer up to 30Mb/s of upload i think.

 

[thomasmoor]

It is a good idea .

 

[azazel1024]

I'm sorry, with MoCA 1.1 devices quoting "speeds up to 270Mbps", I'm a little bit skeptical about the speeds shown in these advertisements.

Do you have practical experience with these devices using cable TV coax? What speeds did you see?

At least personally, I see speeds in the very low 90Mbps range with my MoCA 1.1 bridge on my coax. A hair lower than what fast ethernet should be (which is typically around 92Mbps with standard 1500MTU frames for TCP/IP, I see 90-91Mbps with the MoCA bridge).

Biggest issue is gigabit ported MoCA bridges are rare, but they do exist. From the very little I've seen of them, mid/high 100's Mbps is possible on good wiring with MoCA 1.1. Still only half duplex though and also a shed load slower than gigabit ethernet, or even a good wireless connection (bridged routers with 2.4GHz 40MHz I can get 142Mbps across my house. Across my basement and through a couple of walls just laptop to router (not moving my AP and router to test that config, but higher radio power and much higher gain antennas on the AP, so I assume faster) I can get 168Mbps 2.4GHz 40MHz and over 250Mbps on 5GHz 80MHz).

 

[Samir]

At least personally, I see speeds in the very low 90Mbps range with my MoCA 1.1 bridge on my coax. A hair lower than what fast ethernet should be (which is typically around 92Mbps with standard 1500MTU frames for TCP/IP, I see 90-91Mbps with the MoCA bridge).

Biggest issue is gigabit ported MoCA bridges are rare, but they do exist. From the very little I've seen of them, mid/high 100's Mbps is possible on good wiring with MoCA 1.1. Still only half duplex though and also a shed load slower than gigabit ethernet, or even a good wireless connection (bridged routers with 2.4GHz 40MHz I can get 142Mbps across my house. Across my basement and through a couple of walls just laptop to router (not moving my AP and router to test that config, but higher radio power and much higher gain antennas on the AP, so I assume faster) I can get 168Mbps 2.4GHz 40MHz and over 250Mbps on 5GHz 80MHz).

The only difference I see between the two technologies is reliability. Wireless can be very fickle, whereas once a MoCA bridge is set up, nothing should really affect it.