When network speeds match the transfer rate on a mother board...
Pages: 12
Imagine what we will be able to do once network speeds are as great as the effective transfer rate between the components of a computer. Assuming we can get parallelization on that scale workable, we would have the computing power of all networked computers combined at our disposal.
| Imagine what we will be able to do once network speeds are as great as the effective transfer rate between the components of a computer. |
@maeriden; Movies, assuming sized as they are on average today, would be transferred in under a second. But you'd probably stream them anyways.
Can't happen due to propagation delays. But there's already line speeds up 40 Gbps, if not higher.
closed account (3qX21hU5)
I know businesses can get some amazing speeds in certain parts of the country like RB said of 40Gbps which is insanely fast. I know comcast is set to release a new 150Mbps plan for residential around here which is still pretty damn fast but costs probably $200 a month if not more :(. Just until a few months ago I was still trying to make due on 1.5mbps lol
I sincerely hope the word 'Cloud' is dropped before that day comes or else it will likely be appended to the names of every relevant or irrelevant technology one could use in that situation.
Google Fiber has 1 Gbps up and down speed. At least in the Kansas City area. I believe there is also a standard of fiber that supports 100 Gbps, but don't quote me on that.
| But there's already line speeds up 40 Gbps, if not higher. |
Yeah, mellanox sells 40 and 56 Gb/s networks. They hope to reach 160 or 200 Gb/s in 2017
Last edited on
| They hope to reach 160 or 200 Gb/s in 2017 |
Italy hopes to reach 10Mbps in 2020. Ping 140 isn't nice at all :C
My speeds are 5.5/0.45 (Mbit).
Anyways:
Do you think network speed should be calculated per-bit or per-byte?
Anyways:
Do you think network speed should be calculated per-bit or per-byte?
I wanna' say per byte, but if an ISP starts listing things per-byte then most people aren't going to notice the difference in units (if they do, they probably won't know what it means) and just see "5 vs 40", when the two are really about the same. It's not a good marketing move at this point.
Last edited on
It should stay per bit, since that's how everything is transmitted and dealt with. Most of the header fields that the network uses are in bits and not bytes.
Should we use the english system or the metric system?
It should stay english, since that's how everything is transcribed and dealt with.
| ResidentBiscuit wrote: |
|---|
| It should stay per bit, since that's how everything is transmitted and dealt with. |
Hmm I don't quite think that applies the same way. The English system of measurements is ridiculous. If you know anything about networks, you'd know using bytes would be silly. You'd just have to switch back to bits to do any work anyways. But I guess from a consumer point of view, bytes makes more sense because that's what consumers are used to seeing.
Go read RFCs on the various headers. Most of the fields are in bits because why make everything divisible by 8 when you don't need all the bits? If it were suddenly in bytes, people would have to start expressing the size of these fields in fractions of bytes which is just dumb.
Go read RFCs on the various headers. Most of the fields are in bits because why make everything divisible by 8 when you don't need all the bits? If it were suddenly in bytes, people would have to start expressing the size of these fields in fractions of bytes which is just dumb.
Pages: 12