In reply to a post by candlerb:

(and it's hard to tune a PC or laptop to copy files any faster than that anyway)

Windows can be an utter pain for transfers above this. Even with smb3.0.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

No: Cat5e is *certified* for 2.5Gbps at 100m. This is one of the reasons the 2.5G-baseT standard exists.

Fair enough, but everything i have seen about cat 5E, they say, Cat5e provides speeds of up to 1GBASE-T or 1-Gigabit Ethernet or something like that. I have not seen anything about cat5E being certified to cope with 2.5Gb/s

In short, Cat5e will be good for a long time yet, so don't fret.

Even if one day you decide you *must* have an Internet service faster than 2.5G, you can still run separate 2.5G connections to each wired device and each wireless access point, and the aggregate traffic can exceed 2.5G.

I am not worried, I have no reason to go anything faster than 1Gb/s, my broadband is only half that speed and once contract is out will be even lower, my nas is only 1Gb/s and I so are my computers.

I am fine with 1Gb/s it does me.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Fair enough, but everything i have seen about cat 5E, they say, Cat5e provides speeds of up to 1GBASE-T or 1-Gigabit Ethernet or something like that. I have not seen anything about cat5E being certified to cope with 2.5Gb/s

You're seeing people right now in this thread telling you otherwise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.5GBASE-T_and_5GBASE-...

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Fair enough, but everything i have seen about cat 5E, they say, Cat5e provides speeds of up to 1GBASE-T or 1-Gigabit Ethernet or something like that.

Because things change. New ideas appear and older cable standards are reviewed to see if they can be used for the new idea. So check the date on technology information; if not dated assume it WAS correct and we now know more.

It doesn't mean the source was wrong when written.

In reference to wikipedia:

On September 23, 2016, the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved IEEE Std 802.3bz-2016

the standard is 8 years old this September, i wonder why Adrian didn't check for newer sources

In reply to a post by jpm:

You're seeing people right now in this thread telling you otherwise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2.5GBASE-T_and_5GBASE-...

Don't mean the people in this thread are correct, I am not saying they are not, but sometimes you just got to look around.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Because things change. New ideas appear and older cable standards are reviewed to see if they can be used for the new idea. So check the date on technology information; if not dated assume it WAS correct and we now know more.

It doesn't mean the source was wrong when written.

That is true, but not sure how Cat 5E or any Ethernet cable can change, maybe made with better materials. The technology is still the same as it was.
Maybe I am looking at this wrong.
The best way is to suck it and see. As I said if this was my house I would put fibre in the walls and under the floors and have fibre sockets. Not because i need it, but because it is the way to go.
One reason why my partner did it, she decided it was the best way to go, even if a bit pricy.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Maybe I am looking at this wrong.

Indeed you are.

The Cat5e standard is unchanged, but the 2.5G-baseT standard was designed *specifically* so it would work over Cat5e - so you could get faster speeds without having to recable.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Maybe I am looking at this wrong.

Indeed you are.

The Cat5e standard is unchanged, but the 2.5G-baseT standard was designed *specifically* so it would work over Cat5e - so you could get faster speeds without having to recable.

Exactly and if you look at the spec you can work out pretty quickly how they did it ..

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Don't mean the people in this thread are correct, I am not saying they are not, but sometimes you just got to look around.

Agreed, always check your sources. For computer networking the IEEE is the authority. You may have to pay to read some standards.

For IT topics often Wikipedia is very good as IT people keep them up to date, but generally I use information from wikipedia sparingly.