On 7/20/05, scott.hall@comcast.net <scott.hall@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> so in response to my earlier question, someone said run cat 6 instead of cat
>5e when I pull wire.
>
> I figure I'm not too far in and that might be a good idea. I google, and it
>says cat 6 is just cat 5e made to a higher standard, on site said it had
>better shielding. the kid at comp usa (who seemed very knowledgeable)
>repeated the thing about the better shielding (but that's it). said it used
>rj45 jacks and the same as cat 5e termination blocks.
>
> but the older gentleman at his electronics shop (who you'd think would know)
>said cat6 actually carries data faster than 5e and uses all different blocks.
>
> now, this is contradicted by everything else, but I've started to trust
>curmedgeonly old people, and why else would I want cat 6 if it's only
>better/more stringently made and/or better shielded? actually I get the
>shielding, but it's a house in the woods, not an office building.
>
Well, the kid at CompUSA is likely to working at CompUSA for a reason
other than he's a network guru.
The big difference between Cat 6 and Cat 5E are that Cat 6 has
reduced levels of interference, particularly in near-end cross talk
(called NEXT by lazy people) and far-end cross talk (ELFEXT). It's
also spec ed at 250 MHz, instead of 100 MHz. I think there are also
some different physical requirements (slightly larger wires, and
higher levels of twist) but that may just be required to meet the
performance requirements.
Of course Cat 6 uses Cat 6 connectors. They look just like regular
Cat 5/5E (or cat 3, for that matter) connectors. You can use 5E
components, and if you install high quality ones properly, you might
even get Cat 6 performance. It'd be pretty silly to pay extra for the
cable, and not use the right components throughout the system. You
use the same tools to terminate the plugs, punch down blocks and jacks
either way. It's probably not necessary to buy Cat 6 patch cables for
the house yet, as Cat 5E can do gigabit Ethernet. When 10,000 base-T
comes along, then buy new patch cables.
> I've been here:
>
> http://www.lanshack.com/cat5e-tutorial.asp#Chart
>
> and here:
>
> http://www.generalcable.com/North_America/NA_Assets/TechPapers/LookCat6.pdf
>
> and it seems the kid's closer to right. to top it all off, the cat 5e the
>old guy had had 320 mhz on the box, which the guy said was good, and seems to
>be higher than what cat 5e is rated for.
>
The Cat 5E standard is at 100 MHz. (320 mhz might be what tin cans
and string are good to...) Testing at higher speeds is pretty
meaningless, and unless they tell you exactly what the test, it's
totally meaningless. It's likely that the claim that is that it meets
Cat 5E cross-talk requirements at 320 MHz, but who knows?
--
David Scheidt
dmscheidt@gmail.com
|