I hope you're not planning to connect them to the same network.
Well, depending on the OS, the NICs, and the switch... he could team them and double his bandwidth, but for a home network it's kind of useless unless he's running 10/100 or if he has a storage server that's actually capable of maxing out gigabit.
But knowing him he probably thinks it'll make his internetz fastar! lol
yes i going to hook them up to the same network. My build in network card doesn't work right. It seems to take for ever to load up web sites. I have a realtek gigabit built in. I have time warner cable for my internet. My wife's computer is very quick. We both have the same motherboards just her is a duo core and mine is a quad core. So i think if i have two network cards the other one can help to speed up my web loading and online game playing. I did update the drivers and it's the same. I am running windows 7 64bit. I was going to get other network card that's a gigabit. I do a lot of file sharing between my computers too.
Connecting two NICs at the same time isn't going to make your internet faster. Unless you're getting Google Fiber, there's no way in hell your internet comes even close to maxing out gigabit ethernet.
Like I said, if it's supported by the drivers, the OS, and/or the switch, you can team your NICs together to increase your bandwidth on the *local* network but I doubt you're doing anything that would take advantage of that.
Considering you're at 10/100, it's conceivable that you'd see some benefit to teaming your NICs.
Just remember, it's not just the NICs that determine your bandwidth. You could stick a 10 Gbps NIC in a 486 and it wouldn't do a damn thing to increase bandwidth (assuming you could even find a 10 Gbps NIC with a bus that 486 boards supported, and I don't think one exists).
Well sure, but I would assume that the CPU bottleneck only really applies on the far-low-end. I've got the SuperGateway (PIII), but that's the oldest thing actually on my network at the moment. Though I suppose P4-era crap wasn't meant to have gigabit LAN, either.
Gigabit is about right on Pentium 4s. I had an HP board with gigabit. Too bad the board was a piece of shit otherwise. The network card was excellent though!
At work, we have some gigabit and some 10/100 endpoints. We have a server we use for imaging computers, and we have used software link bonding to give it 5Gbps of bandwidth with 5 network cards. Since we have 10 gigabit fibers to endpoint closets which split off to gigabit or 10/100 ports, we can truly max out and use the bandwidth.
We are doing imaging out of a ram drive so I/O is not a concern. Server has 32GB of RAM and holds about 20GB worth of images.
Well i installed the other network card in my computer. Now i have two of them. I plug one in my wireless router and the other one in my modem itself. I seem to download a little faster. My online game seem to be a lot smoother. Them new network card only a 10/100mb card. So i see how it goes.
Well i installed the other network card in my computer. Now i have two of them. I plug one in my wireless router and the other one in my modem itself. I seem to download a little faster. My online game seem to be a lot smoother. Them new network card only a 10/100mb card. So i see how it goes.
Unless you did any form of advanced configuration (this sounds like "plug and play") you're still only pushing out of one of those NIC's (probably the modem if you dial a PPPoE connection in the Network Connections folder, router otherwise). I see the placebo effect is kicking on strong tho.
I have time warner cable and my built in network card is a realtek Gigabit card and the on i just installed is a realtek 10/100mb card. Windows 7 seem to be using the Gigabit card mainly. the only time it uses both card is when i am doing big downloads then i see both network light flashing.
Having multiple network cards going to the same network is redundant. It's like splitting a garden hose into 3 and using all 3 hoses to water the same plant.
Multiple network cards on the same network can be used to increase bandwidth and provide redundancy for fail over, but only if they're configured to do so.
All nikkigreg1974 is doing is bypassing his router, which actually may provide some slight speed increase because there's one less firewall between him and the internet. But with typical consumer internet connections, I doubt there is much of a real world performance benefit.
So my question is.... what is the point of the wireless router?
I'd like to assume for the rest of his devices and with basic Time Warner service on a standard residential modem, I'd also like to assume he knocked those offline when he hooked it up direct.
So my question is.... what is the point of the wireless router?
I'd like to assume for the rest of his devices and with basic Time Warner service on a standard residential modem, I'd also like to assume he knocked those offline when he hooked it up direct.
Either this or he has a modem & router combo in addition to the wireless router. So the other devices would likely have some double NAT'ing going on.
So my question is.... what is the point of the wireless router?
I'd like to assume for the rest of his devices and with basic Time Warner service on a standard residential modem, I'd also like to assume he knocked those offline when he hooked it up direct.
Either this or he has a modem & router combo in addition to the wireless router. So the other devices would likely have some double NAT'ing going on.
Part of me wants to get a command prompt up on his box and run some tracert's to see just how he's getting out of the house.
The other part wants to run away very fast.
BTW...a 100 Mbps connection on an FTP server could peg a earlier P4 just keeping up with managing the TCP connections, which is why servers feature things like TCP offload engines.
So my question is.... what is the point of the wireless router?
I'd like to assume for the rest of his devices and with basic Time Warner service on a standard residential modem, I'd also like to assume he knocked those offline when he hooked it up direct.
Either this or he has a modem & router combo in addition to the wireless router. So the other devices would likely have some double NAT'ing going on.
Part of me wants to get a command prompt up on his box and run some tracert's to see just how he's getting out of the house.
The other part wants to run away very fast.
BTW...a 100 Mbps connection on an FTP server could peg a earlier P4 just keeping up with managing the TCP connections, which is why servers feature things like TCP offload engines.
What if the TCP offload engines failed? Would like to see an answer please. Sorry underjack for the accidental PM.
Comments
Well, depending on the OS, the NICs, and the switch... he could team them and double his bandwidth, but for a home network it's kind of useless unless he's running 10/100 or if he has a storage server that's actually capable of maxing out gigabit.
But knowing him he probably thinks it'll make his internetz fastar! lol
Having multiple NICs is usually used for bridging two different networks, or creating a switch/router running linux or a server version of Windows.
Like I said, if it's supported by the drivers, the OS, and/or the switch, you can team your NICs together to increase your bandwidth on the *local* network but I doubt you're doing anything that would take advantage of that.
Since I've got a shitload of PCI NICs, could I profit from adding one to my server to increase bandwidth?
actually that would only help bandwidth-wise for the main switch. Anything over wireless would access it just as slowly.
never mind then...
Just remember, it's not just the NICs that determine your bandwidth. You could stick a 10 Gbps NIC in a 486 and it wouldn't do a damn thing to increase bandwidth (assuming you could even find a 10 Gbps NIC with a bus that 486 boards supported, and I don't think one exists).
We are doing imaging out of a ram drive so I/O is not a concern. Server has 32GB of RAM and holds about 20GB worth of images.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBonding
If I remember correctly, we used Mode 6, adaptive load balancing.
Unless you did any form of advanced configuration (this sounds like "plug and play") you're still only pushing out of one of those NIC's (probably the modem if you dial a PPPoE connection in the Network Connections folder, router otherwise). I see the placebo effect is kicking on strong tho.
Having multiple network cards going to the same network is redundant. It's like splitting a garden hose into 3 and using all 3 hoses to water the same plant.
(Edit: fixed broken image)
All nikkigreg1974 is doing is bypassing his router, which actually may provide some slight speed increase because there's one less firewall between him and the internet. But with typical consumer internet connections, I doubt there is much of a real world performance benefit.
I'd like to assume for the rest of his devices and with basic Time Warner service on a standard residential modem, I'd also like to assume he knocked those offline when he hooked it up direct.
Either this or he has a modem & router combo in addition to the wireless router. So the other devices would likely have some double NAT'ing going on.
Part of me wants to get a command prompt up on his box and run some tracert's to see just how he's getting out of the house.
The other part wants to run away very fast.
BTW...a 100 Mbps connection on an FTP server could peg a earlier P4 just keeping up with managing the TCP connections, which is why servers feature things like TCP offload engines.
What if the TCP offload engines failed? Would like to see an answer please. Sorry underjack for the accidental PM.