![WP_20151223_15_16_21_Pro[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Oem5SRI.jpg "WP_20151223_15_16_21_Pro[1].jpg")
Can't get Gigabit Ethernet
I ran a whole bunch of cat 5e through my house and I cant get Gigabit, only 100 Megabit. when I use store bought cables I get Gigabit but not with any of my home done ones. (pic related, its one of them)
I marched the store one and the colours sequence is the same on each end.
I have tried two different crimpers now so I am pretty sure its not the crimper.
TL;DR
Home network not fast enough. Help.
maybe you need cat6 cable
works for me (tm)
>>52009248
But the store bought ones are cat5
>>52009237
Does your switch/router support gigabit?
>>52009237
>the cables can do 1 GB so shouldn't it just werk????
What's your modem?
What's your router?
what are you plugging these into?
Don't answer here, go to >>>/wsr/ or >>>/g/sqt/ or GIT GUD.
>>52009237
what the fuck, why are you holding it like that? Why is your thumb above the cable and not under it? Are you retarded?
It could be any number of things. The actual RJ45 might not be cat5e rated. Double check that both the cable and connector are cat5e rated or just buy a bunch of pre-made cat6, dummy.
>>52009268
Yes 100% because it works with store bought ones.
>>52009276
autism
>>52009237
So what's changed when you're limited to megabit?
Just the cables?
>>52009272
The ADSL goes into a telstra shit box, witch goes into Netgear D6300 and two pcs are off that. a gigabit switch is conected two another two pcs.
>>52009300
that is correct
>>52009276
I was leaning on the table but your right, it was not one of my finest moments.
>>52009237
CAT5 can't do GbE, you need CAT6 or better
>>52009416
So then why do the store bought cat5 cables work?
>>52009237
Just get CAT6 or CAT7, shit is cheap these days.
> poor termination
> incorrect termination
> wrong equipment
> noise
get yourself a pair tester at a minimum if you did the terminations yourself,
what brand cable/jacks did you use?
>>52009440
No clue, but I was only getting 96Mb/s when I had CAT5 cable, asked on /g/ and was told to get CAT6 and now I get Gb speeds
>>52009416
cat5e is 1000baseT retard
If your in home stuff sheilded? Is the store bought stuff sheilded?
Also
"Gigabit Ethernet is really pushing the limit of Cat5e cabling. Cat6 is superior to Cat5e when it comes to insertion loss, near end crosstalk (NEXT), return loss, and equal level far end crosstalk (ELFEXT).
Consequently, Gigabit Ethernet over Cat6 could be marginally faster than Cat5e, by the amount of errors produced over Cat5e, even though the networking equipment on either end still operates at the same 1 Gbit. This difference will vary based on other factors in your environment, and also networking equipment. In real world terms, the difference is probably too small too measure without sophisticated tools, and so small as to be made non-existent when other delays introduced by operating systems, switches, routers, and end-user applications are considered.
Most companies are installing Cat6 now for new installations (some reports say as much as 90%). That is mainly for future proofing, since the labor to run cabling can often exceed the cost of cabling itself. I would recommend Cat6 for all new installations, but not to replace existing Cat5e."
>that connector wiring
What the fuck happened there OP? You're doing SOMETHING terribly wrong.
Show us a pic of both ends together, please. Such that we can properly see the wiring.
that colour code in picture is wrong for a start, the hardware prob cant negotiate the signal at 1G because X-talk.
Cat-5e does shit tier GB anyways
>>52009492
The jacks are cabac
>>52009494
I'd happy with 96 Mb/s
>>52009537
Cant as each end is in two separate rooms but i can assure you the colour sequence on each are the same
>>52009591
I know but its the same at both ends. shit tier or not its better than what im getting.
>>52009635
>Cant as each end is in two separate rooms but i can assure you the colour sequence on each are the same
That's nice, but they are still wrong. And yes, it matters, and no, you can't just use arbitrary colorings consistently on both ends.
From top to bottom in your OP pic, it should be: white/orange, orange, white/green, blue, white/blue, green, white/brown, brown. In that order.
Go replace the connectors on your cable, and then test your connection speed again. If it still doesn't go above 100 Mbit, THEN we can talk.
>>52009237
make sure you made it like this (note the green wires).
>>52009692
I dont understand why as at the end of the day copper is copper but fine, i will.
>>52009635
The cable pairs have different twist rates to reduce noise between cores, so when you follow the standard either A or B for terminations you will get best possible result, when you terminate a cable any old way your applying power/data to incorrect pairs and end up with alot of crosstalk/interference on the cable.
>>52009739
enough for it to be capt at 12.5Mb/s? really?
give me a bit ill go recrimp one.
>2015
>not running cat7a
>>52009722
>I dont understand why as at the end of the day copper is copper but fine, i will.
The reason is that color-matching wires are twisted around each other (that's the "twisted pairs" in your so-called Unshielded Twisted Pair or UTP cable), which makes it possible to send signals over the *pair* or wires with minimal electrical interference. (The network card uses tricks like setting orange to +5V and white/orange to -5V to create a twisted pair with a net 0V voltage, or things like that; I'm not clear on the electrical magic of it but it's something along those lines.) The different pairs are twisted at different twist frequencies to minimize interference between the pairs.
I think it doesn't actually matter which pairs you use in which place, and the relative location of the color and white/color wires of a pair. But what DOES matter is that the right pins are paired with each other; namely, 1/2, 3/6, 4/5, and 7/8. (Doing the exact colors wrong is still a bad idea for maintenance reasons, but I *think* it doesn't affect performance. Still, better to not take chances.)
at this point in time I would like to admit defeat, copper is not just copper at the end of the day. Thank you all for helping me in my quest to find that the sequence does matter.
TL;DL
it works, go home
>>52009914
All hail the unshielded twisted pair.
High speed communications over cheap cable. Cat5 is 100x easier and a great deal cheaper than coax.
Here's Mr. Obvious but how long are the cables you made
>>52009996
I think the longest before a repeater is 25m. but pc to pc would be 75m
>>52009347
Then just use the gigabit cables and ditch the slower ones.
Problem solved?
>>52010020
Kk I believe the limit is 100 meters just thought I would ask
>>52010029
its fixed now, i couldn't run ready made cables through my walles
>>52009790
Also, 100 megabit only uses two of the four pairs in the cable.
wtf order are the internal cables in?
Follow this image.
