|
|
|
Ask HN: Why is consumer ethernet so slow?
|
|
3 points
by gangster_dave
2073 days ago
|
|
The state of the art in other technologies is extremely fast: 10 Gbps for Wifi 6/6e, 10 Gbps for 5g, 48 Gbps for HDMI 2.1 (not networking, but common). Meanwhile, consumer ethernet is still predominantly 1 Gbps. Why hasn't this changed over the past twenty years? |
|
Broadcom were making $$ from 1GBASET and were slow to develop/release 10GBASE-T, they held the market back and encouraged SFP+ since they did sell those chips. Intel/Cisco were inclined to wait for BRCM chips. The startups that developed 10GBASE-T (Solarflare initially led, then Teranetics, Aquantia emerged) were not successful quickly. Eventually Aquantia managed to partner with Intel & survived. Both Solarflare's PHY technology & Aquantia ended up being acquired by Marvell, Aquantia for significant $$ last year. Teranetics circuitously ended up as part of Broadcom. The rest of Solarflare was acquired by Xilinx.
10GBASE-T wasn't a good fit for data-centers due to the high power/latency. So those customers went direct attach / SFP+ / optical. Which drove those prices down, and made them more attractive, further delaying 10GBASE-T volumes. Data centers got used to expensive cables, (relatively) cheap/simple low-power, low-latency transceivers. 10GBASE-T was a solution looking for a problem.
Eventually the 2.5G/5G Ethernet for Wifi back-haul opened the copper market up - those technologies reuse almost everything from 10G. Also automotive Ethernet too. Chip/power scaling and increasing volumes for Wifi/ datacenter deployments has eventually driven down the cost to a point where 10GBASE-T is becoming more widespread/attractive.
The initial sales/marketing strategy for 10GBASE-T failed, sadly, and it has taken a long time to recover.