# 10 Gigabit Won't Work



## Eric_Cartman (Apr 20, 2021)

I bought a Netgear 10 Port switch that has 2 10G ports.

I bought this switch.



			https://www.amazon.com/dp/B076642YPN/
		


I needed a new switch so I figured I'd get one with 10G ports.

I also bought 2 10G network cards for my computers.

These are the network cards I bought.



			https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01N5AOWW6/
		


I've connected my main computer and my media server to the 10G ports with the 10G cards.

The problem is that it seems like my connection is limited to about 3 Gigabits.

It says 10G in windows but when I try to run iperf between the two computers I only get about 3G.

And transfering files is also a lot slower than 10G.

I'm scratching my head now trying to figure out the problem.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Selaya (Apr 20, 2021)

Are you running NVMe SSDs on your mediaserver?
Because SATA will cap out well below 10,000BASE speeds and bottleneck your network.


----------



## kayjay010101 (Apr 20, 2021)

Selaya said:


> Are you running NVMe SSDs on your mediaserver?
> Because SATA will cap out well below 10,000BASE speeds and bottleneck your network.


iperf doesn't use storage, it sends only network packets. If iperf is reporting sub ~10gbit, it's a connection issue.


----------



## Selaya (Apr 20, 2021)

Yeah I just realised that.


----------



## W1zzard (Apr 20, 2021)

Did you enable jumbo frames on all equipment?


----------



## TheLostSwede (Apr 20, 2021)

I have pretty much the same setup. Got the EMX version of the switch though and two cards from Aquantia.
Not having any of the issues you're seeing. Not using Jumbo Frames, as there's zero speed difference enabling at 10Gbps.
I obviously don't get exactly 10Gbps either, but it's a lot faster than what you're seeing.
Check the settings so one card isn't set to 5Gbps or something like that. The link lights on the switch should both be green on the 10Gbps ports.
I also presume both machines are at least PCIe 2.0 (ideally PCIE 3.0) and that you're using a x4 slot for the cards? Anything else and you won't get 10Gbps.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 20, 2021)

What about your cables?

CAT5e has a maximum bandwidth of 1Gbps. CAT6 can go up to 10Gbps up to 55meters (~180 feet). But note that is under ideal conditions. Cheap connectors, bad crimps, even the number and radius of the bends (as in kinks) in the cable can affect the effective bandwidth. 

Ethernet cables are cheap, flimsy, easily damaged, but critically important network devices. I always recommend making your own cables. For one, if I need a 13 foot, or a 15 inch cable, I can make them instead of buying a 25 foot and a 3 foot cable. 

But I learned long ago it is important to "invest" in a quality crimper. Cheap (as in low budget) crimpers provide cheap (as in poor quality) crimps. Same with the connectors. And investing in a decent cable tester reduces (or at least does not raise) blood pressures and hair loss. 

But there is a skill involved so practice makes perfect. Be ready to sacrifice some cable and a few connectors.


----------



## Eric_Cartman (Apr 20, 2021)

W1zzard said:


> Did you enable jumbo frames on all equipment?


I tried enabling jumbo frames, it made no difference.


TheLostSwede said:


> I have pretty much the same setup. Got the EMX version of the switch though and two cards from Aquantia.
> Not having any of the issues you're seeing. Not using Jumbo Frames, as there's zero speed difference enabling at 10Gbps.
> I obviously don't get exactly 10Gbps either, but it's a lot faster than what you're seeing.
> Check the settings so one card isn't set to 5Gbps or something like that. The link lights on the switch should both be green on the 10Gbps ports.
> ...



This is what I get with iperf. I'm not even getting 3G now. 

Both cards say they are connected at 10G in Windows.

Both cards are in 3.0 x4 slots.






Selaya said:


> Are you running NVMe SSDs on your mediaserver?
> Because SATA will cap out well below 10,000BASE speeds and bottleneck your network.


I have a SATA SSD in my computer and a pair of RAID0 hard drives in the server.

That I guess explains why I'm not getting full 10G during file transfers but I think it should be faster.

And it doesn't explain the crap iperf results.



Bill_Bright said:


> What about your cables?
> 
> CAT5e has a maximum bandwidth of 1Gbps. CAT6 can go up to 10Gbps up to 55meters (~180 feet). But note that is under ideal conditions. Cheap connectors, bad crimps, even the number and radius of the bends (as in kinks) in the cable can affect the effective bandwidth.
> 
> ...


I have store bought 6ft Cat5e cables.

I read Cat5e can handle 10G up to 40m or something like that.

So the cables shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Apr 20, 2021)

Try a direct connection *without* the switch.

I find it unlikely that the switch is the problem, but the fewer things you're testing, the better. I've heard that 10Gbit can overheat some switches (causing slowdowns). Again, I don't think that's happening in your case, but might as well cross that issue off the list by just doing direct connections (for test purposes).


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 20, 2021)

Eric_Cartman said:


> I read Cat5e can handle 10G up to 40m or something like that.
> 
> So the cables shouldn't be a problem.


No. That is wrong. As I noted, CAT5e only supports up to 1Gbps. This is easily verified with our friend Bing Google. 

Cat5e vs. Cat6 (cablematters.com)

How to Choose an Ethernet Cable | Digital Trends


----------



## TheLostSwede (Apr 20, 2021)

Are you sure the cards are getting the correct bandwidth? That is 2.5Gbps speed, which suggests some setting is wrong.
Could very well be the Cat 5e cables, not all cables are the same, so there's no guarantee it'll work, as Cat 5e was not designed for 10Gbps speeds at all. Yes, it can work on a short length of cable, but no way 40m. At least try getting a couple of Cat 6 cables, as they can do 10Gbps up to 55m.







dragontamer5788 said:


> Try a direct connection *without* the switch.
> 
> I find it unlikely that the switch is the problem, but the fewer things you're testing, the better. I've heard that 10Gbit can overheat some switches (causing slowdowns). Again, I don't think that's happening in your case, but might as well cross that issue off the list by just doing direct connections (for test purposes).


It's not the switch, I've had mine for a couple of years and I have never had any issues with it. It's on 24/7/365.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Apr 20, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> No. That is wrong. As I noted, CAT5e only supports up to 1Gbps. This is easily verified with our friend Bing Google.



"Supports" is not a concept that works very well in the physical world.

CAT5e is *designed* for 1Gbps. But in practice, you'll see speeds in excess of 1Gbps if you put equipment on them (or less, depending on local conditions). As a physical device, you can affect the speed of a connection by twisting or stepping on cables sometimes. CAT6 is *designed* for 10Gbps. That means its noise characteristics are low enough that 10Gbps can be "heard" through to the other side.

Ethernet (including 10Gbit Ethernet) is designed to auto-negotiate. At the beginning of any connection, there's a period where the computer tests what speed its able to get to. If its able to get to 2.5 Gbps, then it will use that (even if its a 10Gbit card). The physical wire may be too noisy. Even a CAT6 cable could be installed wrong and perform poorly. Twist the cable the wrong way, and the stress/strain on the copper inside the cable can degrade the signal (so now its "too noisy" for 10Gbps, but maybe 5Gbps or 1Gbps will work). Or twists / kinks in the wire, or maybe broken shielding, or poorly installed heads.

In contrast, if you really baby the cable: keep it short, have high quality connections, do a good job installing the head... then even CAT5e can do 10Gbps (even though its not designed for it). In any case, working with higher quality cables (ex: CAT6) would help remove one possible issue.


----------



## elghinnarisa (Apr 20, 2021)

dragontamer5788 said:


> "Supports" is not a concept that works very well in the physical world.
> 
> CAT5e is *designed* for 1Gbps. But in practice, you'll see speeds in excess of 1Gbps if you put equipment on them (or less, depending on local conditions). As a physical device, you can affect the speed of a connection by twisting or stepping on cables sometimes. CAT6 is *designed* for 10Gbps. That means its noise characteristics are low enough that 10Gbps can be "heard" through to the other side.
> 
> ...


Worth adding is that the IEEE states that cat5e is a "reliable medium for support of 2.5Gbps and 5Gbps" for up too 100m
Crosstalk and interference in general however could still cause problems.

10.1109/IEEESTD.2018.8457469
126.7.2

I have also seen a lot of people over the years successfully running 10Gbps over cat5e up to 50 meters, although results vary depending on environment and quality of cable.

Point being, cat5e can without a doubt handle more than just 1Gbps.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 20, 2021)

dragontamer5788 said:


> CAT5e is *designed* for 1Gbps. But in practice, you'll see speeds in excess of 1Gbps if you put equipment on them



The specs for CAT5e state it supports up to 1Gbps. The OP has already shown where he is getting 3Gbps - so we know it can happen.  But he has a 10Gbps switch and NICs and is looking to get, and rightfully so, at least close to 10Gbps.

While faster speeds with CAT5e are possible, that is with ideal conditions - good cable, good connectors, good crimps, short distances, no kinks and minimum to no EMI/RFI. 

It should also be pointed out that other factors can limit over all speeds too - such as the speed of the drives you are copying to and from.

Regardless, since we are not talking about pulling new cables threw walls, I would replace those CAT5e with CAT6 and then you know your cables are not your bottleneck.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Apr 20, 2021)

dragontamer5788 said:


> "Supports" is not a concept that works very well in the physical world.
> 
> CAT5e is *designed* for 1Gbps. But in practice, you'll see speeds in excess of 1Gbps if you put equipment on them (or less, depending on local conditions). As a physical device, you can affect the speed of a connection by twisting or stepping on cables sometimes. CAT6 is *designed* for 10Gbps. That means its noise characteristics are low enough that 10Gbps can be "heard" through to the other side.
> 
> ...


I mean, it was designed for 1Gbps, but as has been proven, it works perfectly fine for 2.5Gbps, as that is what the 2.5GBASE-T standard was designed to use.
If you have some good cables, it can also work for 10Gbps. I was using that for a while, by mistake, but it was a 2 metre run.

As for Cat 6, that's only up to 55m of 10Gbps and now 100m of 5Gbps, but you need Cat 6A for longer runs at 10Gbps.



elghinnarisa said:


> Worth adding is that the IEEE states that cat5e is a "reliable medium for support of 2.5Gbps and 5Gbps" for up too 100m
> Crosstalk and interference in general however could still cause problems.
> 
> 10.1109/IEEESTD.2018.8457469
> ...


Actually, 5Gbps needs Cat 6 to reach 100m, but it will work with Cat 5e up to 55m.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 20, 2021)

Everybody is talking about "in theory" and while that may be right, it is not helping the OP who is working in the real world - a place where "in theory" frequently does not jive with reality. 

He need to try CAT6 cables, designed for his switch and NICs, and see what happens.


----------



## ERazer (Apr 20, 2021)

If you gonna spend money on 10g connection why cheap out on cable? 

as already mentioned get cat6 cables


----------



## evernessince (Apr 20, 2021)

As others have stated, swapping cables should be your first option.


----------



## Eric_Cartman (Apr 20, 2021)

Bill_Bright said:


> No. That is wrong. As I noted, CAT5e only supports up to 1Gbps. This is easily verified with our friend Bing Google.
> 
> Cat5e vs. Cat6 (cablematters.com)
> 
> How to Choose an Ethernet Cable | Digital Trends


Ok.

I will buy new cables and see if that helps.



ERazer said:


> If you gonna spend money on 10g connection why cheap out on cable?
> 
> as already mentioned get cat6 cables


It was just the cables I already had.

Since I read from several places that Cat5e works with 10G just fine I figured I wouldn't bother replacing them.


----------



## Aht0s (Apr 20, 2021)

If you could plug those two computers together and run iperf, I think you will be able to tell for sure if your cables are the problem or it is something else.
Like someone mention earlier, try working your way up to the problem. Direct connection then add other hardware once you confirm it works the way it should be.
I think is ideal to figure the problem and then you can decide on the purchase.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 20, 2021)

Eric_Cartman said:


> Since I read from several places that Cat5e works with 10G just fine I figured I wouldn't bother replacing them.


Well, CAT5e does "work with" 10Gbps. But it is the same as USB 2.0 devices "work with" USB 3.0. Or slower RAM "works with" faster RAM. 

But as is the case with many things, the "weakest" or in this case, the "slowest" link sets the performance limit for the entire system.


----------



## efikkan (Apr 21, 2021)

Eric_Cartman said:


> I have store bought 6ft Cat5e cables.


Assuming these are in excellent physical condition, these shouldn't be the problem.
If you haven't already, try hooking up one cable directly between the machines (as suggested by others), if you still only get 2.5G with two or three different Cat5e cables, then the cables are not the problem.

While I have no experience with the TRENDnet 10G card, I do suspect the drivers. Have you tried various driver versions?
I would even try to boot up Ubuntu from a USB stick to see how it detects the card, just to see if it successfully detects the proper speed, but this may be outside your comfort zone.

BTW; Are you able to return these cards if you can't make them work? (And then buy some Intel x550-t1 cards instead…)


----------



## Eric_Cartman (Apr 22, 2021)

efikkan said:


> Assuming these are in excellent physical condition, these shouldn't be the problem.
> If you haven't already, try hooking up one cable directly between the machines (as suggested by others), if you still only get 2.5G with two or three different Cat5e cables, then the cables are not the problem.
> 
> While I have no experience with the TRENDnet 10G card, I do suspect the drivers. Have you tried various driver versions?
> ...


I tried connecting the computers directly with a cable and get the same results.

I bought everything off ebay so returns will be a hassle.

But I'm also not going to spend $300 per network card to buy Intel cards either.

I used the driver that Windows loaded as well as the latest driver from trendnet's website.

I guess since people are saying Cat5e isn't capable of 10G I'll just wait for the Cat7 cables I ordered to arrive.

They are supposed to be here tomorrow.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 22, 2021)

Keep us posted.


----------



## efikkan (Apr 22, 2021)

Eric_Cartman said:


> I guess since people are saying Cat5e isn't capable of 10G I'll just wait for the Cat7 cables I ordered to arrive.
> 
> They are supposed to be here tomorrow.


The best of luck.

And as a tip for you and others; don't pay extra for Cat 7 over Cat 6A, as there is no Cat 7 standard for RJ45(8P8C). Cat 7 is a special standard for datacenters using TERA or GG45 plugs. Whenever you see "Cat 7" terminated with RJ45 plugs, these are just Cat 6/6A cables with a markup. Cat 6A is comparable to the specs of Cat 7 for datacenters. The successor of Cat 6A is Cat 8.1, but that only becomes relevant with 25Gbps Ethernet.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Apr 22, 2021)

Eric_Cartman said:


> I tried connecting the computers directly with a cable and get the same results.



Yeah, I wasn't 100% sure if it'd change anything. But still, its good to at least remove the switch as a *potential* issue. Now we know that its either the cable, the NIC, the motherboard, or the CPU. I don't know if we can make your test setup any simpler, so this is as "easy" as it will ever get.

The CPU / Motherboard could be an old version of DMI which may have less bandwidth than you expect. Motherboard -> CPU connections are surprisingly complicated. Your CPU's "high bandwidth" direct-PCIe x16 port is probably taken up by your GPU. The remaining x4 or x1 ports may have less bandwidth than you expect.

The NIC could be the issue. You're pretty much in charge of quality control yourself when buying used.

I doubt its the cable, given how short your cable is already. (The shorter the cable, the easier it is to send a high quality signal). But its still worth swapping cables *just in case*.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 22, 2021)

efikkan said:


> And as a tip for you and others; don't pay extra for Cat 7 over Cat 6A, as there is no Cat 7 standard for RJ45(8P8C). Cat 7 is a special standard for datacenters using TERA or GG45 plugs. Whenever you see "Cat 7" terminated with RJ45 plugs, these are just Cat 6/6A cables with a markup. Cat 6A is comparable to the specs of Cat 7 for datacenters. The successor of Cat 6A is Cat 8.1, but that only becomes relevant with 25Gbps Ethernet.


Yes, there is a Cat 7 standard for 8P8C, it just uses the GG45 plug which is backwards compatible with RJ45. There are no Cat 7 cables terminated with RJ45, they are terminated with GG45, otherwise they can't be called Cat 7.  However, even if you cut the GG45 connector off and put a RJ45 on the end, the cable itself is still better than Cat 6/A cables because each pair is shielded and the whole cable is shielded with another layer of shielding on top of that.

I agree that it isn't worth spending extra on Cat 7 cables unless you have a very specific reason that needs Cat 7. However, Cat 7 cables are started to get pretty cheap too, you can get 10ft Cat 7 cables for under $5 each these days. So it's not like it's a huge waste of money if someone buys Cat 7 over Cat 6/A.


----------



## efikkan (Apr 22, 2021)

newtekie1 said:


> Yes, there is a Cat 7 standard for 8P8C, it just uses the GG45 plug which is backwards compatible with RJ45. There are no Cat 7 cables terminated with RJ45, they are terminated with GG45, otherwise they can't be called Cat 7.


I think you missed my point. GG45 is certainly backwards compatible with RJ45. But if you find pre-terminated "Cat 7" cables with RJ45, which many stores do sell, they are not Cat 7. In the cases I've seen, they are just Cat 6/6A cables marked as "Cat 7".



newtekie1 said:


> However, even if you cut the GG45 connector off and put a RJ45 on the end, the cable itself is still better than Cat 6/A cables because each pair is shielded and the whole cable is shielded with another layer of shielding on top of that.
> 
> I agree that it isn't worth spending extra on Cat 7 cables unless you have a very specific reason that needs Cat 7. However, Cat 7 cables are started to get pretty cheap too, you can get 10ft Cat 7 cables for under $5 each these days. So it's not like it's a huge waste of money if someone buys Cat 7 over Cat 6/A.


It depends if you're comparing apples to apples or not, i.e. comparing a minimum spec U/UTP Cat 6A or S/FTP or F/FTP Cat 6A to Cat 7 (with the same wire gauge). To really find out whether the cable is truly better you need to dive into the data sheets, and hopefully they are tested with comparable test parameters. They may very well be the same cable with a different certification, or have a very insignificant difference. I would argue there is not much point in buying a cable certified for 600 MHz vs. 500 MHz., unless you find one that's certified for much higher speeds than that.

*Edit:*
I also want to emphasize that the Ethernet standards are very conservative, so when 10GBASE-T allows up to 55m on Cat 6 and 100m on Cat 6A, that has taken into account a noisy server environment with hundreds of these cables next to each other. So unless you plan to coil your network cables around a fridge or run it past an induction cooktop, using a good Cat 6A cable that exceeds the minimum requirements will be plenty good for 10G in any home, and possibly shorter runs of 25G in the future.
It's far more important that cables are properly terminated and not physically damaged, than going beyond Cat 6A.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 22, 2021)

Another good point is CAT6A is shielded and for full benefits, requires grounding one end.  It's best to just buy CAT6 and forget it, as without grounding you won't exceed that performance anyhow.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 23, 2021)

efikkan said:


> I think you missed my point. GG45 is certainly backwards compatible with RJ45. But if you find pre-terminated "Cat 7" cables with RJ45, which many stores do sell, they are not Cat 7. In the cases I've seen, they are just Cat 6/6A cables marked as "Cat 7".


I have yet to come across Cat 7 cables pre-terminated with RJ45, they all have been GG45. I guess for simplicity they might be marked as RJ45 in the store just not confuse people on compatibility.

But if they are literally Cat 6/A cables, as in marking on the cable says Cat 6/A, being sold as Cat 7 than the store is lying.  The cables themselves are different, with Cat 7 cabling being better.



efikkan said:


> It depends if you're comparing apples to apples or not, i.e. comparing a minimum spec U/UTP Cat 6A or S/FTP or F/FTP Cat 6A to Cat 7 (with the same wire gauge). To really find out whether the cable is truly better you need to dive into the data sheets, and hopefully they are tested with comparable test parameters. They may very well be the same cable with a different certification, or have a very insignificant difference. I would argue there is not much point in buying a cable certified for 600 MHz vs. 500 MHz., unless you find one that's certified for much higher speeds than that.


No, you don't have to dive into the datasheets. Even Cat 6A S/FTP cable is worse than Cat 7 cabling. Cat 6A S/FTP only has a single full cable shielding.  Cat 7 has the pairs shielded as well as a full cable shielding.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 23, 2021)

newtekie1 said:


> the store is lying.


Or more likely being scammed by the cable maker or the store's wholesaler too.


----------



## efikkan (Apr 24, 2021)

newtekie1 said:


> I have yet to come across Cat 7 cables pre-terminated with RJ45, they all have been GG45. I guess for simplicity they might be marked as RJ45 in the store just not confuse people on compatibility.


The once that I've seen clearly has RJ45 plugs. And you don't have to look hard to find them, Amazon, Newegg, Ebay etc.



newtekie1 said:


> No, you don't have to dive into the datasheets. Even Cat 6A S/FTP cable is worse than Cat 7 cabling. Cat 6A S/FTP only has a single full cable shielding.  Cat 7 has the pairs shielded as well as a full cable shielding.


I'm sorry to tell you, but you are 100% wrong on this.
FTP means there is a foil wrapping each pair. S/FTP has two layers of shielding, a foil on each pair and a braid wrapping the cable. F/FTP has two layers of foil.
See here.
Cat 6A exists as both S/FTP and F/FTP cables (plus additional variants), I have actually seen it, and I'm about to install 3-400m of it in a house of a relative.

-----

Back on topic:
@Eric_Cartman:
Any luck with your new cables?
I've been trying to find good reviews of TEG-10GECT, to try to find out what kind of sustained speeds can be expected from it, but with no luck.
I think this note is worth reading on Amazon. It seems like some(?) revisions of it may be using a Aquantia chip, so you may check out those drivers.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Apr 24, 2021)

Just a heads up, again. Cat 7 is not an Ethernet standard. Cat 6A is as far as it goes for 10Gbps, don't waste your money in anything above that, as you'll reap zero benefit.


----------



## newtekie1 (Apr 24, 2021)

TheLostSwede said:


> Just a heads up, again. Cat 7 is not an Ethernet standard. Cat 6A is as far as it goes for 10Gbps, don't waste your money in anything above that, as you'll reap zero benefit.


Again, it's not like they are that expensive. Hell, they can be cheaper than Cat6/A. Like I said, 10ft CAT7 cables can be had on Amazon for under $5. I think at this point we are all making a fuss over what amounts to pennies in price difference. If someone wants to get Cat7, let them. It's not like the cables are twice the price anymore.


----------



## Eric_Cartman (Apr 24, 2021)

I never thought me buying Cat 7 cables would cause such a fuss.

You all act like I spent huge amounts of money on these cables.

You all need to calm down they were actually cheaper than 6a cables on Amazon.



efikkan said:


> Any luck with your new cables?
> I've been trying to find good reviews of TEG-10GECT, to try to find out what kind of sustained speeds can be expected from it, but with no luck.
> I think this note is worth reading on Amazon. It seems like some(?) revisions of it may be using a Aquantia chip, so you may check out those drivers.


The new cables did not help at all.

I can't get over about 3G even with Cat 7 cables.

Yes these network cards are Aquantia based.

I know that because when I go into device manager the driver tab says the driver provider is Aquantia.

It says that for every driver I install.

So I'm back to taking suggestions on what I can do to get 10G working properly.


----------



## efikkan (Apr 24, 2021)

Eric_Cartman said:


> I know that because when I go into device manager the driver tab says the driver provider is Aquantia.
> 
> It says that for every driver I install.
> 
> So I'm back to taking suggestions on what I can do to get 10G working properly.


So, have you tried various drivers from Aquantia, other than those from Trendnet?


----------



## Eric_Cartman (Apr 25, 2021)

efikkan said:


> So, have you tried various drivers from Aquantia, other than those from Trendnet?


Yes.

I've tried every driver I could find that would install on the card.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 27, 2021)

Unfortunately other than cables I can't think of much that could be wrong.


----------



## Eric_Cartman (Apr 29, 2021)

I finally found the answer.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/9wi4vx

Iperf now reports close enough to 10G.

I even tried it with the Cat5e cables and it worked with those as well.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Apr 29, 2021)

Did you update the firmware on your cards? I don't know which version your cards shipped with, but there were a lot of early firmware issues.








						Public Driver Downloads | QLogic Fibre Channel HBAs and FastLinQ Ethernet adapters and controllers - Marvell
					

Download Marvell drivers by Platform or Part Number  for Marvell QLogic Fibre Channel HBA and Marvell FastLinQ Ethernet adapters and controllers.




					www.marvell.com
				




Also, how do you explain that I get around 8Gbps on my two cards not using the -P 8 option?

With it, I get slightly better speeds than you still. You seem to have very inconsistent speeds as well.





On the plus side, doing -P 8 shows that jumbo frames might have a small performance improvement.


----------



## Solaris17 (Apr 29, 2021)

So what was the actual answer? That thread is just a mess of ideas. Were you doing teaming? That link may not help future people.


----------



## Eric_Cartman (May 30, 2021)

TheLostSwede said:


> Did you update the firmware on your cards? I don't know which version your cards shipped with, but there were a lot of early firmware issues.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes I updated the firmware on my cards they were only one version older than the newest.

I don't know why you get higher speeds without the -P 8 command than I do.

From reading iperf on Windows just seems to be inconsistent on what speed it gives over 1G without the -P.

My inconsistant speed doesn't bother me the server is being used by others in the house.



Solaris17 said:


> So what was the actual answer? That thread is just a mess of ideas. Were you doing teaming? That link may not help future people.


The answer was to add the -P 8 in the iperf command.


----------



## Athlonite (Jul 15, 2021)

Eric_Cartman said:


> I have store bought 6ft Cat5e cables.
> 
> I read Cat5e can handle 10G up to 40m or something like that.
> 
> So the cables shouldn't be a problem.



CAT5e will not handle 10G upto any length it just can't cope with the really high frequency used by 10G I suggest you buy a couple of new CAT6A or better cables. CAT5e cables a frequency of only 350MHz that's not enough for 10G which requires 600MHz or better CAT6A CAT7

that also looks like it's the same chipset as I have on the TP-Link TX401X it's the AQC107 so I'd check out Marvel's site for the latest driver and there should also be a firmware update program aswell use both or just grab these


----------

