You lost me at “latest” and “enthusiast” in the same breath as “gigabit”. Bring on the 10g y’all! (That’s a knock on Rivet, not you HH 🙂 )

IIllIlllII:

You lost me at “latest” and “enthusiast” in the same breath as “gigabit”. Bring on the 10g y’all! (That’s a knock on Rivet, not you HH 🙂 )

I am so fascinated by your nickname ... 🙂

IIllIlllII:

You lost me at “latest” and “enthusiast” in the same breath as “gigabit”. Bring on the 10g y’all! (That’s a knock on Rivet, not you HH 🙂 )

really how is 2.5 just not a normal now, hell 5 should be a normal and 10 on high end, why are they still pushing gigabit?

Hilbert Hagedoorn:

I am so fascinated by your nickname ... 🙂

Barcode - hes' a pro player

Denial:

Barcode - hes' a pro player

Barcode Indeed! Picked my nickname in the dark days of AOL chat rooms to avoid getting it added to spam lists...until they automated that. Played Diablo, TeamFortressClassic, Diablo 2 (#1USEast HC), TF2, WOW, before family life set in. Love this site, always the first one I check every weekday when I wake up, the time zone differential usually means HH gets those posts up nice and early. And yes, I’m old enough to remember laughing at the Swedish Chef on TV

Kaill:

really how is 2.5 just not a normal now, hell 5 should be a normal and 10 on high end, why are they still pushing gigabit?

Because its still mostly useless for "normal" people that do nothing but connect to their router for internet.

nevcairiel:

Because its still mostly useless for "normal" people that do nothing but connect to their router for internet.

okay then under that thought then why push for wifi 5 or wifi 6. Most devices don't reach the speeds those provide or even take advantage of them, but still they updated the standards and put them in to consumer products, why is that different then putting 2.5, 5, or 10gb nics on our routers and motherboards.

Kaill:

okay then under that thought then why push for wifi 5 or wifi 6. Most devices don't reach the speeds those provide or even take advantage of them, but still they updated the standards and put them in to consumer products, why is that different then putting 2.5, 5, or 10gb nics on our routers and motherboards.

Wifi 6 has significant advantages outside of speed. It has huge improvements for situations with a lot of competing networks, like in apartment buildings or whatnot. That has actually a direct tangible impact on many people.

I'm surprised this "Killer" series has survived as long as it did. I've never known anyone who felt they were worth getting.

nevcairiel:

Wifi 6 has significant advantages outside of speed. It has huge improvements for situations with a lot of competing networks, like in apartment buildings or whatnot. That has actually a direct tangible impact on many people.

okay but still stands that most "normal" people won't be taking advantage of those benefits, but because of standards being implemented those benefits are there whether they are used or not, so why would that have to be different for Nics on Motherboards, Routers and even modems.

I have Verizon FiOS gigabit fiber internet in my home and my motherboard (Asus Rampage VI Extreme) has a 10g LAN port but I still hook my ethernet cable up to the Intel V-219 1g LAN port instead. Should I even bother with the 10g Aquantia LAN port? Its not like I'll get any faster speeds, right?

Kaill:

okay but still stands that most "normal" people won't be taking advantage of those benefits, but still because of standards set it was released so why would that have to be different for Nics on Motherboards, Routers and even modems.

I don't get it, how would cutting down interference in densely populated areas not be taken advantage by normal people? Most normal people live in urban areas. I have friends that can barely get WiFi in their own apartment because it's so crowded - so while they wouldn't benefit from increased WiFi 6 bandwidth, they'll definitely benefit from the density improvements. That being said I agree that we should be pushing the faster speeds regardless across all mediums. I don't care if people are using it or not - I want to use it.

vdelvec:

I have Verizon FiOS gigabit fiber internet in my home and my motherboard (Asus Rampage VI Extreme) has a 10g LAN port but I still hook my ethernet cable up to the Intel V-219 1g LAN port instead. Should I even bother with the 10g Aquantia LAN port? Its not like I'll get any faster speeds, right?

Probably not, the Verizon Gateway/Router itself is gigabit.. so regardless to which you plug it into, it will only negotiate at gigabit speeds. That being said it's possible (i doubt it but still the possibility exists) that the Aquantia controller is just simply better than Intel so you'll get a faster connection within that gigabit limit. Intel NICs are pretty good though so it will probably just be the same.

Yeah, and my old motherboard. MSI X99A Godlike Gaming Carbon had a Killer 1g E-2500 LAN port and I noticed no difference in speeds or latency at gigabit speeds. I think the reason the Killer has survived this long isn't because its better but because its an equal alternative to Intel.

nevcairiel:

Because its still mostly useless for "normal" people that do nothing but connect to their router for internet.

gotta love those vicious cycles created by ignorance, same as with computers in 2019 shipping with the same 2007 720p webcam, 1080p for the rare model, goes something like this: they suck! > no one uses them! > OEMs dont improve them > they suck > no one uses them ~ most computers today can do 500mbps transfer between them but are limited to a 5th of that, cuz reasons"

EspHack:

gotta love those vicious cycles created by ignorance, same as with computers in 2019 shipping with the same 2007 720p webcam, 1080p for the rare model, goes something like this: they suck! > no one uses them! > OEMs dont improve them > they suck > no one uses them ~ most computers today can do 500mbps transfer between them but are limited to a 5th of that, cuz reasons"

Its not ignorance, but practicallity and cost. The vast majority of PC users just quite simply have no need for faster Ethernet (yet). They don't have anything to transfer, all they do is use the internet and game. As such, they would also not want to pay for it, and even today 2.5G/5G or 10G chips still cost quite a bit. What does an average gamer joe do with 2.5G? Connect to the switch built into his router, which is only 1G at best. Even if he had a 2.5G switch, what is he going to transfer? I know plenty ordinary gamers who buy mid-range gaming hardware, they all would have zero use for something like that. There is not enough actual real-world demand for this yet to spread to mid-range or even low-end hardware. This is not ignorance, this is just fact. Most people wouldn't know what to do with it. The world is actually moving forward on this topic though, as high-end boards get 10G or at least 5G or 2.5G built-in now far more commonly then one generation back. But low-end or mid-range, most people that buy those just wouldn't want to pay for the premium this would add. Maybe a couple more generations and 2.5G will be more wide-spread. Everytime I see those demands on "enthusiast" boards like this one, I always imagine people are just mad because they want a cheap mid-range board and still all the premium features. Guess what, you would still pay for those features, and the mid-range prices would increase. 🙂

Kaill:

really how is 2.5 just not a normal now, hell 5 should be a normal and 10 on high end, why are they still pushing gigabit?

because: - if your net provider is unable to get the band size (ADSL+ or VDSL) then it is useless (mean most of the population in the world). - Killer chip are good in reactivity and it's better to have a reactive gigabit than a sleepy 10Gb for gaming (the biggest is not always the better, a bit like in... forget about it 🙂 ). But 10Gb just starting to be on normal motherboard so it will come in this way little by little.

schmidtbag:

I'm surprised this "Killer" series has survived as long as it did. I've never known anyone who felt they were worth getting.

I am too, but nearly 100% were OEM impementation on motherboard, i had one on the motherboard for my G3258, it was a great thing but not exeptional at the same time. Also it doesn't work on linux (at least at this time). And also most user doesn't know how to configure it and so it lost it's advantage.

EspHack:

gotta love those vicious cycles created by ignorance, same as with computers in 2019 shipping with the same 2007 720p webcam, 1080p for the rare model, goes something like this: they suck! > no one uses them! > OEMs dont improve them > they suck > no one uses them ~ most computers today can do 500mbps transfer between them but are limited to a 5th of that, cuz reasons"

We can draw graphic scene that screen can't handle, shall we waste time to do this way or shall we adapt to actual demand??? In 2007 webcam at 720 were good enough and 1080 were a bit too much for most people, with time and the evolution (ex: there is no more copper wires in my street, only optical), and the fabric cost drop, 1080 is the minimum. But was it a good idea to get 1080 webcam in 2007? i don't think so. and it is the same for 10Gb i wouldn't get it now, but i will have it in future (and it's a bit a lie because my mother board and my switch are already 10Gb despite i don't use those port yet, so you see it is comming)

can't they do us all a favour and announce their immediate liquidation.

My motherboard has a Killer and Intel NIC. I get slightly better pings on Intel vs the Killer with the Killer software installed. I just use Intel and uninstalled the Killer software.