HDMI over CatX

Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Posts
12,748
Looking to make use of a HDMI over CatX extender. I understand they don't work at the TCP/IP layer and therefore cannot be plugged into a switch, however my thinking is that they shouldn't have any issues being plugged into a patch panel, assuming the other end of course is plugged directly back into the receiving end of the HDMI extender.

Looking to set up something like the below, will this work OK?

A7GForo.png
 
What you've pictured looks fine for IP based senders. They usually recommend single end-to-end cables for the non-IP versions, so your mileage may vary.

IP based senders can be plugged into a switch, just not the switch you're using for the rest of the network. If you do use the same switch the network will grind to a halt. I guess that some cleverness with VLANs might avoid this, but I've never investigated.

I have a single sender downstairs that goes to two TVs upstairs via a network switch. Because of the issue above the cabling they use their own cabling.
 
What you've pictured looks fine for IP based senders. They usually recommend single end-to-end cables for the non-IP versions, so your mileage may vary.

IP based senders can be plugged into a switch, just not the switch you're using for the rest of the network. If you do use the same switch the network will grind to a halt. I guess that some cleverness with VLANs might avoid this, but I've never investigated.

I have a single sender downstairs that goes to two TVs upstairs via a network switch. Because of the issue above the cabling they use their own cabling.

This is where it gets a bit confusing for me. In theory with the above diagram this should still be classed as an end-to-end setup. The patch panel is not doing any switching, it merely links a patched cable from the HDMI extender to the patch panel, and at the other end from the faceplate to the receiving extender.

I will of course have a gigabit switch under the patch panel for my other networking devices, but with HDMI over CatX not working at TCP/IP layer i figured i'd just plug directly into the patch panel.

For reference these were the extenders i was looking at: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Extender-U...DCTAEM1PKSPV&refRID=4MH140SADCTAEM1PKSPV&th=1

The POE version so that i don't need a power supply at the receiving end.

So i presume you've got a dedicated switch that only has the HDMI extender and two HDMI receivers plugged into it?
 
Those senders aren't IP based.

These for example are:-

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Extender-H...dmi+sender+ip&qid=1568026117&s=gateway&sr=8-7

The non-IP versions can be very sensitive to cabling so any additional plugs and sockets along the route can be a problem. It'll also depend on the quality and length of the cabling. The only way to absolutely know is to try it. With Amazon's return policies that isn't a big problem.

I do use a dedicated switch for the senders.
 
Those senders aren't IP based.

These for example are:-

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Extender-H...dmi+sender+ip&qid=1568026117&s=gateway&sr=8-7

The non-IP versions can be very sensitive to cabling so any additional plugs and sockets along the route can be a problem. It'll also depend on the quality and length of the cabling. The only way to absolutely know is to try it. With Amazon's return policies that isn't a big problem.

I do use a dedicated switch for the senders.

Cheers for that.

I think i'll give the ones i linked to a go, and if i can see the quality is degrading/stuttering etc, then i'll send them back and swap for some IP based ones.

I presume that whilst these are compatible with routers/switches, they'd need to be kept separate from other networking devices? The pictures are a bit misleading as they're almost suggesting you can just plug straight into a router, which assuming other network devices would likely be using, i would have thought this would cause issues.
 
The pictures are a bit misleading as they're almost suggesting you can just plug straight into a router, which assuming other network devices would likely be using, i would have thought this would cause issues.
I made the same assumption and connected the senders to my existing network. They worked perfectly, unfortunately everything else on the network gradually ground to a halt.

You can do exactly what they show in the pictures, and it's a convenient way to connect to multiple end-points. You can't start adding additional unrelated devices.

I ran an additional external Cat5e cable and that fixed the problem. They're mainly used for Sky HD and the picture looks as it should on a 42" plasma. The sound does eventually go out of sync if the Skybox isn't put into standby every so often.
 
You can’t use a patch panel or joint/back box on standard baluns, they are notoriously picky, IP is a different game.
 
Looking to set up something like the below, will this work OK?


I had this working much as you describe over a decade ago except that it was a KVM box at each end with a PC in a secure place and the keyboard, mouse, and display in an atrium. Make sure you use a different colour cable at the patch panel.
 
Should work fine. We have a few like this in work.

Cat6 direct is most optimal, but if it's decent cable then it will work through multiple patches.
 
Just to add to this thread, i used 4 sets of standard "HDMI over single cat5e" baluns around my house. All are fed through a patch panel through my house structured cat5e cabling with the final end from a faceplate. Standard cat5e/cat6 patch cables (a mix, whatever i had at the time when installing each one) at the rack and at the device ends.

All work perfectly, a mix of brands, mostly chinese generic, whatever i could find cheapest over a long period of time as they were added, via eBay. They dont seem picky at all to me. Obviously they are not IP devices, so need to be physically patched together, they cannot route via any data switching, ie at the patch panel end they just loop through.
 
Back
Top Bottom