Will 1Gigabyte per second (8gbps) connections be a thing in the UK within the next 5-10 years?

g67575

g67575

g67575

Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2019
Posts
8,159
So, 1GBps downstream and upstream sync rates.

Is this something even being considered at the moment?

Possible applications for this type of connection would be very fast game downloads. E.g, 60GB game in 1 minute, 120GB game in 2 minutes. Waiting for downloads would be virtually a thing of the past, unless games got substantially larger.

Also, very high speed file uploads to services like Google Drive /OneDrive, for data backup. Speeds would be similar or even faster than current home networks over LAN.

I've heard many FTTP network backhauls are capable of 10gbps data transfers, but this doesn't mean network providers have the data capacity to support this type of connection yet.

Another thing to consider, is that most solid state drives in computers 'only' have max transfer speeds of 500MBps, rather than 1GBps, due to SATA III speed limitations - NVME drives though can generally handle multiple Gigabytes per second.

Will be interesting to see if SATA IV is ever released (and becomes a standard in PCs/laptops), supporting multiple Gigabyte per second transfer speeds...

It's maybe the sort of thing a future government might be able to fund, once nearly all residential premises in the country has been connected to a FTTP network... What do you think, will 900-1000 megabits per second connections be enough already?
 
Last edited:
Gonna be awhile I think - few people even have a fully 1gbps setup at home let alone 8. I have some minor 2.5gbps connectivity and the rest is 1 with some stuff still at 100mbps even heh.

Even with 10gbps networking and NVMEs you need some fairly specialised hardware to actually see anything like speeds over 500MB/s transferred over a network link.
 
Even stuff like the quality of the device driver (even with using hardware acceleration/offloading) will have an impact, how well tuned for performance memory access is, etc.

Not something I'm an expert on but know enough it isn't trivial to get end to end throughput like that with consumer grade hardware.
 
Can routers that FTTP providers use even handle 1GB per second transfer rates?

EDIT - Even routers like the ASUS RT-AX89X with 10gbps ports can't get anywhere near that transfer speed in real-world LAN testing. So I think you are right Rroff, consumer routers just aren't fast enough yet.

I wonder why hooking up internal SSDs to USB 3.2/USB 4 hasn't caught on yet? It looks like the transfer rates have easily superseded SATA 3.

I can't see a reason not to switch the interface on most internal SSDs over to USB 3.2 (from SATA III) or above, at least in the next few years. I think this would be preferable to using NVME/PCIE connections (could still have 1/2 connections for these), which are still not widely adopted by consumers.
 
Last edited:
So, I had a look around for routers that could actually do this. I think this would work:

https://www.broadbandbuyer.com/products/41347-draytek-v3910-k-cloud/

DrayTek Vigor 3910 Multi-WAN Broadband Router - £693.94

Can handle 9Gb/s throughput apparently!

It has 2 SFP slots that allow 10gbps modules to be installed for WAN and LAN networking, somewhat limited in this regard. It would need a 10gbps switch for additional connections.

Hardly a cheap option.

10gbps RJ-45 ports on routers aren't really a thing yet, so you'd have to pay through the nose for special 10gbps SFP modules.
 
Last edited:
To be honest, I don’t see why normal households will want/need a symmetric connection.

In the real world, the absolute vast majority of domestic internet connections are for consumption. Very few people upload any meaningful amount of data to the cloud. Most data that is stored in the cloud is just pictures etc.

The people that have big home NAS devices to store data probably aren’t going to want to upload it to the cloud because backing up their ‘Linux ISOs’ has little value, high cost or questionable legal implications.

If your running a business from home, that’s a different question altogether and will obviously have different requirements. But those people are in the tiny majority.
 
The speed of the data is expressed in bits per second, that is how it is done. Are you going to start using scores to measure years next? Oh hey how old are you, I'm one score and five... No you are going to say you are 25.
 
Journey said:
The speed of the data is expressed in bits per second, that is how it is done. Are you going to start using scores to measure years next? Oh hey how old are you, I'm one score and five... No you are going to say you are 25.
Click to expand...
I'm going to speak to my local car dealer and ask how many furlongs to the gallon it gets, and what its maximum feet per second is. :cry:
 
Nobody cares, in the USA they refer to Internet throughout in MB per second. Surely you can tolerate either format? :)

It's totally not what the thread is actually about...
 
ChrisD. said:
I'm going to speak to my local car dealer and ask how many furlongs to the gallon it gets, and what its maximum feet per second is. :cry:
Click to expand...

I've just asked the milkman if he can start delivering my milk in London Quarter's or Metretes, which ever one he can figure out that gets me enough milk to last a couple of days. :p
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
To be honest, I don’t see why normal households will want/need a symmetric connection.

In the real world, the absolute vast majority of domestic internet connections are for consumption. Very few people upload any meaningful amount of data to the cloud. Most data that is stored in the cloud is just pictures etc.

The people that have big home NAS devices to store data probably aren’t going to want to upload it to the cloud because backing up their ‘Linux ISOs’ has little value, high cost or questionable legal implications.

If your running a business from home, that’s a different question altogether and will obviously have different requirements. But those people are in the tiny majority.
Click to expand...

That's an absolute self-fulfilling fallacy though. Here's your slow, heavily asymmetric connection folks... Wait, people are mostly downloading, they don't 'need' better upload. Well, no sheet Sherlock. If the bandwidth was available, people would use it (and come up with new ways to use it).
 
Rainmaker said:
That's an absolute self-fulfilling fallacy though. Here's your slow, heavily asymmetric connection folks... Wait, people are mostly downloading, they don't 'need' better upload. Well, no sheet Sherlock. If the bandwidth was available, people would use it (and come up with new ways to use it).
Click to expand...

How is it? Please tell me what normal everyday households are uploading considerable amounts of data where they need a 1gbps upload speed. The absolute vast majority of users prioritise downloads Over uploads which is why the providers prioritise download speeds over upload speeds. It’s like they have did the market research and looked at customer usage patters during the design of the product.

I specifically carved out businesses being ran from home on a residential connection as they obviously have different requirements.

Last time I checked up to 900/100 connections are not slow. FTTC is slow by modern standards, yes but it’s also irrelevant to the point in which nearly all users prioritise download over upload.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
How is it? Please tell me what normal everyday households are uploading considerable amounts of data where they need a 1gbps upload speed.
Click to expand...

You're just restating the point. They're not, because it's (generally) not available.

The absolute vast majority of users prioritise downloads Over uploads which is why the providers prioritise download speeds over upload speeds. It’s like they have don’t market research and looked at customer usage patters during the design of the product.
Click to expand...

The 'design of the product' was mostly in consideration of poorly maintained and ancient phy networks (eg DOCSIS) which were inherently limited repurposed products. BT's new fibre network is still only at 100Mbps upstream because that's 'faster than the competitor, so good enough'.

I specifically carved out businesses being ran from home on a residential connection as they obviously have different requirements.

Last time I checked up to 900/100 connections are not slow. FTTC is slow by modern standards, yes but it’s also irrelevant to the point in which nearly all users prioritise download over upload.
Click to expand...

You're honestly telling us that, should (say) 1Gbps upstream be standard people wouldn't be treating cloud storage as LAN, transferring larger files between each other, and finding new and creative ways to use it? Have you even been on the Internet long? :p If it's there, it'll get used and allow for innovation. A measly upstream is testament to poor infrastructure and lackadaisical ISPs who care about the bottom line, not the Internet as a thing or customer use cases. If it's not there, you can't use it - and ISPs use exactly your justification for not bothering to improve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom