10Gb NIC & Switch with Link Aggregation Recommendation
10Gb NIC & Switch with Link Aggregation Recommendation
Hello, I've discussed my recent setup where six computers link to one server hosting our online course tool. The faster performance drops when multiple users edit, read, or preview simultaneously. For more information, check the thread where @Windows7ge recommended upgrades to fix the slowdown. He suggested upgrading the network interface card on the server to a 10Gbps model that also supports Link Aggregation. Our existing switch doesn't support 10Gbps or Link Aggregation, so we should purchase one that does. Are there any recommended network interface cards and switches that meet these requirements? Since all computers are within about 30 feet, we won't need Cat6A, but Cat6 was proposed instead of Cat7. Given we'll only need ten 25-foot Cat7 cables, and the price difference isn't significant, I considered buying ten Cat7 units. @Windows7ge also asked about DAC and fiber optics—currently I'm thinking of connecting a Cat6 or Cat7 from the new 10Gb NIC to the updated switch and then routing Cat6/7 to each computer. Are there additional components needed? Also, how would link aggregation function? Could I directly connect to the switch via an IP address and use a user interface to adjust each port to limit 1Gb/s? I'm comfortable with the hardware side but new to networking, so any further advice would be appreciated. Thanks a lot.
Did you confirm the network was the limiting factor as requested? If you intend to use 10Gbps connections, you likely won’t need a Layer 3 switch for your client count. I recommended a Layer 3 switch in the case of connecting several 1Gbps links. Since each client doesn’t exceed a 1Gbps link, upgrading them would be unnecessary. You could deploy a 10GbE NIC (such as Intel X540-T1) on the server and connect it to a switch with a 10GbE port. Then route 1GbE to each client. This assumes you identified the server’s 1GbE NIC as the bottleneck.
Search for sfp+ dac cables, they’re likely cheaper than rj45 and offer lower latency and power use. They represent a better overall standard, but use rj45 only if backward compatibility is essential—since the two IP ports will share one. Set it up on a switch and client. If you plan for 10G, it’s probably unnecessary. Don’t restrict port speed unnecessarily; 10G makes sense then. I’d probably switch to a micro-ox connect x3, which is affordable on eBay and works out of the box with Windows and Linux. Check the MikroTik switches; you can find one here: https://mikrotik.com/product/crs317_1g_16s_rm. There are cheaper options if you don’t need many ports. Also, verify if your network is the bottleneck—your screenshot might not show maximum usage. What are the full specifications of the server? Try using Performance Monitor logging, as it’s ideal for this.
Network equipment featuring 10gbps RJ45 connections tends to be costly. A setup with a minimum of seven ports can become quite pricey, often reaching around $550 or higher. Here are some options:
- NETGEAR 8-Port Switch – $590
Includes 1 x 10G SFP+, suitable for desktop or rack installations, with ProSAFE lifetime protection.
[Product link](https://www.amazon.com/NETGEAR-Managed-8...B01GTWPTJY)
- TRENDnet 8-Port Switch – $540
Supports 2.5G/5G NBASE-T, 160Gbps capacity, rack mount design, lifetime protection.
[Product link](https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16833162157)
- SFP+ Network Cards & Switches – $300–$250
Many affordable choices available; switches and network cards are budget-friendly, while cables can be pricier.
[Example card](https://www.unixplus.com/collections/net...-l3-switch)
- MikroTik Desktop Switch – $250
Supports 1Gbps port and 8 SFP+ ports, flexible for switching or routing.
[Product link](https://www.amazon.com/MikroTik-Desktop-...B07NFXN4SS)
- Intel X520 Switch – $300–$400
Offers Gigabit Ethernet and multiple SFP+ ports, suitable for small networks.
[Product link](https://www.unixplus.com/collections/net...r-x520-da1)
For your setup, using SFP+ cards paired with more affordable switches should keep costs manageable. If speed isn’t the main concern, you’re likely within reach of acceptable performance.
I've looked into the Ethernet performance in Task Manager, but it didn't show significant improvement. Are there alternative methods to test? It might not be the network issue after all. Your system specs are: i7 3.40 GHz CPU, 14GB RAM, GTX 1060, 6GB VRAM, 1TB HDD. Would swapping the hard drive for an SSD be more beneficial than upgrading the network?
I wasn't aware Performance Monitor existed, but it provides much more information. I ran tests on three out of six computers at once while most of my team was away, and here are the findings: Disk (possibly peaking; an SSD might fix the read/write problem), CPU (no immediate concerns), Network (network appears fine, but TCP is unclear). Thanks for explaining!
That tool tracks resources, but based on what I see it’s using an HDD.
Thanks for providing all the detailed information! I've stored it for when my team grows and we need a faster network connection.