Designing a high-speed network involves several key considerations.
Designing a high-speed network involves several key considerations.
Thank you for the guidance. However, I feel my initial concern was already addressed. Regarding your hesitation about using a NAS for gaming, I’ll set this aside.
You'll grasp the concept once you try it. * Sata operates significantly quicker than most connections. * Your network will become overloaded, causing your switch to glow like a Christmas tree. * You'll need to use the same letter for the network share; otherwise, your games won't function properly. * Networks are less dependable than local storage, leading to delays, drops, or even complete failures. Access times would be terrible. * Your game loading will suffer. That's a long list—remember, in computing you should stick to the KISS rule. You can achieve similar results with just a PC, without the complexity of Ethernet cables, switches, RAID drives, or NAS devices. Just because something happens online doesn't mean it's a smart move. If you're curious about networking, go ahead, but don't treat it as a brilliant strategy. Have you worked with networking before?
Your 10-year-old HP Z400 handles around 540MB/s, which is about a 4.5Gbps network. This old machine will load games faster than your new PC, a big network, and a NAS. In reality, you’re wasting time, money, and power trying to make it work. If you really want this speed, upgrade to 10Gbps and then it’ll match local storage performance.
I'm shifting focus away from this subject. Here’s the summary of what I’ve gathered. I just completed a session of Far Cry: New Dawn for about half an hour. I set my resolution to 1440p, and the frame rate consistently stayed around 144fps with maximum settings. The performance felt smooth. Currently, I’m using a 1GB connection. To test further, I checked CrystaldiskMark. A sequential write speed of 150MB/s on a 7200rpm drive versus 118MB/s on the NAS suggested something interesting. That number aligns closely with 1GBps? Probably not. This indicates that upgrading to a faster network connection would likely boost these numbers even more, possibly surpassing what a 7200rpm drive can achieve. For now, it’s functional. It isn’t an SSD, but it performs adequately. Keep in mind the random4k write speed was higher on the NAS than the drive, with the drive scoring around 1.15/1.63MBps and the NAS at 37.45/29.63MBps. There are several reasons I’m conducting this test. First, I have multiple gaming systems nearby—one in my office for keyboard/mouse, another in my living room for casual play. Having everything centrally stored on a larger NAS would simplify access without needing two separate drives, especially in the living room where I aim to minimize space usage. I’m not using both at once. Before jumping to conclusions about storage importance, I’m relocating to an area with limited bandwidth options, particularly given my budget constraints. If I can keep my collection locally, it reduces waiting times for gameplay. Also, I’ve played in a busy environment with multiple Wi-Fi routers, smart thermostats, streaming devices, and other computers running at once. Despite that, the results remain consistent. So, let’s agree—SSDs are faster than HDDs or RAID setups based on these tests. Stop minimizing NAS performance just because of HDDs. It works. And even if a game is extremely poor over a NAS, I can move it to my local machine, which might be faster, without risking full local storage saturation.
We’re discussing how to run games on one computer across multiple networked machines. Installation isn’t just about copying files; it involves registry data, updates, plugins, and media codecs that won’t transfer directly. Only simple games will function, not complex ones, and you’ll need to reinstall each time on a different PC. Transferring games between systems often fails because of these dependencies.
With your current 5400rpm HDD, even an ideal setup might lag behind a modern 10,000rpm drive. Using outdated hardware just adds complexity and slows things down. You’re investing in something novel, but it won’t match today’s performance standards. Local storage remains faster, and upgrading to 10GB with fast drives would give you a much better experience. If more people adopted this approach, it would become the norm.
Before joining this group, I shared my perspective as before—I didn’t require managed options. That’s why I purchased a 5-port 2.5GbE switch from QNAP (QNAP QSW-1105-5T 5-Port Unmanaged 2.5GbE Switch). However, after connecting it behind my router, the speeds dropped to around 40MB/s, even though the network display showed 2.5Gb/s in the Network and Sharing Center. This was a decrease from the 110MB/s I received with just the 1GbE router. I’ve included photos of both the original and current network setups. Another point is that my NAS runs Windows 10, so I can verify the speeds on both the NAS and the client PC. My next idea is to upgrade my router to include at least one 2.5GbE port so all devices connected through the switch would support that speed. I’m looking into the ASUS RT-AX86U (https://www.asus.com/us/Networking/RT-AX86U). It might be worth checking the troubleshooting section, but I suspect there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with the hardware. I’m uncertain about the setup and would appreciate any guidance.
The router isn't the problem here; I wouldn't replace it. Ensure traffic isn't reaching the router. Check speeds using tools like iperf to see what the network can handle. Would you get full 2.5Gb speeds if devices connect directly? It might help to use a managed switch for better troubleshooting.
I investigated further and discovered iperf. It matched the speed I achieved. Connecting computers directly via Ethernet isn't something I've experienced before. Regarding managed switches, they typically create a unified network downstream of the router's LAN. Placing your NAS on a managed switch would integrate it into the same network, allowing access through the router's WiFi. The router's LAN and WiFi areas would merge, so the NAS remains reachable via the combined network.
Yes, simply connect them directly. It varies based on configuration, but generally they function as unmanaged switches unless adjustments are made. L2 switches cannot create a separate subnet independently; that responsibility falls to a router or L3 switch.