|
||||||||
Network cat5e cables |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,979
|
Network cat5e cables
I'm s out to embark on a new house project and want to network the house for pcs media etc etc just wondered if its best to use 1 socket behind the tv then put a switch box in to plug my devices in ie sky HD smart Tv blueray player or to bring down individual cables to separate sockets?
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 2,938
|
If you're going to the effort of cabling the house properly then it makes sense to put several sockets in each room to give yourself flexibility in the future.
What are you using as your central switch? |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 43,524
|
it's normal to use dual end plates in this situation. although i guess the number is arbitrary since you may well need more.
i'd think about cat 6 cable. it wont cost much more and might be more future proof. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Reading
Posts: 27,926
|
Of course the more cables you run into each location the bigger the network switch you need at the central point. So the options are,
1/ One big multiport switch in a central location with each port cabled out to various locations as required. 2/ One small central switch feeding a single cable out to each location and using additional switches to expand the number of ports at each location. Option 1 is possibly the neater as it doesn't need all these small network switches all over the place. But really depends on how much cable you fancy pulling through. Which could be a consideration if it has to go through pre-existing trunking/conduit. If you are also laying in your own trunking/conduit then that isn't so much of a problem. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Essex
Posts: 16,223
|
I would try and put in two or four pairs of cat6 if possible as cat6 can be used for HD video as well as data. Also in the central location you can install a patch panel so different rooms can be connected if required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 4,391
|
I can't see any benefit to running less cable, except time saved (and it's easy enough to run it in pairs or fours to negate this advantage). The cost of the cable itself is minimal - and you don't need a massive router at the central point to serve all the cables you've pulled, only something large enough to serve all the cable-points you're actually using.
You know the corner of the room you think you absolutely don't need to run any cables to? Run some there as well ![]() Cheers, David. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,979
|
Just thinking of speed here guys so it dosnt really matter which way I do it, I will use cat 6 I think but it dosnt mater if:
1. A single cable from a central switch to behind the tv and using a local switch there. 2. Multiple cables from the central switch to multiple wall plates behind the Tv |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Reading
Posts: 27,926
|
Multiple cables might be better for future proofing. You don't need all of them to be used for networking. But having a few spares might come in handy if you need them for other things.
You can for example send video and audio over CAT5/6 cable with the right kit, even HDMI. So if you wanted to feed the output of a satellite receiver for example to another room using CAT5/6 extenders is one way to do so. If the cables are there of course. And if nothing else having two cables instead of one gives you a spare, either for future expansion or as a back-up if the one you use goes faulty. If you land all the cables on a patch panel then you can connect them up any which way you like. Some to the network switch, some interconnected to feed signals from room A to room B or for any other signal that can be poked down a CAT5/6 cable. You could even distribute your phone line over it if you wanted (RJ45 to BT style socket adapters exist). |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Essex
Posts: 16,223
|
Quote:
Just thinking of speed here guys so it dosnt really matter which way I do it, I will use cat 6 I think but it dosnt mater if:
1. A single cable from a central switch to behind the tv and using a local switch there. 2. Multiple cables from the central switch to multiple wall plates behind the Tv |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 2,938
|
Quote:
if you use a switch then all the traffic from that room will be going down one connection. This may not be important to you but for example if you have a couple of devices using HD video streams then you might run into problems. Also as mentioned, you can use cat6 for distribution HDMI as well as data.
A raw BD rip allows up to 48 Mb/s (68 Mb/s for 3D) so even at those quality levels you wouldn't run into any problems on a gigabit network. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 4,391
|
Quote:
Gigabit throughout would easily provide enough bandwidth for a home network for a long time to come
It causes friction in some institutions, because the IT department rolls out a network that's supposed to be a once-and-for-all-time job (arguably like the mains power cables), and then they come back five years later wanting more money to do the whole job again. Cheers, David. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:58.


