IPX, multiple NICs vs switch - Network

This is a discussion on IPX, multiple NICs vs switch - Network ; Hi there, Currently I have 3 systems connected by a switch. I use them for gaming (Flight Simulator 2004). They are 'connected' by a piece of software called Wideview. Each system gets its own specific data from the server. Currently ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: IPX, multiple NICs vs switch

  1. IPX, multiple NICs vs switch

    Hi there,
    Currently I have 3 systems connected by a switch. I use them for gaming
    (Flight Simulator 2004). They are 'connected' by a piece of software
    called Wideview. Each system gets its own specific data from the server.
    Currently this process consumes all available bandwith (100Mbit) so I'm
    planning an upgrade to Gb technology.

    However, since a NIC can only send 1 package at a time my brain produced
    something what might be either a brainfart or a solution: would it be
    more efficient if I equipped the server (System A) with 3 NICs, one
    connected directly to system B, one to System C and one to my router.
    In theory it would be possible to send the neccessary data to both
    systems simultaniously with less collisions and 'polution' caused by
    data from and to the Internet.

    Does this make sense? And will this be more efficient than connecting
    everything with a switch?

    Thanks!

  2. Re: IPX, multiple NICs vs switch

    I don't imagine that Flight Simulator would use 100mbit. But never using
    that game I wont further comment on the netcode.

    I would only worry about upgrading my network for that game if it is causing
    the game to lag.

    It is possible to have 2 network cards in one computer and use that as a
    switch. A computer running windows XP has access to a feature called
    'network bridging'. This will be of use in your situation as 2 network cards
    can be used to join 2 segments. The computer with 2 network cards
    essentially has full speed access to both other computers. The downside to
    this is that traffic from one segment has to pass via the network bridge to
    reach the other. This happens transparently and very fast in my experience,
    not worth worrying about.

    Cost: extra network cards for bridge computer. two cross over cables of
    sufficient length

    Gigabit will likely solve your problem completely. I own a gigabit switch +
    network card. I find that the maximum bandwidth I can achieve with gigabit
    is around 50MB/sec. Nothing I use is able to significantly load my gigabit,
    while I can easily load my 100mbit's 10MB/sec.

    cost: gigabit network card(s), gigabit switch.

    So there's 2 pretty simple choices to make.

    I'd just go gigabit as all new desktops and laptops seem to include
    integrated gigabit networking.

    The choice is now in your hands.

    Peace.




    "Sjaakie" wrote in message
    news:4221da6f$0$28993$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    > Hi there,
    > Currently I have 3 systems connected by a switch. I use them for gaming
    > (Flight Simulator 2004). They are 'connected' by a piece of software
    > called Wideview. Each system gets its own specific data from the server.
    > Currently this process consumes all available bandwith (100Mbit) so I'm
    > planning an upgrade to Gb technology.
    >
    > However, since a NIC can only send 1 package at a time my brain produced
    > something what might be either a brainfart or a solution: would it be more
    > efficient if I equipped the server (System A) with 3 NICs, one connected
    > directly to system B, one to System C and one to my router.
    > In theory it would be possible to send the neccessary data to both systems
    > simultaniously with less collisions and 'polution' caused by data from and
    > to the Internet.
    >
    > Does this make sense? And will this be more efficient than connecting
    > everything with a switch?
    >
    > Thanks!




+ Reply to Thread