More cat5e runs, or a switch?

[IVB]

I currently have 5 cat5e runs (2 local media devices, 1 IP-control device, 1 bidirectional analog audio over cat5e from local receiver to WHA, 1 GC100 for 2 local serial) to the living room, and it looks l need 2 more (new serial devices)
 
Its absolutely trivial for me to do extra runs since I have easy access to the crawlspace.  I could go wireless, but my neighborhood has TONS of WiFi networks (houses 15' apart, I can see 10 networks), plus a ludicrous amount of wireless pollution, so I prefer wired.
 
Wondering at which point do I say "eff it", and put in a local switch. 7 freaking runs to one location is...a lot.
 
(and that doesn't count the motion sensor, 3 windows, door sensor, 2 pairs of inwall speakers that had their own wiring runs in that room. I think there's more wire than wood.)

 

[wuench]

I would say local switch.  But I would run a worst case test on it to make sure it meets your needs and be prepared to take it back if it doesn't, especially if you are doing a lot of high bandwidth streaming.  
 
The only switches I have found so far that can handle streaming a bluray ISO to my boxee are my Cisco/Linksys SG300's steady 25-40Mbps (several other unmanaged Cisco/Linksys failed miserably).   Others around here stand by Netgear switches for consumer/small business class switches.

 

[IVB]

Interesting, I wouldn't think managed vs unmanaged would affect throughput but your real world experience would indicate otherwise.
 
I only have 1 device (SageTV) that needs the BluRay streaming, the others are a Samsung BluRay player (streams NF/Hulu/Amazon), receiver, GC100, none of which need high bandwidth. I could have SageTV go direct, use a switch with the other current one, and re-use the 2 newly freed up runs for the serial devices.

 

[xlurkr]

1 bidirectional analog audio over cat5e from local receiver to WHA

 
If this uses baluns, I hope you don't plan to run it through the switch.
 
-Tom

 

[lonebrave]

A local switch will only help with Ethernet devices, not anything that is using baluns, as xlurkr pointed out. The other key factor will be the total throughput needed by all devices on the switch...if the aggregate needs more than the single uplink can provide, you'll be imposing bandwidth issues. My guess is that the unmanaged vs managed performance largely has to do with the internal bandwith of the switch backplane and processors.

 

[IVB]

Yes baluns, no not putting that through. I can put 1 media device (Samsung BR), 1 IP controlled Marantz receiver, 1 GC 100 through the switch with no issues as the latter two are trivial traffic. I could then do:
 
1 run for the switch (which connects the samsung, marantz, global cache
1 run for SageTV HD200
1 run for WHA
2 runs for serial devices
----
5 runs

 

[pete_c]

When I redid the family room I also redid the electric and LV wiring.  I used an in wall LV box and multiple keystone jacks.  Its a bit tight but have run catXX, RG6 (thin), speaker so forth and so on.  I like the multiple keystone jack wall plates.  Works well with RG6 and HDMI ports.  For the RG-6 cables now convert them all to thin RG-6 which works better for m.  The catXX connections are keystone jack to patch panel such that they could be utilized for other stuff.  The box to patch panel run is short from the main floor to the basement.  I utilize separate 22/4 wires for the panel stuff and the wires are in different chases.
 
I am have recently updated from unmanaged 24 port Gb switches to managed 24 port Gb switches (TP-Link).
 
Here I have been streaming live TV / recorded 1080 on the main MM LCD via Gb and XBMC.  That said I have tested streaming 1080 live and recorded media on a small Atom 1.2Ghz PC with a Broadcom Crystal HD card and it works well using Gb.  Its been a couple of years now but orginally did have a small switch behind the MM center.
 

More cat5e runs, or a switch?

 
I would suggest more cat5e runs (that is what I would do).

 

[Neurorad]

Some Global Cache devices now, I've read, do serial over IP.  Might be fun to play with.

 

[sic0048]

Id' say go with whatever is on hand and easier.  If you have a switch you can use (like an old router with the router functionality and wireless AP turned off), then go with that because it is quick and easy.  But if you are going to have to buy something and already have the wire on hand, I bet you can run the two wires quicker than it would take you to go to the store and pick something out.

 

[wuench]

Interesting, I wouldn't think managed vs unmanaged would affect throughput but your real world experience would indicate otherwise.
 
I only have 1 device (SageTV) that needs the BluRay streaming, the others are a Samsung BluRay player (streams NF/Hulu/Amazon), receiver, GC100, none of which need high bandwidth. I could have SageTV go direct, use a switch with the other current one, and re-use the 2 newly freed up runs for the serial devices.

It wasn't related to being managed.  I was just pointing out it is a managed switch, which means more expensive, so maybe a bit much based on your requirements.  What you are doing with Sage is actually what I did.  I had 2 cat5 at that location, so I piped one into the SG300 and the other goes to a old dumb 100Mbps linksys for my Denon Amp, GC100 etc, for CQC control.  

 

[IVB]

Some Global Cache devices now, I've read, do serial over IP.  Might be fun to play with.

 
yeah sorry, my GC-100 is a Global Cache which I use to do serial over IP. But it was $100 on eBay, and the "biggest" unit does 2 serial. Paying $50/device just to control serial over IP is a bit steep. At the time I thought I'd only ever have 2 devices (TV, receiver), but then the PJ & screen showed up.
 

But if you are going to have to buy something and already have the wire on hand, I bet you can run the two wires quicker than it would take you to go to the store and pick something out.

 
And that is the issue. In this particular location, I can run & terminate a new wire on both ends in less than 30 minutes. If I'm adequately motivated and don't screw things up, I can do it in 10 minutes.  The reason for my post was that i'm already at 5 runs to the media center, do I really go to 7 runs in one location?  That just seems HUGE.

 

[Del91574]

Run the copper and spend on easier infrastructure elsewhere. The more network hardware, the more choke points and more items to go wrong. Copper is cheap.

 

[rsw686]

I would pull the additional cables as well. Instead of purchasing a bunch of switches with no management you can place a higher end switch and have better visibility and control over your network for around the same cost. Additionally all switches can be placed on a central UPS.
 
Check out the Global Cache iTach series. Their new IR and serial devices are able to be powered by PoE. I haven't tried them yet, but this would remove some of the cable clutter.

 

[tmbrown97]

One thing that can be kinda handy in a house where you end up with some cascaded switches - you can put a POE switch in the main closet, then use something like the Netgear GS108T downstream which is actually powered by the POE switch upstream - so no separate power supply; then you can still have the whole thing on a single UPS.  It pairs well with a GS110TP or larger in the main closet - and that can power IP phones, cameras, access points, and your downstream switches - and it's still fanless and silent.
 
Unfortunately in my house I have to cascade switches, and I run some VLAN's for a hardware work VPN so I have to use switches that are VLAN capable so I can split out the different networks as needed.  These products work great for what I'm doing.

 

[fcwilt]

I install one run to a local switch for low bandwidth stuff (like the GC-100) and other runs as needed for high bandwidth stuff (like media players).
 
To date four runs has been the max.
 
There are IP to serial boxes that provide 4, 8 or 16 ports from Moxa.
 
http://www.moxa.com/product/Serial_Device_Servers.htm