Suggestion: Difference Between CAT Cables

[tylerhyperHD]

Hey everyone,

This seems like a good TechQuickie to do:

What is the difference between CAT 5, CAT 5e, CAT 6, and CAT 7 cables? How do you know which cable your router can use? What is the difference in speeds? How much should I spend on such cables?

 

What do you guys think? Any other questions about CAT cables?

[Tabs]

1 minute ago, tylerhyperHD said:

Hey everyone,

This seems like a good TechQuickie to do:

What is the difference between CAT 5, CAT 5e, CAT 6, and CAT 7 cables? How do you know which cable your router can use? What is the difference in speeds? How much should I spend on such cables?

 

What do you guys think? Any other questions about CAT cables?

 

Unless you think this needs an update, it's still pretty accurate. Ethernet tech hasn't changed much in 5 years; cat 5e is still the recommended minimum for gigabit in short runs, and cat 6+ is needed for 2.5g+.

Edited May 25, 2018 by Tabs

[Lurick]

The difference is the supported speeds. Cat5 - 100Mbps, Cat5e - 1.0Gbps, Cat6 and 6a - 10.0 Gbps up to a certain distance. Cat 7 isn't really an official standard.

You shouldn't buy CCA cables but beyond that, it depends on the length of the cables.

[tylerhyperHD]

Just now, Tabs said:

 

There is a new CAT 7 standard and this video is outdated...

[Lurick]

1 minute ago, tylerhyperHD said:

There is a new CAT 7 standard and this video is outdated...

Cat 7 is not an official standard. Cat 8 is the next official standard.

[Tabs]

2 minutes ago, tylerhyperHD said:

There is a new CAT 7 standard and this video is outdated...

As @Lurick said, Cat 7 isn't an official standard. If a cable is legitimately Cat 6 or 6a then it's capable of any kind of speed any current ethernet hardware can utilise. 

[tylerhyperHD]

The reason I think it should be revisited is because people could think the number 7 is the best cable that is out there and spend hundreds of dollars on cables.

 

Also their router could not be compatible with the cable on some scenarios.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

1 minute ago, tylerhyperHD said:

The reason I think it should be revisited is because people could think the number 7 is the best cable and that is out there and spend hundreds of dollars on cables.

Which Cat7 cables are you looking at that cost hundreds of dollars?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B013PUMQYY/ref=s9_acsd_top_hd_bw_bAqaqOZ_c_x_w?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-3&pf_rd_r=CYYGR0SJ7RW237FE2MEA&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=cda5afa6-ee64-5002-b282-ddfc6faf6a03&pf_rd_i=9938479011

[Lurick]

2 minutes ago, tylerhyperHD said:

The reason I think it should be revisited is because people could think the number 7 is the best cable and that is out there and spend hundreds of dollars on cables.

99% of people just want something that is cheap and will work and the cheaper the better. Anything beyond that and they probably will do a bit of research before hand and realize what's best for them.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

1 minute ago, Lurick said:

99% of people just want something that is cheap and will work and the cheaper the better. Anything beyond that and they probably will do a bit of research before hand and realize what's best for them.

Yep. Ever wondered why routers like these don't fly off the shelves? 

[tylerhyperHD]

Just now, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

Yep. Ever wondered why routers like these don't fly off the shelves? 

Think of it like a Macbook Pro, if I spend more I get more - I kinda make this the same analogy on ethernet.

[Lurick]

5 minutes ago, tylerhyperHD said:

Also their router could not be compatible with the cable on some scenarios.

There are almost no scenarios where this will impact consumers. Unless you have a 10Gbit capable switch or router that can't do below 1Gbit and plug up a Cat3 cable, you're not going to have issues.

[tylerhyperHD]

Just now, Lurick said:

There are almost no scenarios where this will impact consumers. Unless you have a 10Gbit capable switch or router that can't do below 1Gbit and plug up a Cat3 cable, you're not going to have issues.

If I had a newspaper cone on my head, I would buy CAT 6 or 7 on something that doesn't go above a gig per second. The problem is I could be getting a cable that is great, yet not unlocking what it has to offer.

[Lurick]

6 minutes ago, tylerhyperHD said:

Think of it like a Macbook Pro, if I spend more I get more - I kinda make this the same analogy on ethernet.

Spending more does not mean you get more. If you can't take advantage of the features, having them sit idle and do nothing is just wasting money. Looking into the future to what will benefit you soon is one thing but hoping it will reach 5 years out and spending above and beyond is pointless.

 

 

3 minutes ago, tylerhyperHD said:

If I had a newspaper cone on my head, I would buy CAT 6 or 7 on something that doesn't go above a gig per second. The problem is I could be getting a cable that is great, yet not unlocking what it has to offer.

It doesn't work like that. If the devices on both ends cannot take advantage of the cable then it's pointless to spend more and you don't get extra speed by doing so.

[tylerhyperHD]

4 minutes ago, Lurick said:

Spending more does not mean you get more. If you can't take advantage of the features, having them sit idle and do nothing is just wasting money. Looking into the future to what will benefit you soon is one thing but hoping it will reach 5 years out and spending above and beyond is pointless.

 

 

It doesn't work like that. If the devices on both ends cannot take advantage of the cable then it's pointless to spend more and you don't get extra speed by doing so.

This is actually my point - people with newspaper cones on their heads won't know that they are spending too much on a cable.

[iRileyx]

If you wanna suggest they revisit this (but i don't really see a need, not until cat8 comes out anyway and even then it could just be a "follow up" style video) then atleast post it in the right place.

 

 

 

[tylerhyperHD]

Just now, RKRiley said:

If you wanna suggest they revisit this (but i don't really see a need, not until cat8 comes out anyway and even then it could just be a "follow up" style video) then atleast post it in the right place.

 

 

 

Sorry didn't know where to post 

[WereCatf]

Cat5e is plenty, still, for a good while and once the consumer-oriented IEEE 802.3bz-gear starts to show up in stores, you'll get a nice speed-bump from 1Gpbs to 2.5Gbps even with Cat5e.

[Glenwing]

Well, in line with this, the fact that most Cat 6+ cables are fake probably is worth its own video too, since apparently not even people here are aware of it

 

https://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/is-your-cat6-a-dog.htm

 

Quote

So, the difference between Cat 5e, Cat 6, and Cat 6a cable is not so much in the basic design as it is in the tolerances. As the bitrate, and correspondingly the frequency, of the signal increases, smaller and smaller discontinuities and inconsistencies in the cable become relevant. Cat 5e is required to meet certain specs for signals up to 100 MHz (one "Hertz" is one complete wave, e.g., a sine wave, per second, and a "Megahertz" is one million of those per second). Cat 6 is required to meet tighter specifications, and to meet those specs to 250 MHz. Cat 6a must meet the same specifications as Cat 6, but must also meet similar specification limits all the way out to 500 MHz. So, while the basic cable architecture doesn't change between Categories, the demand for consistency and quality in manufacturing does.
 

The fact that it's hard to tell the difference between Cat 5e, Cat 6 and Cat 6a by looking at them opens the door, unfortunately, to some deceptive practices in the industry. The door is further opened by the fact that, unlike some specifications which have a licensing agency and an enforcement squad (e.g., HDMI Licensing, which licenses the use of the HDMI trademarks and enforces the specification), these Ethernet specs are operated purely on the honor system. If a manufacturer wants to sell "Cat 6" cable, all he has to do is change the jacket lettering on his Cat 5e cable to read "Cat 6." Beyond that, it's pure caveat emptor -- it's the buyer's job to figure out whether he's being scammed.

The idea that somebody would just change the jacket lettering on his Cat 5e cable and call it "Cat 6" might seem just a bit too brazen, even for a sharp operator. If you have just a bit of faith in humanity, you'd think that nobody would label a cable "Category 6" on the jacket and sell it in a major national store chain without ascertaining that the cable actually met Category 6 specifications--but if you thought that, you'd be wrong. A few years ago, Fluke corporation, who make various Ethernet test devices, announced that in its survey of the market approximately 80% of the patch cords sold as "Cat 6" did not meet the specification (see Fluke article).

Fluke's claim that 80% of so-called Cat 6 patch cords were noncompliant seemed surprising, and we wondered whether things had gotten any better -- surely they had? -- since then. With the DTX on the desktop, this became a fairly easy question to answer, and we decided to go shopping.

[...]
 

To start with, of course, the near-unanimity of the results is pretty surprising. Out of twenty cables tested, four met spec, and of those, two did it by a hair. This 80% failure rate is, as it happens, exactly what Fluke reported a few years back, and our sample certainly shows no improvement over that time. Plainly enough, most of these cables aren't designed to meet Cat 6 or 6a specifications, and they're certainly not tested for compliance before leaving the plant.
 

Perhaps the most surprising aspect of the results is that, out of the sixteen cables which failed their stated spec, all but five also failed Cat 5e testing. Cat 5e is not a difficult standard to pass; using conventional, non-bonded, twisted-pair Cat 5e of good quality (e.g., Belden 1583A) and ordinary RJ-45 connectors, not only is it easy to build compliant Cat 5e assemblies, but it's common to see them pass the specification by several dB both on NEXT and RL. Contrast that with some of the shockingly bad test results--e.g., the 50-foot major-brand cable from the hardware store, which failed the 5e spec's return loss requirements by a whopping 8 dB.