back to article Ethernet standards group leaves its name in the dust as it details new 800Gbps spec

The 25 Gigabit Ethernet Consortium has decided to ditch its name as it heads off in search of serious speed. The Consortium on Monday announced the change and explained that it was founded to develop 25, 50 and 100Gbps Ethernet, but as it has knocked those off and now has an 800Gpbs spec to share the name doesn’t fit well any …

  1. redpawn

    Can't wait

    My full colour holographic 1:1 Earth emulator needs this to avoid pixellation.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: to avoid pixellation.

      Oh, I don't know. I find that having visible pixies adds a certain retro charm to an emulation (or even to a world).

  2. A Non e-mouse Silver badge


    So 800Gb ethernet is going to be made up of 8x100Gb ethernet bonded together. And 100Gb ethernet is made of slower speeds bonded together (e.g. 4 x 25Gb/s). So 800Gb could be made up of 32 x 25Gb/s lanes.

    1. Bronek Kozicki

      Re: Multiplexing?

      The wording seems to indicate that it would be 2x400G, so I'm thinking link aggregation of two ports on this switch and appropriate number of QSFP-DD modules like this

    2. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      Re: Multiplexing?

      While I agree that telcos use multiplexing, I disagree with the simple application of that solution to improve throughput.

      When the GB standard reached my motherboard NIC, I didn't need to change my Ethernet cable. The same wires work on 100Mbps just as well as on 1Gbps networks.

      Fiber optics can have a signal multiplexed to multiply the bandwidth available, but it's still happening in the same glass tube.

      So I think that the consortium is working on specs for signals that will allow for 800Gbps in the same wire (probably fiber). Those wires will then be multiplexed to provide for Tbps-capable boxes where you plug in 16 wires or something and boom, you have the enough bandwidth to stream all of the porn at the same time.

      Because that's the endgame, right ? Right, I've got my coat.

      1. Bronek Kozicki
        Paris Hilton

        Re: Multiplexing?

        > Right, I've got my coat.

        Please do, it was dirty anyway.

  3. ColonelDare

    Hang on a minute...

    That's the complete works of Shakespeare in 8 microseconds. Eh?

    ..... and I used to think 1200 bps off my cassette recorder was clever!

    1. Mage Silver badge

      Re: Hang on a minute...

      Ha, the ZX Spectrum did 1500 bps!

      I remember 4 Mbps token ring and 10 Mbits "cheapernet".

      The coax based 10 Mbps could easily drop to 500 kbps. I demonstrated this to a customer and he upgraded to Cat5. Though a lot of the PCs were still 10 Mbps, it used a switch, not a hub. The 10 Mbps Cat5 with a hub was just as slow as coax, but you didn't have to check the back of every PC to see where the BNC cable had come off the T-piece. We did add plastic T-shells to some offices too mean to upgrade to Cat5. Twenty five years later I'm still using some of the scrapped 50 Ohm cable to make patch cables occasionally for radio gear.

      I dumped the last box of swapped out Token Ring ISA cards at the recycling centre only a couple of years ago, with a couple of token ring "hubs" and the giant hermaphroditic auto closing plug//socket patch cables.

      1. druck Silver badge

        Re: Hang on a minute...

        Isn't all the radio stuff 75 Ohm though?

        1. Mage Silver badge

          Re: isn't all the radio stuff 75 Ohm

          Only TV, FM/DAB and Satellite. TV and Sat LNB 75 Ohm cable wants to be rather better stuff than the 75 Ohm equivalent to "cheapernet" which is 50 Ohm like RG58. The 75 Ohm equivalent is RG59, only used for FM radio/DAB now. RG6 / PF100 etc is the usual 75 ohm cable now.

          BNC is usually 50 Ohms, though 75 Ohm exist. PL259 is 50 Ohms (CB, Marine radio, Ham Radio). N-type is usually 50 Ohms, but a 75 Ohm version for cable similar size to RG213 does exist.

          Almost all other radio applications use 50 Ohms. Though I'd only use RG58 for patch cords or a shortwave receive only cable. The RG213 (much fatter than RG6) 50 Ohm is better for VHF/UHF receivers or transmitters.


          Coax ethernet (Vampire Tapped and certainly Cheaper net) was probably pre-existing RF cable?

          I've some 92 Ohm cable that was used for some sort of terminal.

    2. zuckzuckgo

      Re: Hang on a minute...

      Shakespeare? I want to know how long it takes to send all 5 seasons of Breaking Bad.

      62 episodes ~ 840 Gbits ~ 1 second.

  4. joeW

    "having 25G in the name was too constraining for the scope of the consortium"

    "...And also we don't want to get petrol-bombed by loonies"

    1. Korev Silver badge

      Re: "having 25G in the name was too constraining for the scope of the consortium"

      5G causes COVID-19 and the fewer viruses there are the better for IT security

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. STGlove

        Re: "having 25G in the name was too constraining for the scope of the consortium"

        You have to asked one of these 5G nutters that if 5G spreads the Corona Virus then why has Japan got the Virus? They don't have 5G

    2. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      Re: "having 25G in the name was too constraining for the scope of the consortium"

      On which subject ... was anyone else surprised to learn that David Icke was still a thing?

  5. AlgernonFlowers4

    Insane Speed

    Oh goody, soon a lie will be able go round the world several times while truth is pulling its boots on.

    1. Down not across

      Re: Insane Speed

      That's not fast enough. Need Ludicrous Speed.

      1. zuckzuckgo

        Re: Insane Speed

        > That's not fast enough. Need Ludicrous Speed.

        The "Ludicrous Ethernet Consortium" has a nice ring to it.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Insane Speed

      I know it was a joke and all, but I have to be pedantic here, sorry.

      The time it takes for a lie to go around the world doesn't really involve bandwidth, unless it's a big lie. What you're more concerned about is latency!

      Sadly, you can't change the laws of physics...

      1. ColonelDare

        Re: Insane Speed

        But you need to allow for exponential growth with R>1 ....

  6. Mike 137 Silver badge

    Actual performance?

    It would be most interesting to have estimates of actual performance for real world data transfers. That's frequently quite a bit less than notional line speed. It would also be interesting to told the proposed application. Even if a NIC can keep up, the computer (and application) behind it would have to be very fast indeed.

    1. Dvon of Edzore

      Re: Actual performance?

      I doubt the group expects even next-gen bleeding-edge processors to suck on a full pipe. This seems more like a way to get data from a particle physics experiment through a forest of successive aggregating routers to the humongous array of godawful expensive storage located a "safe" distance away. Those gigabytes per nanosecond can add up, ya know.

      Hmmm... How much impact on climate change will this link have when it gets applied to transcontinental ocean cables?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Actual performance?

      Even the fastest network optimised CPUs struggle to move 100Gbps.

      This is about uplink aggregation either via network equipment or within blade server (or similar) chassis.

      There are big savings for large telcos/cloud providers in being able to uplink a rack via 4x redundant uplinks versus 2-4x as many cables and corresponding switch ports.

  7. IJD

    These 800G links aren't intended for PC to PC or even LAN links, they're intended for use within and between switches in data centres and in the Internet backbone where huge numbers of lower-speed Ethernet channels (400G, 200G, 100G, 50G, 25G, 10G...) are muxed together. In the longer-haul links (100s, 1000s or 10000s of km) many of these channels are multiplexed together on one optical fiber using different laser frequencies -- just like radio channels, except one channel is typically 50GHz wide (or more), the total "radio bandwidth" is about 5THz centred on 190THz, one fiber can carry getting on for 25Tb/s, and one cable (for example under the Atlantic) might have 8 fibers and be able to carry 200Tb/s.

    Before anyone says "this is all pie in the sky, why would anyone want this?" these transceivers are aimed at hitting the market in 2022 when the next generation of switch chips (25.6Tbps in one chip) hit the market, all driven by the apparently unstoppable demand for more bandwidth at lower cost, which in turn is largely down to video streaming -- which is now mainly mainstream film and TV, not porn for once. How do I know all this? Because I've been working on 800G transceiver designs since last year...

    1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

      That's shocking. Just shocking.

      What is the porn industry going to about this abusive and flagrant, blatant even, stealing of bandwidth by the likes of netflix, amazon and so on? Do they have the financual reserves to be able to lobby (bribe) enough politicians?


    2. donk1


      But....desktops have gone from 10Mb to 100Mb to 1GB...and stopped.

      When are desktops getting 10GB?

      1GB/s ~= 100Mb/s, my NVMe SSD is supposed to be faster than that.

      If I want to backup my stuff software/pics (currently 570GB) to another desktop it still takes hours!

      My NUC has Thunderbolt 3

      I tried Thunderbolt 3 (specific card for my motherboard and revision) with a £50 cable (!) and

      never got it to work.

      Waiting for 10GB to the desktop!

      1. batfink

        Re: But...

        Save some angst and money and just let it run overnight...

      2. Robert Sneddon

        Re: But...

        Higher-end workstation-class desktops have 10Gb fitted as standard -- the new Apple Mac Pro desktop, for example has two 10Gb ports and can take 40Gb PCI-E cards. Dell and HP workstations all offer 10Gb networking options as well, all they cost is money.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: But...

        1Gbps is close to what you will get off spinning rust on a desktop.

        10Gbps will likely be constrained by your CPU on sun 6-core CPUs and 2.5Gbps/5Gbps "multigig" Ethernet are more likely to match your sustained system throughput unless you use a high-spec desktop fro. The last 2-3 years. Multigig also has the advantage of working with lower spec cables and at much lower power. They just need the switches and NICs to come down in price.

  8. Stuart Halliday

    So, a new connector will be required?

    1. Bitsminer Silver badge


  9. CR

    I suggest to bring Pornhub also in this Consortium - being sooo directly interested...

  10. BlackBerry ForEver

    Can it beam the block of cheese in my fridge to my desk or will it be sliced when it arrives?

    Wow! That's bigger than the spread of Covid-19! ..or at least what the poli-charts say.

  11. Jamie Jones Silver badge

    The title is too long.

    "“Ethernet is evolving very quickly and as a group, we felt that having 25G in the name was too constraining for the scope of the consortium,”

    They didn't forsee that?

  12. ICL1900-G3


    When I worked in airline res, we were thrilled when we upgraded from 1200 baud to 2400.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon