10GBASE-T - Too much speed for home use?

[tkamiya]

I've done this with two low end servers with 10GB SFP+ on both ends.  OS was Ubuntu Linux.
 Connection was with optical fiber.  Created RAM disk on both sides and measured the transfer speed.  The best I've seen was 3GB and only briefly.  Average was about 2GB. 

Whether if jumping onto 10GB or not depends on rest of the network.  If you are using good servers, perhaps.  But in my case, it wasn't worth it. 

[vad]

I've recently rebuilt my homelab. It is now a Proxmox cluster with Ceph distributed storage, all running on 3 Intel NUCs. I wish NUCs had SFP+ because the Ceph cluster network would definitely benefit from 10 Gbps. Instead, each NUC has three inexpensive USB3 2.5GbE adapters that work fine.

OP, try to avoid 10GBASE-T if possible. SFP+ might be more cost-effective on the used market, and it's also more energy-efficient.

[Veteran68]

At home I run 10GBASE-T between my main desktop, main rackmount server which (among other things) is my home media server, and my QNAP NAS appliance (~58TB storage). So no, definitely not "too much" speed for home use. Is there even such a thing?

I've done this with two low end servers with 10GB SFP+ on both ends.  OS was Ubuntu Linux.
 Connection was with optical fiber.  Created RAM disk on both sides and measured the transfer speed.  The best I've seen was 3GB and only briefly.  Average was about 2GB. 

Whether if jumping onto 10GB or not depends on rest of the network.  If you are using good servers, perhaps.  But in my case, it wasn't worth it. 

Then there's definitely something wrong with your setup. I've measured transfer between my desktop and NAS at ~9Gbps raw throughput, and that's strictly over twisted pair CAT6A. No fiber involved. Now not every application can max that bandwidth so YMMV, but for raw data transfer there should be no reason why you can't do much better than 3Gbps unless there's some crappy cable over extremely long and noisy distances.