Thinking about getting the Bigfoot Killer 2100 gaming network card? read here first.

Phoenix

Phoenix

Prolific Poster
Before you think about ordering your system with this network card take a look at these charts which show no real gain from using the card:

File Transfer Performance
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2010/09/02/killer-2100-gaming-network-card/2

Gaming Performance - Team Fortress 2 and Call of Duty 4
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2010/09/02/killer-2100-gaming-network-card/3

Gaming Performance - Counter Strike: Source and Race Driver: GRID
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2010/09/02/killer-2100-gaming-network-card/4

In terms of transferring large files there is a slight (0.3MB/sec) increase in speed however when transferring smaller files the card is significantly slower. The games tested with the device were: Team Fortress 2, Call of Duty 4, Counter Strike Source and Race Driver: GRID. The average framerate and average ping were compared in the review and show that there is no reason to spend the money on this. In terms of gaming you would gain more from a better mouse, keyboard or even a larger monitor.
 
PCS

PCS

Administrator
Staff member
That's great feedback Pheonix, and we have discussed this further here: http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/forum...it-LAN-Cards-Now-Available!&highlight=bigfoot

We posted a link to a review here: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc...rs/bigfoot-networks-killer-2100-701117/review

In protest Bigfoot said:

We appreciate your desire to review the new Killer 2100 card, but we wish you had taken a more rigorous approach to testing. For a technical publication that prides itself on providing thorough and careful reviews, this was anything but. Your testing approach was weak and your conclusions were unsubstantiated. We know your readers expect more. If you wish to properly test a networking product, you should include a few technical tests. Looking at real world cases like WoW and Lead and Gold can be helpful, but reported in-game numbers can vary widely due to variables that have nothing to do with the networking interface. We recommend that more systematic networking tests for latency and throughput be used alongside real world tests. In our lab tests, Killer 2100 consistently performs up to 10 times faster than standard networking interfaces while gaming. It also exhibits dramatically less jitter which is critical to eliminating lag spikes related to improper handling of time sensitive network traffic inside the PC. This has been demonstrated on both mid tier gaming systems as well as enthusiast class PCs. These results have been validated by 3rd parties in comprehensive product reviews (see our website for references) and the performance benefits are readily apparent to both pro gamers and mainstream gamers alike. We invite you to take a closer look at the Killer 2100 and we look forward to supporting your efforts to test future products.
John Drewry, VP Marketing
Bigfoot Networks

Do you research and choose for yourself. Personally, my opinion is also that the performance gain is minimal and not worth the expense, but some some people even the slightest gain is worth it.
 
Phoenix

Phoenix

Prolific Poster
Yeah I've seen the other thread but I just thought I'd post one here to help newer members who may not see the other one.
 
Last edited:
Sleinous

Sleinous

Author Level
Personally, I can't see how there could EVER be a gain in performance from this, as even a 54mbps card should be AMPLE for 50mbps Virgin fibreoptic. I think its all a big marketing ploy to grab a bit more of our money. My PC has a 108mbps card in it, however, my BT telephone lines date back from WWII and (with an iPlate filter added) I get a max of 4mbps on a good day. Although when I first installed it, I got 5.5mbps, but BT throttled me back, despite my continuos phoning lol.

The point is, when will we EVER need 108mbps, there are maybe just a few places that even top 50mbps. I really dont see how this card could do anything at all to improve speed as it's nearly solely dependant on your outside connection xD

Also i'd have to agree with that review regards the CPU, I mean, it may benefit an Intel Atom, but its not gonna affect a Core 2 Duo Quad, i3 and so on...or the AMD equivalent for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Sleinous

Sleinous

Author Level
Haha yeah, and 1GB speeds, what is the point in that xD part of the fun of downloading is waiting :p imagine downloading a 700MB file in less than a second, pointless! Doesnt give you enough time to think :p
 
J

James

Active member
It's odd I live on the outside of a small town and barely get a 1MB/s connection.
Other testers in town have show an average of 5MB/s, sounds decentish.

Went in the Local Library the other day and though why not see how fast it is, ended up at 60MB/s :?

Now I'm currently looking at Flats and houses as near there as possible :D
 
Gorman

Gorman

Author Level
James said:
It's odd I live on the outside of a small town and barely get a 1MB/s connection.
Other testers in town have show an average of 5MB/s, sounds decentish.

Went in the Local Library the other day and though why not see how fast it is, ended up at 60MB/s :?

Now I'm currently looking at Flats and houses as near there as possible :D
Click to expand...

The library will be on the local council network which will be mostly fibre throught your area. They pay a lot of money for those links which also serve schools etc. Being near the library wouldnt mean any better speeds than average.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top