255 of 266 people found the following review helpful
on August 28, 2009
Recently we have installed network storage devices, and started to run backups and multi-media services on our home LAN (local area network). As a result the load on our network increased substantially. We decided to upgrade from fast ethernet to gigabit. Due to the arrangement of devices, we have several 8 port switches connected to a larger 24 bit switch which I guess is the backbone of our LAN.
When shopping for gigabit switches, the Trendnet 8 port gigabit greennet switch came up as not only a low cost, but also a low power switch. We purchased several and have been using them for almost half a year.
These switches are silent (there is no fan), and very low power (on my Killowatt meter they always show 0 watts), and very fast. They have limited support for jumbo packets (I forget the exact number, but its around a jumbo packet size of 7-9K).
This is a good solution as a low power, silent, gigabit switch that runs cool and is low cost. The switch is unmanaged, but does have status indicator lights. You will see if you are getting fast ethernet or gigabit speeds on each port. We have had no trouble with these switches.
176 of 185 people found the following review helpful
on July 17, 2010
This switch is solid. In 3 months, I've had no problems with this Trendnet switch.
Compare to my netgear crashes, gets into reboot loops, etc even after power brick and switch replacement.
The Trendnet switch runs cooler than the netgear counterpart.
The Trendnet, like the NetGear, has a metal case for better EMI control. The netgear case is just slightly thicker, which should provide better in-case ventilation.
The Trendnet switch has ports/power on the back, and activity/connection LEDs on the front. Because of this, it makes for a much more tidy desk, and easier to see link lights.
We'll see how this is doing when it's a year, or 18 months old, but so far, it's power-on durability exceeds the competition.
NOTE: This is an unmanaged switch. 10/100/1000 line speed, auto-crossover. There is no monitoring port, no web management, no SNMP, no IP sharing, and no routing.
This is a low cost, and well designed device. I highly recommend it.
176 of 187 people found the following review helpful
This switch is well built with a metal case, performs well, and is economical. I did lots of benchmarks and found that I got maximum speeds while doing multiple concurrent large inter-computer file transfers. I repeated some of the tests while bypassing the switch to see if there was a change in speed and there was none, so this switch kept up with whatever I could throw at it. If you want more speed, chances are you will gain more with better cables/plugs/jacks/etc. rather than looking for a faster switch.
I also used a Kill-A-Watt meter to see how much energy this uses. The amount was so low that it took days to get meaningful readings, and this will cost pennies a year and electricity is not cheap where I live. Also, the switch is economically priced. This switch caused my network diagnostic to misreport cable quality as poor, but although some utilities might give you false readings, your connection will not suffer.
I read elsewhere that this switch is not compatible with WOL (wake on LAN/magic packet) and the person who posted that got the information from Trendnet support. It turns out that this works PERFECTLY with WOL as long as your computer's port is set to auto negotiation. In other words, if there's any limitation, it's with the quality of tech support, not with this switch.
The only minor negatives are that the printing next to the LEDs is not on both sides, so it will appear upside-down if this is wall mounted, making it awkward to keep track of port numbers. Also, the slots for wall mounting could have been bigger to accommodate larger screws. The documentation is minimal, but this is pretty much plug and play.
UPDATE Jan 2011. I have read comments from customers who have had problems using multiple switches of this model on the same network. I have three of them. One is connected with approximately 25 meters of Cat-5e cable to another on a different floor in my home. The cable run is UTP, about half vertical, and half horizontal though an attic with no shielding (except distance) from other cables such as power cables. A third switch is connected with approximately 8 inches of the same type cable, allowing me to have more ports in that location. Benchmarks of file transfers will not give a true picture, since the weakest link (hard drive speed, overhead from data encapsulation, switches, network cards, wall jacks, drivers, cable, etc.) will be the limiting factor. All other parts of the chain will perform at least as well as the benchmark suggests.
I tried copying about 450 GB of relatively large and barely compressible data coming from images of blu-ray and DVD sources. Transferring through all three switches, full length of the cable, etc. gave me transfer speeds of about 96MB/sec. Presumably, the hard disk arrays are the limiting factors in my system, but the switches clearly had no trouble with those sustained speeds. I used Windows 7 drag and drop over a network, which is not among the most efficient methods. A series of smaller files such as JPEGs gave me "speeds" closer to 15MB/sec, which really means that the speed over the wire was probably about the same, but a large amount of the data was overhead encapsulation.
Although it's likely that the switch was not the limiting factor, it's clear that users who are getting poorer performance have other factors that limit performance, making it impossible to say that the switches are the cause of their performance issues. A direct run of cable from one of the computers to the other, bypassing all three switches, would show if there were any increase in performance, thus showing if the switches themselves (or something related to plugs, cables, or jacks) caused the problems. But the speeds I got from several such tests were consistent, and higher than what I would have expected given that I used Windows drag and drop over a network.
79 of 82 people found the following review helpful
I bought two of these TRENDnet switches (a 5 port and an 8 port) when I upgraded our home network from 100 Mbps to 1 Gbps speed. I'm very happy with their performance and stability. I haven't had to think of them once since connecting them to the network. Both switches are connected to a D-Link DIR-655 Router: one with 100 feet of CAT-6 cable and the other with 25 feet.
This switch isn't very large - about the size of a paperback book. I've uploaded a picture to the product page to give you an idea of its relative size. The measurement from our Kill A Watt meter agrees with what others have already noted; this switch uses very little power. The lights on the front are helpful: green indicates a 1 Gbps connection while amber means a 100 Mbps connection.
To get a measure of speed through the switch I copied a 26 GB file between two computers connected to the same switch using drag and drop in Windows Explorer. Average speed for the transfer was 102 MB/sec. That was before enabling jumbo frames on the source and target computers.
This router supports jumbo frames up to 9216 bytes. In real world performance I achieved best performance with the computers configured for 4k frames. Between two Windows 7 64-bit computers I averaged 114 MB/sec tranferring the 26 GB file. Between a Windows 7 computer and a Windows Home Server (version 1) I averaged 109 MB/sec.
To enable jumbo frame support in Windows, right-click on Computer and select Manage. Click on Device Manager, open Network Adapters, right-click on your adapter and select Properties. Under the Advanced tab select Jumbo Frame and choose an appropriate value. Note this only applies to wired adapters; wireless connections don't support jumbo frames.
I've got absolutely no complaints about this switch. It's a great value and perfect for our home network.
30 of 32 people found the following review helpful
on October 30, 2012
I've been looking for a quality 8-port Unmanaged Gigabit switch for a while now. I was debating between this one (TRENDnet TEG-S80G), the D-Link DGS-1008G, the NETGEAR GS108NA, and the Linksys SE2008. I needed something reliable, had the features I wanted, and was fast. This TRENDnet satisfied all my criteria and for a cheap ~$25 bucks, I was willing to give it a shot.
1. Look & Feel - The first thing you'll notice when you pick up this switch is how solid the construction feels. This isn't some cheap plastic, I am not sure if it is aluminum, but its not a cheap metal either. It feels similar to the NETGEAR GS108NA. Solid body, hard metal construction. Vents on the side of the unit help keep this switch cool, though it really doesn't need it. But unlike NETGEAR switches, the Ethernet Port plugs are on the backside along with the unit's power plug, this is a major plus. One thing I hated about NETGEAR switches was how their plugs were on the front, but the power plug was on the back.
The link lights of the switch are fairly non-intrusive. They aren't super blinding bright, but they are clearly visible. If you plan on putting this switch in a place where you might sleep, don't worry, this little switch won't be keeping you up all night. Link lights are accurate as well. Top row of lights mean there is an active link, the bottom row is the speed at which the port is connected. Orange for 10/100Mbit and Green for 1000Mbit/1Gigabit.
I wasn't a fan of the green design that came with the unit, but it's starting to grow on me. ;)
2. Heat & Power Consumption - I really hate how some routers and switches get hot. This unit is cool to the touch and has been on for days now. If you look through the vent holes you can clearly see that they've mounted a heat-sink on the PCB. The power adapter is ALSO cool to the touch. Even if I tax the switch and start transferring gigabytes of data over the network this thing never heats up to hot or even moderate warm. At worst, it is below luke-warm.
3. Features - This was by far the most important thing to me. I have a quirky set-up in my home where I have 3-4 computers, media PCs and a NAS set up around the house. Every single one of them is setup for Wake on Lan (WOL). I was reading around the internet and I heard reports that all these newer switches that touted GREEN power did NOT work with Wake on LAN. I will confirm right now that THIS TRENDnet TEG-S80G 8-Port Unmanaged Gigabit Switch WORKS PERFECTLY WITH WAKE ON LAN. If you buy this switch specifically and it doesn't work for Wake on LAN, you are doing something wrong. It is not the fault of the switch. Computers that are completely shut off, still maintain an active link light with the switch. Yes, this switch still has GREEN power features, so that is a major plus as well.
4. Speed - I personally have not noticed any speed differences between this and my D-LINK DIR-655 router acting as a switch (DHCP off). I ran some speed tests over the switch with 'LAN Speed Test (Lite)' and these are my results.
ASUS RT-N56U (w/ custom firmware)
CAT 5e Cable - Total Length about 25 meters between computers.
* Note: I don't have jumbo frames or anything like that set up. I just plug and go. I am writing to/reading from a 7200rpm/SATAII drive.
Packet Length: 500MB
Time to Complete: 5.074s
Packet Length: 1000MB
Time to Complete: 10.326s
Packet Length: 3000MB
Time to Complete: 46.219s
Packet Length: 500MB
Time to Complete: 9.716s
Packet Length: 1000MB
Time to Complete: 18.439s
Packet Length: 3000MB
Time to Complete: 58.451
When using TeraCopy, files transfer at a steady 85-95MB/s. When I use Windows Copy, speeds start out peak at ~190MB/s but quickly dip down to 90-110MB/s.
I use this switch to stream 1080p movies from the NAS and there have never been any issues with stuttering or lag.
Overall, this is a fantastic switch. I've only owned it for about a week, so only time will tell how reliable it is. If something happens to it or it breaks down, I'll be coming back here to edit my review, but if you don't hear from me, it means this thing is still working like a champ.
20 of 20 people found the following review helpful
on July 19, 2012
Although the switch performs admirably and the metal case has a high-quality feel, I was a bit disappointed about two things: 1) The 5 ports on back are all plastic unlike the 8-port version where they are metal. 2) The speed indicator shows green for 1000 and nothing if the connection is 100 or 10. The 8-port version shows green for 1000, amber for 100, and off for 10, so you can tell whether you have a 100 or 10 connection. At least currently, the pictures show a plastic model which is incorrect - this unit has a metal case. Had I realized this unit couldn't differentiate between a 100 and 10 connection and has plastic ports instead of metal, I would have spent a few more dollars and got the 8-port version, even though I wouldn't use all the ports. I bought both the 8 and 5 port models and installed the 8 port first. I spent a good bit of time trying to figure out why my Apple TV was only connecting at 10 on the 5 port and 100 on the 8 port until I read the instructions and realized the status lights are different. So, there's more difference between the 5 and the 8 besides the number of ports.
18 of 18 people found the following review helpful
on July 6, 2011
This router solved a digital interference problem that occurred when I plugged network AV devices into the network port of my uVerse set-top box.
I had been using a powerline network adapter to connect internet to my network enabled DVD player, TV and home theater PC (HTPC). For video, powerline networking is a slow connection, even though this powerline adapter was advertised as good for video. However, I frequently saw that my streaming Netflix was dropping back to a low bandwidth connection because the powerline network adapter couldn't provide the bandwidth required to stream HD from Netflix.
Recently I subscribed to AT&T uVerse, and I discovered that the uVerse set-top box had a network output port. So I plugged the HTPC into that, did some DSL speed tests and discovered that the uVerse network connection was a lot faster than the powerline adapter. Apparently the uVerse box gets it's internet connection via the video coax cable.
So I ordered the TrendNet router just to split the internet signal from the uVerse box to all three audio/video devices. A gigabit switch is overkill for that purpose, but the price was right, and it's nice to have technical headroom as well as some future-proofing.
While waiting for the router to arrive, I left my HTPC connected directly to the network port on the uVerse box. Soon I was disappointed to find that as long as the computer was connected to that uVerse port, I would often get digital interference (giant pixelation) on the TV shows I was watching or recording in the uVerse set top box. "Uh-oh," I thought, "This probably means the TrendNet router is going to create the same kind of digital interference. The uVerse documentation doesn't mention using the network port as a local internet connection, so maybe it's not really meant to be used that way." I ended up disconnecting all devices from the uVerse network port, because every device did cause interference in the uVerse signal. (It's possible there was something defective in the uVerse box, of course. I didn't pursue that with AT&T, probably should have.)
Well, I received the TrendNet router. I wasn't going to return it because I knew I could use it elsewhere in the house. However, I decided on a whim to try it as a router on the back of that uVerse box. It worked! I was able to hook up all three devices to the network with the TrendNet as the "buffer" router between the uVerse box and the AV devices. I've never seen the digital interference again, and my streaming Netflix movies always connect at the highest HD bandwidth.
So, I don't know what magic is inside this TrendNet router that solves the digital interference problem, but I'm happy that it did. I've been using it for 2 months now with no problem.
Installation required no drivers - I just plugged in everything and it worked perfectly. The sturdy metal enclosure is good because the router tends to get shoved into the back of the cabinet and gets things piled on top of it, so it is handling a lot of physical abuse.
Update October 2012: Has now worked flawlessly for 15 months.
34 of 38 people found the following review helpful
on June 5, 2010
I'm in shock with how flawlessly and easily this device works.
I already have a mildly complicated network set up, with cable internet going to a wireless 802.11n-only router which also has four ports connecting to rooms throughout the house; another router is dedicated to broadcasting in 802.11b/g and offering AirTunes functionality (it receives music broadcast over the network). I purchased this device to allow two computers in one room to connect to the network & Internet via ethernet.
Little did I realize how simple it would be.
All I had to do was connect (any!) port on this TrendNet switch to the wall Ethernet connector and (any!) other ports on the device to the two computers in the room. Both computers immediately joined the network and had Internet connectivity. As expected, the device indicated the two local computers had gigabit connectivity, but only 100MBps connectivity to the main router (the in-wall wiring is not Gigabit-capable).
Besides its zero-config juju, I also really like the little rubber feet on the device; its solid-feeling metal build; its very informative LEDs; and its blazing speed.
12 of 12 people found the following review helpful
[update 1-15-2011] we are upgrading our backbone to managed switches - the latest batch of trendnet TEG160WS units didn't have a fan inside -- infact to make sure I put a wattmeter on it and they only draw 11watts with 8/16 ports in use at 1gbps. My assumtion is they redesigned the product to be more green since it runs 24/7 and were able to yank the noisy fan. You can still replace the fans on the older units with 40mm fans with ball bearings)
[end of update]
With gigabit ethernet sometimes insufficient to link backbones a common technique has emerged to aggregate to channels to get a 2Gbps link instead. My NAS Raid5 synology array Synology DiskStation 5-Bay (Diskless) Scalable Network Attached Storage DS1010+ (Black) supports this with 2 gig-e jacks on the back, as do several lan cards on servers these days.
The advantage is you can build a backbone between switches that has 2gbps capacity and connect to your server or NAS box with this aggregated 2x speed link, then plug in multiple 1x gig-e devices to the switches along the way. This makes for efficient low cost backbone design and serves the need using off the shelf parts and smart switches like this.
The trendnet switch is also a value compared to the cisco 8 port which runs about $100 - 2 of those would cost more than this and you would use 4 ports just linking the two switches together if you use an aggregate backbone design.
As for the fan noise - it can be quieted down - the fans that come from the factory are cheap 1u size fans, but computer stores for home pc builders sell high quality ball bearing fans that are the same size but do not make the buzz of the trendnet fans. They have the same hole pattern, voltage, and plug so swapout is easy and quiets down your box without sacrificing airflow. I'll post links when I can find some for sale on amazon so other users can kill off the acoustic noise.
one last note - the amazon dimentions are wrong - this is a standard rackmount product measuring 440 x 210 x 44mm (17.3 x 8.3 x 1.73in.)
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful
on April 17, 2015
Loved the first one, so I bought a second one. Now, I have both the v3 hardware and the v2.x hardware. The dimensions of the v3 (4"x6") are smaller than the v2 (4" x 6.75"). Also, the version 3 hardware no longer has the 'keyhole slot' so it cannot be hung on a wall. This was a problem for me because I want to mount the v3 on the wall behind a bookshelf. Also, v3 does not have the second row of orange LEDs to indicate 100Mb connection speed, but it does still have a single row of green LEDs to indicate 1Gb link speed.