Jump to content


Photo

Killer 2100 Gaming Network Card from Bigfoot Examined


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Nemo

Nemo

    Will Fold 4 Food

  • Honorary Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7228 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Franklin, TN

Posted 23 March 2011 - 02:17 AM

If you ever wondered if these types of network cards really worked as claimed, now is your chance to find out as OCC reviews the Bigfoot Killer 2100 Gaming Network Card - http://www.overclock...ot_killer_2100/

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.83GHz / ASUS P5Q Deluxe / Patriot Extreme Performance 2GB PC2-9600 DDR2-1200MHz / 2x Seagate ST3160827AS 160GB RAID 1 / Seagate ST31000340AS 1TB
Corsair TX750W / Sapphire HD 5870 1GB GDDR5 / SilverStone TJ05 / Scythe Zipang 140mm CPU Cooler / ASUS VH202T-P 20" widescreen monitor (x2) / XP Pro SP 3
"however, i cannot claim to be such a fish as i am not a fish at all..." - hardnrg,Jul 4 2005, 02:49 PM
 

Posted Image

Posted Image

Follow OCC on Posted Image
Subscribe to the OCC Newsletter

Lucky Mudder Race 2013


#2 xPETEZx

xPETEZx

    .:!!MEAT!!:.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2084 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West London, UK

Posted 23 March 2011 - 09:36 AM

The review seems very positive of this card, even listing it as having "No cons", which I find very very hard to swallow given that the thing costs $70. At the very very least the con should be the cost.

I cant believe for even 2 seconds that that same $70 would not be better spent going towards another component.

Further, was the method of testing the card in file transfer not flawed? Surely the card can only perform as well as the other end will allow? If the other machine only has an On-board card, its never going to do anything great.

Big hype is made of the point that the Killer was 20MB/s faster in UDP, but almost no mention was made that is was slower by 30 MB/s in TCP...

Main: | Win 7 Pro x64 | C2Q Q9550 @ 3.4 | 8GB OCZ Reaper | 2x Sapphire HD5850 1GB in CFX | ASUS P5Q-E | Creative X-Fi | OCZ Vertex 3 240GB | Corsair HX750W | Logitech G15 + G5 + Z5500 | 2x Dell 2007FP |

Media: | Win 8.1 Pro x64 | C2Q Q6600 | 4GB Corsair Dominator | Gainward GTS250 512MB | Intel DP35DP | Samsung SSD 256GB | ASUS Xonar D2 | PC Power & Cooling 610W | Antec Veris | Onyko TX-NR515 + Tanoy SFX5.1 | Sharp LC32U700e |

Server: | Win 8.1 Pro x64 | i5 - 4430 | 16GB Corsair XMS3 | Gigabyte Z87-HD3 | Corsair RM550 | Kingston 128GB | Corsair Neutron 256GB | 4x 1TB Samsung F3 (2x RAID1) | Samsung F4 2TB (Backups) |


#3 Fight Game

Fight Game

    Total Nerd

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2303 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 March 2011 - 12:24 PM

I've read another review of this lately, and they found it had a couple areas of concern. Forget where the review was, or the areas of concern, but atleast this bigfoot card is doing slightly better than the previous models. Still not worth the $77, and it would be a very rare chance where the microsecond advantage, would actually be an advantage. But people will buy it, so they make it.

Dell 24" UltraSharp 2408
Gigabyte EP45-UD3R
Intel e8400 @ 3.6ghz
Xigmatek s1283 cooler
GSkill 4gb 1066 ram
AMD Gigabyte 7850 2gb
GSkill 64gb ssd's in raid0
Gigabyte GC-Ramdisk 4gb (page file, temporary)
OCZ 600w psu
Antec 900


#4 Black64

Black64

    Black It Out

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3348 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The internet

Posted 23 March 2011 - 02:33 PM

I wouldn't even pay $20 for this.

Current System

[CPU]Intel Xeon W3670 (i7-970) @3.20Ghz---[CPU Cooling]Thermalright Silver Arrow---[MOBO]ASUS Rampage Gene III---[RAM]G-Skill Rip Jaws (24GB)(6x4GB)---[GPU]ASUS GTX 780 OC---[PSU]KingWin Lazar LZ-1000---[CASE]Bitfenix Colossus Venom Edition---[HDDs]WD Dives(6.5TB total storage) and Samsung 250GB SSD(boot)---[Monitors] 3X NEC 24" LCD2490WUXi ISP Panels and 1X Seiki 39" 4K monitor

 

PC Audio System (Speakers) Triad InRoom Silver's --- (DAC) Schiit Modi --- (AMP) Emotiva MiniX-a-100 --- (Headphones) Sennheiser Momentums and Paradigm H15NC --- (Headphone AMP) --- Schitt Magni

 

 


#5 GabrielTessin

GabrielTessin

    Different

  • Folding Member
  • 1158 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Remer Minnesota

Posted 23 March 2011 - 03:27 PM

I wouldn't even pay $20 for this.

I would, I hate having a higher ping than someone else online.

I think I would be willing to pay $70 for it if I couldn't find a better use for the cash too. I like it.

I am the reason we can't have nice things. 


#6 aniyn

aniyn

    New Member

  • Members
  • 32 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 24 March 2011 - 03:06 AM

$77 for marginal increases? I'd like to see one of these measured against an Intel PCI Network Adapter Card, see how it compares then.
"Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is a massive online multiplayer game"?! Since when was BF an MMO?

#7 Fight Game

Fight Game

    Total Nerd

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2303 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 March 2011 - 06:49 AM

I would, I hate having a higher ping



I don't see how it can lower your ping. I see it claiming that it can, but again, I just don't see it.

Dell 24" UltraSharp 2408
Gigabyte EP45-UD3R
Intel e8400 @ 3.6ghz
Xigmatek s1283 cooler
GSkill 4gb 1066 ram
AMD Gigabyte 7850 2gb
GSkill 64gb ssd's in raid0
Gigabyte GC-Ramdisk 4gb (page file, temporary)
OCZ 600w psu
Antec 900


#8 IVIYTH0S

IVIYTH0S

    They call me... General Help.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20555 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsauken, NJ

Posted 24 March 2011 - 08:20 AM

I don't see how it can lower your ping. I see it claiming that it can, but again, I just don't see it.

:withstupid: :withstupid:
my gaming network came with my gaming motherboard :P

"GilliumX58" DESKTOP
Mobo: Asus P8Z68-V-PRO | Processor: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz | CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS9900MAXR | Videocard: MSI Twin Frozr HD7970
Memory: Patriot 8GB 1600mhz | OS SSD: SanDisk Extreme 240GB SATA | PSU: PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W
Monitor: Samsung 30" 305T | CD/DVD: Samsung SH-S223F | Keyboard: Razer Tarantula | Mouse: Razer Lachesis

OCC Cool Club Member

 
 

 

GPU Comparison tool on AnAndTech


#9 Fight Game

Fight Game

    Total Nerd

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2303 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 March 2011 - 08:39 AM

the ping is the time it takes to send and receive a packet, and there are just sooo many factors like the physical distance, quality and speed of the lines to and from there, etc. If network card A sends right now and bigfoot card sends now, they both start at 0 ms. Once they are sent, there is nothing the card can do about it, but wait for it to be received.
If we were using a really old, slow, single core cpu, very little other resources, and the pc some how actually lagged trying to do this, or during this micro transaction, I might understand since this card has dedicated resources. But with today's multicore and fast cpu's, I just don't see the need.

Edited by Fight Game, 24 March 2011 - 08:45 AM.

Dell 24" UltraSharp 2408
Gigabyte EP45-UD3R
Intel e8400 @ 3.6ghz
Xigmatek s1283 cooler
GSkill 4gb 1066 ram
AMD Gigabyte 7850 2gb
GSkill 64gb ssd's in raid0
Gigabyte GC-Ramdisk 4gb (page file, temporary)
OCZ 600w psu
Antec 900


#10 xPETEZx

xPETEZx

    .:!!MEAT!!:.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2084 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West London, UK

Posted 25 March 2011 - 01:33 AM

I could perhaps understand the use of this card, if all people concerned where playing on a LAN, and already had maxed out rigs.

But for online play, I just don't see it. Especially when your average joe will have some rubbish "free" router running some $9.99 per month package. THAT is going to be the biggest source of high pings. Not your network card.
I have to be honest, no matter how cheap this card was, I could never see myself buying it. Hell even if it was given to me free, Im not sure id waste a good PCIe port on it.
It makes no difference. So why put it in?

Main: | Win 7 Pro x64 | C2Q Q9550 @ 3.4 | 8GB OCZ Reaper | 2x Sapphire HD5850 1GB in CFX | ASUS P5Q-E | Creative X-Fi | OCZ Vertex 3 240GB | Corsair HX750W | Logitech G15 + G5 + Z5500 | 2x Dell 2007FP |

Media: | Win 8.1 Pro x64 | C2Q Q6600 | 4GB Corsair Dominator | Gainward GTS250 512MB | Intel DP35DP | Samsung SSD 256GB | ASUS Xonar D2 | PC Power & Cooling 610W | Antec Veris | Onyko TX-NR515 + Tanoy SFX5.1 | Sharp LC32U700e |

Server: | Win 8.1 Pro x64 | i5 - 4430 | 16GB Corsair XMS3 | Gigabyte Z87-HD3 | Corsair RM550 | Kingston 128GB | Corsair Neutron 256GB | 4x 1TB Samsung F3 (2x RAID1) | Samsung F4 2TB (Backups) |


#11 Black64

Black64

    Black It Out

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3348 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The internet

Posted 25 March 2011 - 08:09 AM

I would, I hate having a higher ping than someone else online.

I think I would be willing to pay $70 for it if I couldn't find a better use for the cash too. I like it.



It you counted the time that it saved you it would pay for itself in like a million or so years. A millisecond here and nanosecond there...... :popcorn:

Current System

[CPU]Intel Xeon W3670 (i7-970) @3.20Ghz---[CPU Cooling]Thermalright Silver Arrow---[MOBO]ASUS Rampage Gene III---[RAM]G-Skill Rip Jaws (24GB)(6x4GB)---[GPU]ASUS GTX 780 OC---[PSU]KingWin Lazar LZ-1000---[CASE]Bitfenix Colossus Venom Edition---[HDDs]WD Dives(6.5TB total storage) and Samsung 250GB SSD(boot)---[Monitors] 3X NEC 24" LCD2490WUXi ISP Panels and 1X Seiki 39" 4K monitor

 

PC Audio System (Speakers) Triad InRoom Silver's --- (DAC) Schiit Modi --- (AMP) Emotiva MiniX-a-100 --- (Headphones) Sennheiser Momentums and Paradigm H15NC --- (Headphone AMP) --- Schitt Magni

 

 


#12 Hoopa

Hoopa

    New Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Spokane, WA

Posted 26 March 2011 - 03:40 AM

One slide to represent latency, made of data gathered over 5 minute intervals? I would have liked to have seen more about this specifically.

Edit: Well also there is a slide to represent the speed test ping. The BC2 ping results are much more varied than those of the speed test, perhaps misleadingly so.

Edited by Hoopa, 26 March 2011 - 03:57 AM.