1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel NIC (Network interface controller) vs Killer E2200

Discussion in 'Networking & Security' started by MartinNixon0422, May 8, 2014.

  1. MartinNixon0422

    MartinNixon0422

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    52 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    Well, first of all, I m a gamer!!!
    just wondering the different between Intel Ethernet vs killer Ethernet
    MSI and Giga says Killer is better for gaming, and live stream, and they did show the pic of it
    (well, I remember I saw it somewherer....but cant find the pic...)

    anyway, what's you guys think??
    :peace:
     
  2. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,254 (10.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,495
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    killer NIC's usually dont do shit. they're no better than any other, they were just bundled with QoS software that could solve internet lag problems if the cause was something like torrents on your PC by sending the game packets first.
     
    ISI300, THE_EGG and remixedcat say thanks.
    10 Year Member at TPU
  3. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta
    And what then makes Intel better?

    I mean, I agree, it's just the bundled software. And the KillerNic stuff seems a bit better than CFOS depending on your use and how you set it up. Because technically ,that's what we'd really be comparing...CFOS vs KillerNic software. Proprietary vs 3rd party.
     
    HD64G says thanks.
    10 Year Member at TPU
  4. WalterHughes1986

    WalterHughes1986 New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    12 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
  5. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    45,254 (10.34/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12,495
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    what makes the intel better? leaner, more stable drivers and a few decades more experience making network cards ;)


    and because its software, its useless if the cause of lag is outside your PC. like another PC torrenting, or lag from your ISP or another player.
     
    THE_EGG, puma99dk|, remixedcat and 2 others say thanks.
    10 Year Member at TPU
  6. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    19,305 (7.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,761
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    I did a test with a standard intel gigabit nic card and a Killer nic. After countless ping tests, gaming sessions, and lan speed tests our results showed they do not offer anything more than a cool name. Tested off a 500MB Symmetrical connection.
     
    cadaveca says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  7. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta
    It's less CPU utilization that gives Intel the edge, really. That was why KillerNics came on separate cards...as did older Intel ones... However, not all Intel controllers are good...just nearly every single one. :p

    But many systems don't have a shortage of CPU power, so this is less and less important today.

    Anyway, fundamentally speaking, the KillerNic controllers, as hinted above, are Qualcomm designs which are optimized for GAMING, while the Intel controllers are simply great controllers.

    The KillerNic E2205 is pretty much comparable to Intel controllers now, and software does allow KillerNic E2205 to be better at times, but I still feel that the Intel controllers have a better physical design.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  8. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    14,257 (3.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,119
    The general consensus is that it is not worth the money.
     
  9. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta
    Sure, but that general consensus is based upon older controllers, on add-in cards, not the current E2205 that is built into GAMING motherboards from nearly every brand. And nearly every brand will have results showing that for GAMING, KillerNic is better. I'm not saying that is my own opinion... it just is what it is.

    Saying KIllerNic sucks, because of an older controller... and not the E2205 that is commonly used today... well... You can do that, sure. :p
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  10. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    6,877 (2.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,847
    A while ago, they did tests. The Intel NIC came out on top. But not by much at all. Have they updated those tests to show the Killer NIC now comes out better? It was not in the past.

    About the only thing the Killer NIC offers over the Intel NIC is software control to prioritize traffic. If the Intel NIC has that now, its a toss up. Unless you are a 'pro gamer' one wouldn't notice a difference anyway. ;)
     
  11. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta
    There are some poopy Intel controllers.

    Anyway, a result from another site(not my results):

    [​IMG]


    You have to list specific controller models rather than state general performance metrics with just a brand name, IMHO, so take this result with a grain of salt. You could also say that this might be highly workload dependent. At the same time, if you are someone that STREAMS their gameplay, the kIllerNic software will do you a favor, for sure. At the same time, boards with Intel NICs that have the CFOS software can do the same...but you need to know how to tune the software, FIRST.
     
    HD64G and vega22 say thanks.
    10 Year Member at TPU
  12. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    19,305 (7.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,761
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    What a lot of people do not realize is that it takes data going from point A to point B and you can have all the best equipment in the world at point A but have weak point along the path to point B and it still ends in the same result.

    If I wanted something to prioritize my traffic I would just buy a nice firewall/router or service switch.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  13. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta

    I agree, and this should be a "given fact", but whatevs. I'm just relaying the info that disagrees with your opinion about KillerNic in general that has some companies saying otherwise, not my own opinion.

    Personally, I feel the KillerNIC software is killer as a gamer who streams content live while playing. :p I'm also typing this now from a 4W Bay-Trail Celeron CPU, in a system that uses 25W at max. Dedicated hardware for nearly everything is very much old-school tech.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  14. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    19,305 (7.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,761
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    I wouldn't discrediting the people that did the testing you posted, I am just merely mentioning our testing here at work. We did not test it with realtek nics only intel gigx.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  15. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta
    Heh, I think you're taking this a bit too seriously.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  16. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    19,305 (7.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,761
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    how?
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  17. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta

    I love you. Oh hey, I finally am using that 250 CFM fan. That thing is just stupid. :roll:


    Anyway, as you said, for most instances, the bottlenecks are really out there in the net, not in your system. The actual differences for most users between Intel i217V and KillerNIC E2205 is in single-digit percentiles in my testing, and both trade blows on workloads.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  18. brandonwh64

    brandonwh64 Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    19,305 (7.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,761
    Location:
    Chatsworth, GA
    That fan was my hero. I have two more but I think they are 92MM and they will surely chop your finger off if you aint careful. LOLOLOLOL
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  19. Hilux SSRG

    Hilux SSRG

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Messages:
    1,024 (0.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    170
    Location:
    New Jersey, USA

    The Intel one is more dependable and consistent with testing over the years.

    Recently the Killer "bigfoot" series gave me trouble on the x79 platform. Glad the mobo manufacturer offered both Intel and Killer LAN options.



    Cadeveca, a slide from MSI's marketing is not really unbiased testing.

     
  20. Easy Rhino

    Easy Rhino Linux Advocate

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    14,257 (3.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,119
    KillerNIC may be better when built into the motherboard but the general consensus is still that it is not worth the money.
     
  21. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta
    They don't make add-in KIllerNICs any more... except one that is supposed to be WiFi/Wired, but I haven't seen that out in the wild as of yet.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  22. 95Viper

    95Viper

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,494 (1.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,512
    Location:
    στο άλφα έως ωμέγα
    Here is a test from a well known company that refutes the others and is recent ( 11 Apr, 2014 ) : Tried And Tested: Why Intel Ethernet Is Still Better For Gaming.

    And, here is one quote from the review:
    So, it all depends on either, who you believe or your own testing.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2014
  23. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    15,580 (4.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,320
    Location:
    Beaumont, Alberta

    I know, but they are quoting another site. And just so we are clear, I'm not taking any sides here as to who is better... I think each has it's own pros and cons. I like the Killer software, though, no problems saying it's better...because Intel doesn't offer QoS software directly.
     
    10 Year Member at TPU
  24. remixedcat

    remixedcat

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Messages:
    4,067 (1.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,283
    Intel is often preffered for servers because they are more compatible with hypervizors like VMware and hyper-v.

    Also generally more stable drivers.

    Oh and its always best to just use your router's QoS.
     
  25. Fourstaff

    Fourstaff Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,333 (3.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,075
    Location:
    Home
    Suppose I am playing an online game while torrenting in the background. Will KillerNIC perform better than the competition in such scenario? I have not seen anyone testing under such scenario, perhaps I have not read all reviews.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)