10GBASE-R using 64b/66b encoding scheme (3% overhead) 10GBASE-X using 8b/10b encoding scheme (20% overhead)

10GBASE-R is achieved with single xcvr lane 10GBASE-X is achieved with 4 XAUI xcvr lanes & 2 RXAUI lanes.

Looking at the advantages 10GBASE-R having today, is 10GBASE-X is still being used in today Ethernet world? Or it is just a legacy protocol?

| improve this question | | | | |
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Just from the encoding schemes, I would assume that 10GBASE-R is less fault-tolerant than 10GBASE-X, since the more bits you have in your line code the more error detection and error correction you can do. But I don't have much background in these things, so I could be wrong. \$\endgroup\$ – Hearth Oct 15 '19 at 13:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ Is it still being used today? Not a valid EE question. \$\endgroup\$ – Andy aka Oct 15 '19 at 13:20
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ This type of encoding is not FEC, it does not correct bit errors. \$\endgroup\$ – alex.forencich Oct 15 '19 at 20:25

10GBASE-X is essentially obsolete. Four times the pins, four times the fibers or wavelengths, four times the traces, larger transceivers, etc. vs. 10GBASE-R. And no advantage besides lower per-lane bandwidth.

Now, there will be legacy hardware running this protocol, but only because nobody has bothered to replace it with something more modern.

| improve this answer | | | | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.