Network Cable Shootout - Belden, Commscope, Hikvision, Honeywell, NavePoint CCA, Windy City Wire

By IPVM Team, Published Dec 17, 2018, 09:51am EST

Every IP camera install needs UTP cabling. But how much of a difference is there between dirt cheap generic cables found online and the bigger, better-known brands claiming increased performance and/or labor savings?

network cable shootout

To find out, we bought 12 boxes of Cat 5e and 6 cabling from six manufacturers, pulling multiple runs with each and testing them to standards with Fluke's DSX-5000 cable certifier. Included in this test:

Belden Cat 5e / Cat 6
Commscope Cat 5e / Cat 6
Hikvision DS-1LN5EU Cat 5e / DS-1LN6U Cat 6
Honeywell 5078 Cat 5e / 6360 Cat 6
Navepoint Copper Clad Aluminum Cat 5e / Cat 6
Windy City Wire 8665619 Cat 5e / 775609 Cat 6

[Note: The new December report adds Commscope, who was not included in the original November report.]

Inside, we answer these questions:

Who ranked best, average, and worst?
Did the cables pass certification tests?
Where did they fail, if at all?
Which offered the greatest headroom over minimum compliance?
How does solid copper compare to copper clad aluminum?
How easy was the cable to pull from the box?
How flexible was the jacket?
How easy to strip was the jacket?
Did twisting/bending deform the cable?
How did cable box features and usability vary?
Are all of the cables UL/ETL or other test lab listed?
Where is each cable made? (China vs Mexico vs USA)
How does pricing compare?

Network ***** ********

***** ** *** *****, Windy **** ****'* ***** and * ****** ******** the **** ******* *****, while *********'* *** **** copper **** ******** ***** failed ************* ** *** distances ******, **** ******** usability ******.

****: ***** ** ****** feedback ********* *** ** and *** * ***** were *********, ******, *** the ******* **** **** added ** *** ******** report. ********* ********* ** the *** **** ** the ****** ******, ************* Hikvision, *********, *** ******* CCA ******* ** ****** below ***** **** **** and ******. *** ******** made ***** ****** ************* with ****** ********, ******* the *** ****** ******** and ***** ** * premium *****.

network cable rankings

** ****** *** *********** differences ******* **** *** worst ** **** *****:

Ranking *******

***** **** **** ******* offered *** **** ***-****** combination ** ************* **** performance, **** *******, *********, and ***********, ** **** as *****-*** ******** *** found ** ******, ***** priced ** *** ***-*****, comparable ** ***** ********** options.

****** ***** ***** ** performance, ******/********* ************, *** ease ** *******, *** does *** ******* *** the ******* ********* **** Windy **** (******** ***** labels, ****** ********, ***.) Close ****** ****** *** Commscope **** ***** ************* results *** ******* **** other ********.

** *** ****** ** the ********, ******* ****** clad ******** ****** ***** sold ** ***-**** ****** retailers ********* ***** ** nearly ***** ****, **** importantly ******* ** **** Cat ** *** * certification ***** ** *** distances *** *********** *****, with ***** *** ************, hard ** ***** *******, and ***** ********* *** seen ** ***** ****** tested.

***** *** *** ******* for *** *** * cable ******:

cat 6

***** *** *** ******* for *** *** ** cable ******:

cat 5e

Cat **/* ************* *****

** ****** *** ****** using ******** ********** *** at ******** ********* ** order ** ******* ******** various **** ***** ********. We ****** ***** *********:

**', ******* ** ******** such ** ***** ****** or *********** ******
***', ***** ** ***"*******" ****** ** **** cable ****
***', *** ******** ******** UTP ***** *** ** run ***** ***** ******* certification ********* ** *********

************, ** ****** ***** multiple *********** *******:

****/****
****/***** *****
******* ****/***** *****

***** *** ****** ** 300' ** ****** ******** the ***** *******, *******, and ***** ********* ** real ***** *****, **** tested ****** ******* **** to ***' *** ******* 50' ******* *** *********.

Copper **** ******** ***** *** *****

*** ****** **** ******** cable *** *** **** any *** ** ** 6 ************* ***** ** any ***** ***** *** combination ** ************ (***** panel, ****, ******* ****). Efforts **** **** ** reterminate *** ****** ** correct ***** ******, *** the ****** ****** *** not ****.

*** ***** ****** ****** certification ******* *****. *******, there *** ******* *********** in *********** ******/********, ********* below.

Headroom **********

***** *** **** ***** manufacturers ****** **/* ************* the ****** ******** ****** results ** ********.

*** *******, ******* ** headroom ** ******** * cables, ********* *** ********* performed ********* ** *** Belden *** ***** **** ~150' *** ~***' *******. Honeywell ****** ************* **** several ** ********, ****** notably ***** **** ******.

** ********, *** ****** clad ******** ***** ***** testing ** * *********** margin, *********** ** ******** headroom.

cat6 headroom comparison

***** **** ********* ********* well ** ** *****, as ****, ***** *** Belden *****'* ******** ********* somewhat. *******, *********'* ********* headroom ** ******* ******* than ** *** * testing, ***** ********* ********* significantly, ********** **** ********* to ******/***.

*****, *** ****** **** cables ****, **** **** due ** ********* ****/****** Loss ******, *** *********. Because ** ****, ***** headroom ******** ******* ****** than *********'* ** *****, which *** *** ****** from ***** **** ******.

cat5e headroom comparison

Download ***** **** *******

*** ***** **********, ** have ******** **** ** test ******* **** **** test, ********* ****** *.* ** .*** file. ***** ******* ******** detailed ******** ** *********, attenuation, ****** ****, *** more ********** ******** ** cable *****.

Cable ******* ***********

***** **** ********** *********** in *** **** ** difficult ****** **** ** pull, ******** ** ******* issues, **** ** *** flat ***** ****, ******* it ****** ** **** up, ****, ** *****, how **** ** *** marked, *** ******* ********.

Cable ***** **. ****** ****

***** *** ********, ***** were ********** *********** ** how **** ****** ****** to **** ** *** "bounce ****" ****** *** box **** ******. **** issue ********* *** ******* of ******* *** ***** which *** *** **** increase ******* **** *** damage *** ***** *** reduce ***********.

*** ********, ** *** video *****, *********'* ****** clad ******** ***** *** be **** ** **** back ** **** ****** from *** ***. ** contrast, ***** **** ****'* reel ** * *** cable ******* ****** ******* flat/straight ** *** *****.

**** ** ** **** greater ********** **** ******* multiple ****** ** * time, ** ******** ****** coiling *** **** ****** become *******. ************, *** flatter ****** ****, *** easier **** *** ** dress **** ***** *****, racks, *** ***** ******, reducing ******* ****.

Footage ********

*** ****** ****** **** marked **** ***** ********* in *** ***, ******** down **** ****', ***** below. *******, ***** **** wire ******** ** ********** marking ******* *** **** footage *** **** ****. This ** * ****** minor ********, *** ********** mental **** ***** **** be ********* ** ****** check *** **** * cable ** **** ********* two ********, ***** *** reduce ******** ** *** field.

Outside ******** ***********

** *** *******, ** saw ** *********** ******* cable ******** *** ***********, with ******* ****** ***** the **** ***** ********** as ******* (** *** Cat */** *** *** 5e). ** *** ***** count ************ **** ** many ** ****** *******, cable ******** ** *** likely ** ** * significant *****, ****** ****** density ******* ******* ******** where ******* ****** *** more ******* **** ****** and ***** *****.

** ** ****** *******, it *** ** **** difficult ** ***** ****** diameter ****** ******* ******* conduits ** **** ****** housings, *** ** *** testing ** *** ** issues ***** ****** *** cable ** **** *************, exceed **** ******, ** be ********* ******* ** normal ***.

Internal ********* ***********

******* ** ***** ********, some ****** **** **** separators ***** *** ******** to **** ******** ********** in *** ***** ******** spaced. ** ****** ******, Belden *** ***** **** both **** * ****** flat ********* ***** *** located ******* *** ******/***** pairs *** ****/*****. ********* and ********* **** ** X ****** ********* ***** kept *** **** ***** apart.

**** ***** ********, ** saw ** *********** ******* these ******** *** ***** performance ** *********. **** may ** ****** ******* off **** *********** *** do *** ****** ***** down.

Conductor ***** ****** ******* ** *** ******

** *** *****, *** cables' ******** ********* ****** were **** ** ********, even ** *** ********. Members **** ******* *** (and *** ********** ******) that **** ****** *** use **** ************ ****** with **** *** ***** or ****** *** ***** difficult ** *******, ** solid ******* ********** *****, making **** ********* ** distinguish **** *******.

*******, **** ** *** cables ** **** **** suffered **** **** *****, shown *****:

Jacket *******

* *****'* ****** *** huge ****** ** *** ease ** ************. ****** quality ****** ******, **** those ***** **** ****** strippable *** ******** **** as ******, ***** ****, and *********'* *** ** to *** *** **** CCA ***** ***** *** difficult ** ***** *** easily ********* ****** *****.

Jacket ********* ***********

*******, **** ********* *** cable *** ****** ******* instead ** ****** *******, making ** **** ********* to ******.

Box *******

*** ******* ** *** cable *** ** *** in ***** ************. **** box ****** *** ***** tangles *** *****, **** from *** ****** **** pulling, *** ********* ***** frustration. * **** ******** box ******* ** ***** paying *** ******** *** flat, *** *** ******* additional *******, **** ** pull ******* ****** (****** when ******* ******** ** into * *******/***** ****).

****, *** ****** ***** and * **** ********* boxes, **** *** * cable ***** * **** in ***, *** ** using * ******* ***-**** box. ***** **** **** offers **** ** ***.

** *** ***** *****, we ****** *** ******** which ************* *****:

Windy **** *****-*** ********

***** **** **** ******** several ******** *** ***** on ****, ** ***, competitors.

**** ******* ******:***** **** ***** ******* three ***** *******, **** top *** ****** ******* in ******** ** *** single ***** ****** ***** on **** *****. **** allows ***** ** ** stacked ** *** ** each ***** *** ****** through ********** ******** ** **** a *******.
******** ***** ******:***** **** ************ ****** ***** ******** ***** ***. ** default, ***** ****** *** blank *** ****** *********, but **** *** **** be ***-******* ** *** factory. **** ****** ***** to ****** *** *** tag * ***** ***** pulling ******* ** ******* on *** *****, ***** is ***** ******* ** difficult ** ****.
****** *******:**** *** ** ***** City **** *** ** custom ******* **** ********/********* information *** **** *****'* specific *******, ****** ** easy ** ******** ***** project, ********, *** *** specific ****** ** ** for. *** *******, ** green *** * ** used *** ** *******, instead ** *********** ******* to ******** **** ***** code, *** *** *** simply ** ******* "** Cameras" ** ****** *********.

** ****** ***** *** other ******** ** **** video:

** ******** ** ***** features, ***** **** ***** are ******** ***** ***** "RackStak" ******, ********* ******** carts ***** ***** ******** boxes ** ** ******* and *********** *** ****** pull *****, ******* ****** ******* ********** **** ** ********** installations, *** ******** ** WCW's *****. ******* ***** may ********* ** *********** via **** ***** ** cart, *** *** *** secured ** **** ***** and *** **** ** in *** ******** ******. Additionally, ******** *** ************ here, ***** **** **** includes *** ******* ** track ***** *** * unique ** **** ** each ***, ** **** as ****** ***** *** assembly *******, **** ** to **** ****** ** separate ****** ** *** box, ******* ** ***** are ****** ***** *********** cable *******.

Pricing **********

*** ******* ***** ** 1,000' ** *** ** CMR ***** *** **** under $***, **** *********, Honeywell, *** *** *** near **** *****. *******, Belden *** ************* **** expensive, **** $*** *** 1,000', ***** *** ****** clad ***** *** **** inexpensive, **** **** **** the ******* ***** ** others, **** ~$**.

*** ******* ***** ** Cat * *** ***** was ~$*** *** ******** feet. *****, ****** ****** drastically, **** ****** $*** for ****** ** **** $60 *** ******* *** cable.

Test *** *******

******, *********, *********, *** Windy **** **** ****** were *** ** ***/** ETL ******. *******, *** low-cost ****** **** ******** cable *** ** ******* from *** ******. **** may ******* ** **** bid **** **** ** from **** ********* *** users.

Country ** ******

*** * ********* **** split ****** * *********. The ******, ***** **** Wire, ** **** ** the ***, ** *** Commscope; *** ****** **, Belden, **** ** ******; Finally, ********* *** **** in ******* *** ********* and ********* *** *** made ** *****:

[****: *** *** ******** report **** *********, *** was *** ******** ** the ******** ******** ******.]

Comments (79)

John Honovich

IPVM | 11/05/18 02:14pm

John S, Ethan, Rob, great job on this!

A few things:

As we did the with the 25 camera model installability shootout, we continue to focus on doing bigger tests with more definitive results / rankings.
If your preferred cabling provider was not included, feel free to explain why you use them in the comments and what advantages they have. We are happy to include more in future versions. Please do not post one line complaints.
Remember, we are currently moving into a much larger facility so tests will be disrupted this month. This may be the only shootout this month with regular postings returning in December and accelerated testing in 2019.

Undisclosed #1

11/05/18 02:29pm

Odd that the longer cables showed MORE headroom than the shorter ones, I would have expected the opposite.

Ethan Ace

IPVM | In reply to Undisclosed #1 | 11/05/18 05:11pm

Thanks for pointing that out. We actually had two errors. First, the charts munged together link and channel testing, so results were not the same. Second, 150' and 300' were transposed when we were finalizing graphics.

I've updated the charts in the report with the accurate numbers. Competitively, things remain unchanged:

Belden and WCW are consistently high.
Hik Cat 6 does very well, but headroom is very low on Cat 5e (slightly worse than Navepoint, which straight up fails certification).
Honeywell 5e does very well, but Cat 6 is notably lower than others in the test.
Navepoint fails both Category tests.

Note that with these numbers, Belden's headroom still goes down on the shorter cable. It appears to be due to some more drastic spikes in NEXT than in the longer cable, which cut into the test margin, though it is still 4+ dB over minimal.

Ethan Ace

IPVM | In reply to Ethan Ace | 11/05/18 05:34pm

Some clarity for those unfamiliar with interpreting cable certification reports: A cable can have positive headroom but still fail a certification due to other factors. Headroom is a ratio of attenuation to crosstalk, presented in decibels, and does not take other test factors such as insertion loss or return loss into account.

The Navepoint CCA cables in this case failed due to high insertion loss and return loss, while crosstalk was within acceptable parameters. This is why the Hikvision Cat 5e cable may have less headroom than Navepoint, but still pass certification, because it did not suffer from these loss issues.

Jim Davis

In reply to Undisclosed #1 | 02/19/21 07:51pm

There are two values for headroom, NEXT and Return Loss. On the longer cables, NEXT from the far end will attenuate and be less significant than on shorter runs. A real challenge for connector hardware and cable is a test of a short run where the NEXT from the far end does not attenuate as much on the return trip.

Undisclosed Manufacturer #2

11/05/18 02:54pm

One feature of Belden that should be noted is the field team responsible for specifications written requiring Belden or Belden/Belden equivalent. There is a cost to that and a benefit to dealers.

Undisclosed Manufacturer #3

11/05/18 03:01pm

Why no comparison with specification cable like Belden, Hubble, Commscope etc?

Jon Dillabaugh

Pro Focus LLC
11/05/18 03:22pm

I prefer the old style WCW boxes. The new 1000’ put ups are the double wide boxes, which are considerably heavier and take up much more room in the truck. You can ask your rep to provide the smaller/original style box when you order.

Armando Perez

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Jon Dillabaugh | 11/05/18 04:30pm

We asked them to only ship the older thinner boxes and they have been doing it for us. You should ask for that. For me it was about how many reels I can fit on the shelf in our inventory room and in the truck shelf.

Kyle Folger

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Armando Perez | 11/07/18 11:21pm

Yes, I did the same and they have continued to send the thinner boxes. When I first started ordering from them years back, I complained because I wanted to see pricing per box with box/materials charge included in the price per box so it was easier to enter the price/ft when receiving the boxes without dividing the materials among the amount of total boxes. They have done that ever since.

I was rather cautious as I thought I was going to open the report to find the cable I've been using fell to the bottom of the list or something. Thankfully, that wasn't the case.

Fabian Muyawa

LONTECH SYSTEMS
IPVMU Certified | 11/05/18 03:32pm

A cable is a medium through which data is Transmitted and indeed a good quality cable is key. However, it might have not been given much attention by average installers and replacing poor quality cable with a good quality is quite painful, costly and time consuming.

This article is informative and a workup call for our industry.

Armando Perez

IPVMU Certified | 11/05/18 04:29pm

Not sure where youre getting that WCW Cat6 price from... (the top most summary image)

John Scanlan

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Armando Perez | 11/05/18 05:32pm

Thanks Armando - That was a miss by our graphics person. It is updated now, and the pricing shown is direct from Windy City Wire.

Clint Hays

Rasilient | 11/05/18 07:54pm

I've used Windy City for a while and I preferred their wire at a higher cost per box than some cheaper options we had available because my guys weren't fighting the boxes all day.

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | 11/06/18 04:15am

Can you please clarify this part? I didn't understand it but it sounds interesting:

Additionally, although not demonstrated here, Windy City Also includes the ability to track cable via a unique QR code on each box, as well as custom cable box assembly options, with up to four cables on separate spools in one box, neither of which are common among competitive cable options.

Brandon Coleman

In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/06/18 06:12pm

They have an app where if you're tracking inventory the warehouse manager and techs can scan boxes and enter lengths so that you always have an idea of what's on the shelf and on jobs/trucks.

Undisclosed Distributor #7

In reply to Brandon Coleman | 11/07/18 02:30pm

Yes, you can scan the p/n code but it doesn't tell you how much is left in the box. That is still a manual process of checking the markings on the cable.

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | 11/06/18 07:13am

Awesome report, especially with all the performance tests. Not everyone has test equipment so I wanted to add some tips and tricks for ensuring you're getting a good quality cable:

Profit margins for manufacturers on cables are thin. They live on volume. My estimate is that cable factories have an average profit margin of 5% per cable. So they do everything to cut costs including:
The number of twists per length is something they play around with sometimes. While the Cat 5/6 standards set out these rules, a lot of manufacturers will BEND (get it??) them a little allowing them to use less raw materials per box. You will notice the difference between these two cables that both claim to be Cat 6. A lot of the time though the difference is much more subtle than in this photo.

Similarly the standards set certain twists per length as a whole. So the separator itself will twist and all the pairs will twist along with it. This 'rate of twists' if you will, can be less than the standard allowing manufacturer to save on raw materials by a bit.
Copper composition - even within pure copper cables there are grades. When it comes to CCA there different copper percentage compositions. In general there are two main processes for combining copper with aluminium to produce CCA, one is a mechanical process and the other is a chemical electrolysis process. The former can give you higher copper compositions and the latter will give much lower. The mechanical process will give you higher conductivity obviously since there is more copper and will be more expensive. You can ask your vendor about the copper percentage composition in their CCA. Most sales people won't know but they may give you clues. Some CCA cables can even pass fluke tests. With that price level I suspect Hikvision and Honeywell are using a high copper composition CCA cable. From a physics point of view, most electrons travel on the surface of the cable. So it might be wasteful to use too much copper.
A reliable way to test for the combination of copper composition and gauge in one test is to do a basic resistivity test. Take a length of each wire separately and test its resistance with a good multi-meter. Resistivity is ohms/meter. If you have a vernier scale you can also normalize your results.
Another basic way is to burn the wire with a lighter. I think Brian smokes so you can borrow his lighter, strip 2 wires and light up the ends simultaneously. The one that begins to melt first probably has less copper and more aluminium.
Some manufacturers, and I have seen this with high end names too, will use less copper composition, less twists per length, and/or less gauge on only 2 pairs (typically blue and brown pairs for obvious reasons).
Rip cords - not particularly important for surveillance applications and don't affect pricing much. But I personally don't like manufacturers who go this far in cost cutting.
Making cables slightly shorter than 1000'. Of course not all will be exactly 1000', there is always a margin of error but generally a length decrease of even 1% will significantly increase their margins. Many times, the OEM you're buying from will be cheated themselves by the original manufacturer. While a 10' shorter cable may not affect you too much. But factories that do things like this are likely to also cheat you with other things like copper composition and other specs.
Similarly, you may see slightly lower thickness but AWG23 quoted in the datasheet. Use a vernier scale and check on your vendor from time to time.

For Cat 6 at least, Hikvision cable is actually CMX according the datasheet you linked, unless I've missed something. The Belden and Windy City are CMR.

Jon Dillabaugh

Pro Focus LLC
In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/06/18 12:49pm

Abaas,

I really love the fact that WCW omits the rip cord. I rarely have needed it. My stripper tool has never nicked a conductor jacket yet that I have found. It also makes a much cleaner jacket edge for inserting into an 8P8C/RJ45 connector.

About the CMX/CMR jackets, were you assuming it made any difference in performance, other than maybe the jacket removal subject? I would be curious if the jacket affected any measured testing.

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Jon Dillabaugh | 11/06/18 01:15pm

Good point on rip cord omission.

On CMX/CMR I was just pointing to the fact that Hikvision is inferior in terms of specs. CMX is cheaper to produce. It would make more sense to compare their CMR model.

CMR vs. non CMR cables that I've tested have a big difference in overall cable flexibility.

John Scanlan

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/06/18 07:14pm

Abaas - Thank you for the great comment and sorry for the confusion. It looks like the link is incorrect. We tested CMR cable. I just pulled the cable in font of the box label and snapped a picture of each to ensure that CMR was used, shown below:

I am unable to locate product pages on Hikvision's European nor American website, however they are both listed in the Fall / Winter 2018 product catalog on page 102.

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to John Scanlan | 11/07/18 06:17am

Proper Cat 6, proper AWG23, UL listed, CMR, 75 degree RoHS, pure copper for 130 USD is quite impressive.

Windy city's price is even more insanely low for those specs, made in USA, and that performance.

Kyle Folger

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/07/18 11:31pm

You do need to be careful sometimes with WCW though. To compete with lower cost cable they were offering siamese coax and I simply thought the lower price was because it was imported and not made in the USA. However, the lower cost was really due to the fact they were using CCA. I asked them why they would even offer it and only offer solid copper.

They do offer plain boxes without Made in the USA so you get the benefit of the WCW spool but with imported cable they offer that is solid copper.

We use Ubiquiti's TC-PRO TOUGHCable for outdoor connections, but that pull box absolutely sucks. For a small fee you can have the cable shipped from BH Photo to WCW and they will repackage the cable on their nicer cable system and send it to you.

They have been great to work with and keep offering products that aren't just bulk cable.

David McNeill

In reply to John Scanlan | 11/12/18 07:16pm

John can you expand the CMX/CMR/CM acronyms and their applicability.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/08/18 02:30am

A reliable way to test for the combination of copper composition and gauge in one test is to do a basic resistivity test. Take a length of each wire separately and test its resistance with a good multi-meter.

Abaas, have you actually used this technique yourself and found it reliable?

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/08/18 06:25am

The above 3 cable comparisons were from the same manufacturer claiming pure copper, 55% copper composition in one CCA cable and 8% in another CCA. When questioning further they claimed that it wasn't 55% copper but "55% conductivity" which obviously makes no sense because percentage is not a measure of conductivity. Same gauge on all wires.

We pulled 200m of each wire (measured after unwinding and stretching out) and measured resistance when they were connected in parallel (see rows 4, 7, 10, 13) just as a checksum. Then measured each wire individually (see rows 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15). We measured resistance for each stretch of wire using a Pro'skit general purpose multi-meter.

But, when comparing OFC pure copper vs other pure copper options, there was no noticeable difference (even when we tried 305m) probably because the difference in resistance was less than the multi-meter's own tolerance.

So when comparing different CU content percentages in CCA it's fairly accurate. But when comparing different grades of CU in pure CU cables, I suspect you'll need huge cable lengths and more accurate test equipment.

Side notes:

- We pulled 200m and counted # of twists then divided it by 20 to make comparison more readable. Also measured resistance for 200m and divided by 2.

- Gauge was the same across all

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/08/18 06:43am

We pulled 200m of each wire (measured after unwinding and stretching out)...

But nothing was untwisted, correct?

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/08/18 06:51am

It was 200m of untwisted and stretched out wire. We did not want twisting to skew our resistance readings as the twist rates were different.

The idea for resistivity testing on cables with same gauge is to estimate copper composition in the cable. So same absolute lengths were used.

We counted number of twists (rows 4, 7, 10, 13) initially before unwinding as a secondary test. You will notice that cables with low copper compositions also had less twist ratios in order to further reduce costs. The manufacturer's rationale is that low end customers will not mind cables with less twist ratios and less copper composition.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/08/18 07:14am

The manufacturer's rationale is that low end customers will not mind cables with less twist ratios...

Though too much twisting variance among pairs increases delay skew.

Good stumper question for the next person you meet that knows everything about cable:

Assuming you believe a DC electrical current flowing thru a wire is dependent upon electrons moving thru a conductor, how long does it take for one electron to go thru 100m of wire?

Not that it matters much but so you don’t have to ask 5v dc thru 30 gauge copper wire, 100 ohm load.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/09/18 09:50am

how long does it take for one electron to go thru 100m of wire?

I can tell everyone is obviously dying to know this ;)

Answer is about 4 days. Who knew?

Jim Davis

In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 02/19/21 07:59pm

A reliable way to test for the combination of copper composition and gauge in one test is to do a basic resistivity test.

This is a very important point about the cables. The TIA-568 standard requires loop resistance of less than 25 Ohms for a 300 ft / 100 m link. The problem with cable that is made with Aluminum is that it has much higher resistance. In the test reports, you can see that the CCA almost exceeds 25 Ohms of resistance on even the 150 foot link.

This has a big impact on PoE. the PoE devices are expecting these lower resistance values. Higher resistance values mean that you 'lose' more energy as you transmit down the cable so they will be less efficient. Also, they may not be able to provide the wattage that you are looking for at all. IPVM Image

Abdelhamid Metwally

IPVMU Certified | 11/06/18 02:51pm

Could you do tests with some of the other traditional network cabling brands? A couple of major brands to look at:

1. Commscope.

2. 3M (now part of Corning)

3. Leviton

4. R&M (a Swiss brand that is quite popular in the Middle East).

Kyle Folger

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Abdelhamid Metwally | 11/07/18 11:35pm

I can't recall and I could be wrong but I though WCW sources most of their cable from one of the major cable manufacturer's. Their big selling point is the cable dispensing system. I want to say it was Commscope but I could be wrong. They mentioned it to me on the phone a while back.

Daniel Tyrrell

In reply to Kyle Folger | 11/23/18 07:24pm

If my experience with Commscope is any indication, there is no way it's coming out of a box or reel that smooth.

Unless WCW does something different to also make it come out of the box/reel better than Commscopes own branded cable would.

Jason Crist

In reply to Daniel Tyrrell | 07/22/19 06:25pm

Not the case. Tech packs we can call them (cable packs without spools) from Superior Essex and Berk-Tek pull like greased string. Cheap manufacturer spool-less packs are a disaster.

Jason Crist

In reply to Kyle Folger | 07/22/19 06:21pm

Not the case, they make the majority of their cables. I’m in the Keys with Superior Essex right this moment, neat to see an article about cable on here.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | 11/07/18 04:34am

Is the cable on the right the uncertifiable clad cable?

Seems like one problem might be the lack of diversity in “twisty-ness” between pairs, amiright?

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/07/18 04:40am

If you're a manufacturer not following cat 5/6 standards, then you should mention "twisty-ness" in your datasheet.

On the right is either a Cat 5 cable or a Chinese "Cat 6 cable".

Even within each cable you will notice discrepancy between the twist-rates. On the left the brown and orange pairs are twisted pretty well. On the right orange and blue seem to be twisted slightly better.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 11/07/18 07:13am

Even within each cable you will notice discrepancy between the twist-rates.

And there should be, this is intentional, so as to reduce crosstalk by creating different standing wave patterns.

The cable on the right has some difference in twistyness, but it doesn’t seem like comparatively much. So I’m speculating this may be part of the problem with this cable.

The actual twisty rate of the various pairs, AFAIK, is left up to the manufacturer.

But there is one (dis-)incentive, more twisty = more copper.

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/07/18 07:26am

I believe in the cat 6 standard cross talk is reduced by not having the twists aligning (i.e. a phase shift) as opposed to making twist ratios less.

While having a different twist ratio does reduce cross talk, it will also reduce frequency and consequently bandwidth when twist rate is less on a certain pair (assuming all pairs are being used).

Would have to read up on cat 6 standards to double check.

David Pilchick

Brooklyn Low Voltage Supply
11/07/18 01:11pm

Interesting article

let me point out that you tested

Honeywell’s better Cat 5e

but their low end cat 6

you should have either used both of their low end product or both of their high end product

5078 is their higher end Cat 5e

6360 is their lower end Cat 6

Also

I sell tons of cable

Interesting choice of manufacturer mix

David Delepine

AA Security Systems LLC
IPVMU Certified | In reply to David Pilchick | 11/08/18 04:52am

This begs the question, which brands would you have recommended be tested?

Undisclosed #5

11/07/18 01:19pm

Pretty cool guys. Now how about adding more typical data cable manufacturers to the mix, like Berk-tek, Superior Essex, etc. And UBNT makes a nifty exterior ruggedized STP cable that I like to use for cameras.

Undisclosed Distributor #6

11/07/18 02:15pm

4 of the 5 cables you tested are very rarely purchased by the integrator in this industry because they are very expensive. These 4 vendors charge enough to make a very good cable so the results of quality are expected. There are numerous brands you did not test that make up the majority of cable purchased and these cables are many times not only poor quality but are not built to spec at all. For example, many of the lower cost cables claim to be CMR (riser rated) but the jacket is standard CM. They mark it CMR and it is a lie. Do the industry a favor and test the cables that are used mostly. Out the brands that are frauds and in some case dangerous because they are listed as CMR but when a flame is applied to them they burn vertical like a wooden match stick. Know what your industry uses and test those items. Show the best value as a combination of Price and quality by expanding your brands tested.

Cliff Hennig

IPVMU Certified | 11/07/18 03:08pm

Curious to see how Liberty, Commscope, and ICE cable stack up against these.

David Delepine

AA Security Systems LLC
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Cliff Hennig | 11/08/18 04:53am

I keep hearing good things about ICE, have you used them before?

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to David Delepine | 11/08/18 05:31am

I'm not sure about the rest but ICE offers some Reelex options. Also, I know two of their suppliers in China and they are great!

Tyler Graham

11/07/18 05:24pm

Interesting report! We use WCW for everything but cat6. We have a cabling division so we just use what's on the shelf. Typically Hitachi but some customers specify Systimax and Comscope. I'm going to look into WCW now. We also just got a box of Paige GameChanger cable to give it a try as well. We have also been using the Siemon Z-Plug, which is awesome. http://www.siemon.com/us/convergeit/z-plug/

Jake Voll

SS&Si Dealer Network
In reply to Tyler Graham | 01/06/20 08:28pm

How'd your test go on Paige's GameChanger?

Greg Sachnewycz

IPVMU Certified | 11/07/18 09:57pm

I have to wonder why you chose those five particular manufacturers when there are other, better known brands available such as Mohawk, AWC, and Vertical Cable.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | 11/07/18 10:16pm

It must be quite a fragmented market out there for cable manufacturers, as evidenced by the last 5 post mentioning “better known” and “more typical” manufacturers, such as (in order of mention)

Berk-tek, Superior Essex, UBNT, Liberty, Commscope, ICE, WCW, Hitachi, Systimax, Paige, Simeon, Mohawk, AWC, Vertical Cable.

Edit: Adding 3M, Leviton, R&M

Still only one name* was mentioned more than once, Commscope.

*Very possibly some of the names mentioned actually refer to the same product.

John Scanlan

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/07/18 10:39pm

Very observant U4!

In our report on the most common cable brand used the largest brand specific response was only 10% for Honeywell, followed by Belden and Windy City Wire which is why we selected those brands for the test. The largest response was 45% for other brands. We added Hikvision since they are the largest camera manufacturer, and were interested to see how their cable tested. Dahua also makes cable, which we ordered, but it did not arrive in time for the test. We tested Navepoint CCA to cover the many responses that were basically stating they use the cheapest available, as well as to highlight the pitfalls using copper clad aluminum cable. It just was not feasible to test every brand and each subset of cable listed.

Undisclosed #5

In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 11/07/18 10:53pm

Yeah, Mohawk is the Superior-Essex budget line. Some of the others I’ve never even heard of and I do infrastructure design :-)

David McNeill

11/12/18 06:56pm

Is this a typo, on the paragraph above the Cat 6 Headroom graph.

with Hikvision slightly behind them at both

with Hikvision slightly ahead of them at both

John Honovich

IPVM | 12/17/18 02:52pm

Due to member's request, we tested and have added Commscope to the report, it rated out average as shown below:

network cable rankings

The overall report has been updated to include Commscope in each section.

Levi Liner

In reply to John Honovich | 12/19/18 04:26pm

Can you clarify as to what series of Commscope cable was used? assuming uniprise and not systimax?

John Scanlan

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to Levi Liner | 12/19/18 04:49pm

Levi, you are correct it was Uniprise. We reached out to Commscope technical support and asked them for cable comparable to others tested and that is what they recommended.

Tim Pickles

Mitie Fire & Security Systems
01/14/19 09:17am

I think it probably just illustrates the regionality of the product, but this side of the pond we would look for CE conformity (UL irrelevant) and the major differentiator apart from avoiding CCA, is always to use LSOH (LSZH/LSF) as best practice.

It's hard to correlate the UL & NFPA across to CE and BS, although a fire test carried out by BRE in the UK suggests that CMP is safer than CMX and LSOH?

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Tim Pickles | 01/14/19 10:15am

Tim, thanks for the feedback. Question: what brand of cabling do you most commonly see used in the UK?

Tim Pickles

Mitie Fire & Security Systems
In reply to John Honovich | 01/14/19 04:56pm

Well, there's a few that we get to see, but we tend to use Excel (distributed through Mayflex) that I know a lot of other data companies uses as well.

Anything will copper in is pretty well volatile on pricing but a target buy price for us would be around:

• Internal cat5: USD60
• External cat5: USD80
• Internal Cat6: USD85
• External Cat6: USD115

(Prices checked today and all cable LSOH)

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Tim Pickles | 01/14/19 05:22pm

What internal copper utp cat 6 is for 85 USD? Very curious

Tim Pickles

Mitie Fire & Security Systems
In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 01/14/19 05:33pm

Cat6 copper LSOH

The USD pricing is just taken from the actual sterling pricing of

• Internal cat5: £45.36
• External cat5: £66.95
• Internal Cat6: £62.64
• External Cat6: £89.99

Abaas Mahroos

Al Aswar Trading Group
IPVMU Certified | In reply to Tim Pickles | 01/15/19 08:44am

You're getting a sweet deal.

Tim Pickles

Mitie Fire & Security Systems
In reply to Abaas Mahroos | 01/15/19 02:44pm

What would be your buy prices on the same, in Canada?

Brexit is looming so I need to sell outside of the EU now!

John Nino

05/01/19 09:57pm

Has anyone used Linked Cable? One of my vendors are offering their cables now.

John Scanlan

IPVM | IPVMU Certified | In reply to John Nino | 05/02/19 04:03am

I am not familiar. Do you have a link to the product or manufacturers page?

John Nino

In reply to John Scanlan | 05/03/19 04:54pm

Here is a link to the vendors page but I cannot find the manufacturers website.

Linked Cat6 Riser Cable White

John Nino

05/02/19 03:30pm

Here is a link to the vendors page but I cannot find the manufacturers website.

Linked Cat6 Riser Cable White

Undisclosed

07/23/19 06:22pm

Nice review. Now that you've admitted you are capable of using a cable tester (clearly none of you are integrators ;-) could you please test OSDP/RS-485? Perhaps over Wiegand cable and/or proper RS-485 4-conductor. Can you show the audience how you'd confirm the cable is ok for RS-485? Perhaps toss in 120Ohm resistors at one end or the other? People are scared of the 120 Ohm terminator boogieman. Perhaps you could help with that...

Brian Rhodes

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed | 07/23/19 06:33pm

I'll queue this up for a future test. In many cases, existing (Wiegand) reader wire does not meet the exact spec for OSDP, especially in regards to twists and shielding.

The End-of-line resistor is interesting too, because it essentially is not used for Wiegand. But I've only seen that spec for OSDP for 'long runs' of 200' or longer, and many/most runs are far less.

This fall, we'll do a test to see what impact the cable and resistors have on OSDP performance vs. Wiegand!

Undisclosed

In reply to Brian Rhodes | 07/23/19 10:17pm

this is part of the mystery. RS-485 is made to be tough - it should run over "barbed wire and spit". I am told that all wiegand wire, since it could only ever be 500 feet max, "should be" ok. When you do your test, check the PACS for link status. That is of course a trick question since most of them fail to provide that AFAIK...

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Brian Rhodes | 07/24/19 09:08pm

The End-of-line resistor is interesting too, because it essentially is not used for Wiegand.

minor terminology quibble, “Terminating resistor” and “End-of-Line” resistor” should not be used interchangeably, since they imply different purposes, the former to reduce reflections in transmission media, the latter used to supervise circuits. also, one cannot be used in place of another, because the typical resistance values are not in the same range.

Brian Rhodes

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed #4 | 07/24/19 09:24pm

Point noted, interesting.

Undisclosed #4

IPVMU Certified | In reply to Undisclosed | 07/23/19 08:34pm

People are scared of the 120 Ohm terminator boogieman.

just leave 500-ft on the spool at the last drop with the ends shorted :)

Undisclosed Integrator #8

07/24/19 07:03pm

We've had good luck with the Vertical Cable brand. Would be interesting to see how it stacks up against the competition.

Undisclosed Integrator #9

11/06/19 11:13am

To confirm Tim - here in the UK, Excel would be the cable of choice. You also need to use their accessories to get the 25 year warranty.

Thanks

Jason Brown

01/16/20 04:52pm

Glad you did this test. Thanks. Would love to see one with Outdoor/Wet/Burial rated cable as well.

Jerome Miller

02/19/21 10:25pm

I cannot think of a single job speck that would allow CCA. Is it UL rated? Even though I have not done any large cable installs for 5 years or so most all of the bid specks spelled out the acceptable brands and specks. Most of the jobs were Cat6. I do not know if it is and issue but I have heard that while cat5e will carry the data loads with no problem the upside of cat6 is the 23 gauge wire may be able to handle higher POE requirements as opposed to 24 gauge typical cat5e. The article talks about cmr but it is prudent to know, either from the specks or your knowledge of the site whether plenum is required.

Jason Crist

In reply to Jerome Miller | 02/19/21 10:43pm

As a structured cabling company prior to security, it’s interesting to see what the camera guys do for cable! Keep in mind J that 23awg isn’t a requirement for Cat6 specification although there are many newer “extended distance” options out there that utilize larger wire gauge.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,803 reports, 913 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.