Loading
The cable is a small part of the cost — the labour dominates. That single fact drives almost every sensible decision here, and it's the one most quotes ignore.
| Criterion | Cat6 | Cat6A | Fiber |
|---|---|---|---|
| Max 10G distance | ~37–55 m | 100 m | 550 m (OM4) to 10 km+ (OS2) |
| Material cost | Lowest | Moderate | Higher |
| Installation labour | Standard | Slightly higher — stiffer cable | Highest — needs splicing |
| Termination equipment cost | Low | Low | Higher — transceivers per link |
| Carries PoE | Yes | Yes, better heat handling | No — needs separate power |
| Interference immunity | Adequate | Better — often shielded | Total — immune |
| Realistic service life | 10+ years | 15+ years | 20+ years |
| Best for desk outlets | Yes | Yes | Rarely justified |
| Best for building backbone | No | Short runs only | Yes |
| Between buildings | No | No | Yes — and electrically isolating |
A tick marks the stronger option for that criterion only. Rows with no tick are genuinely a draw — and every option here wins something.
Because labour dominates the cost, Cat6A is usually the cheaper decision over the life of the installation even though it's more expensive today — you're paying once for pulling cable instead of twice. The exception is a short lease: don't over-specify a building you'll leave in three years. Most real projects are Cat6A to the desk and fiber for the backbone.
Almost never in an office. Cat8 is a data-centre spec for very short high-speed runs, and Cat7 was never widely ratified for standard connectors. If someone is quoting you Cat7 for desk outlets, ask why.
Yes, and you generally should — fiber backbone, Cat6A horizontal. Mixing is normal design, not a compromise.
Indirectly but importantly. Wi-Fi 6/6E access points can exceed 1G, so a Cat6 run at the edge of its distance becomes the bottleneck for the whole AP.
Tell us what you're running and what's going wrong. We'll tell you which is right for you — including when it's the cheaper one.
