It depends on the number of clients in the LAN segment, but in general a switch is more efficient than a hub.
Switch because it is at least a little intelligent and can send data packets to the correct port.-----------A switch also regenerates the network signal, where a hub does not.
A switch. Each port has a separate path to each of the other ports on the switch. On a hub, all the ports are tied together into 1 single port. Think of a switch as an 4 lane freeway with 8 entrances and exits; a hub is a one lane highway with the same 8 entrances and exits. It can pass data from only one port to another port- switch can connect 4 ports to the other 4 ports (or 8 to 8 or 16 to 16, you get the idea) A switch is quite a bit more complicated AND is generally more expensive: between 20% and 300% more than a hub with the same number of ports BUT it's very useful on a busy network (business especially.)
because they are more efficent and have more torque.
They are the same thing.
A router that supports two or more communications protocols, such as IP and IPX. It is used to switch network traffic between different LANs located throughout the enterprise as well as to switch LAN traffic to WANs.
Yes, using a switch allows you to connect more clients in your LAN. In addition, it limits the amount of traffic collisions in the LAN segment as well, allowing better performance and throughput of traffic.
Shortcut keys
The Mazda Miata is very fuel efficent.
Social networking. That is the most inexpensive way of getting things out there. Connect everything through Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Email, what have you.
1.switch off the lights and fans 2. switch the car engine off when in a jam or traffic lights 3. make more and more use of renewable sources of energy
No, it's actually less efficent.
Its now the Airbus because it is taking over the Boeing because its more efficent!