You've created your own confusion. You asked about "10GBase-X" in the context of a signal encoding type, so I answered your question in the context you provided. "Don't use that, it's total crap."
This in no way suggests that every time you see "10GBase
X" that they're talking about CX4 or LX4 (and I pretty much even warned that nobody uses that terminology). CX4 and LX4 are not actually true 10G, they're 4 x 2.5G aggregated together. They function as 10G, after a fashion, yes, but they have to run through a switch or interface chip in order to be "usable".
But there was also "1000Base-X", used to denote a range of 1G ethernet options that were mostly fiber, from the common 1000Base-T UTP copper. In general the 1000Base-X options used modules, usually swappable, sometimes fixed, and so generally people might refer to things that weren't UTP as "1000Base-X" and even be almost completely correct. I would take "10GBase-X" to be a generalization of that for 10G, and it's
easy to
find examples of
such use
in industry. The very fact that they say "SFP+" means it is *impossible* for it to be signal encoded as 10GBase-X. There aren't four channels available on SFP/SFP+.
You do NOT want to learn all about this crap. I do not want to REMEMBER all this crap. Just trust me here. Go get yourself some happy SFP+ gear, or happy 10GBase-T gear if you don't mind spending $$$$.
For SFP+ stuff, check to see if you need a manufacturer-specific SFP+ module, and if so, get them. SX fiber is very affordable and hooking fiber between devices is a very highly compatible way to make sure stuff "just works."
