Netgear R7000 Transmit Power on Lower 5ghz Channels

[Hogan773]

I have been doing lots of reading on the internet about the difference between the lower (36-48) vs higher (148 etc) 5ghz channels. Of course when Googling one comes up with all kinds of different time periods for these conversations so I wanted to know what is current.


Old wisdom mentioned that allowable transmit power was 1/20th in the lower channels than the higher channels, therefore you should pick a higher channel. However I also read something that said FCC last year allowed transmit power in the LOWER channels to go up to 1W now instead of 50mw.

Does anyone know if the Nighthawk router firmware would include that so that it now transmits at a higher power in the lower channels?

Thanks

 

[thiggins]

No older routers in the field will be upgraded for higher power in the lower 5 GHz band. Doing do requires FCC re-certification, which is a significant cost that no vendor will bother with.

 

[Hogan773]

Ok I see. I thought it might be a simple firmware update that could make the change.

So assuming the R7000 is still limited to 50mw on the lower 5ghz bands, does that mean it is better to stick to the high bands? Or is the 20x higher power simply offset by the higher frequency which gets soaked up with the walls etc?

Everything I read is just the stock answer "best frequency is the one that your neighbors aren't on" but that is kinda useless because I live in a single family home and my neighbors on either side aren't running 5ghz, or if they are, it isn't detectable by my devices. Therefore ALL 5ghz are equally "open" to me. I want to know low bands vs high bands - which gives the best range and performance.

Thank you

 

[thiggins]

If all 5 GHz channels have low traffic, give the high band a try. Wireless performance is very location and device specific. Only way to know is to try.

 

[Hogan773]

Tried 36 and it seems to be about the same. Hard to tell exactly from Wifi analyzer but the signal might be a tad stronger on the 148 high channels. Speedtest performance doesn't show a material difference either way.

That said, I am probably going to force my phone to the 2.4ghz range because on my nightstand while lying flat, the 5ghz signal gets weak enough that sometimes the phone loses it and when I pick up the phone in the morning, it reconnects to wifi. on 2.4ghz my speedtests are "only" 15-20mbps instead of 30-50, but I don't really need 30-50 to receive push emails and other stuff. Would rather make sure I'm staying on wifi to conserve my LTE data allotment.

Now I need to figure out if there is a way to make the GS4 automatically switch over between 2.4 and 5. i.e. when I am downstairs and within good range on 5ghz I want it to do 5ghz, but when it gets on the fringe upstairs I'd like it to automatically switch over to 2.4ghz.

 

[azazel1024]

Unless you are really limited before, speedtest won't show a difference. Most people's internet connections are a lot slower than their WLAN speeds.

In my experience, the difference between the lower 5GHz channels and the upper ones on routers that are pre-FCC regulatory changes is about 3-4dB, IE only about a 2x difference in signal strength. Most routers do NOT broadcast at the full FCC limits and all clients are limited to between 25-50mw anyway, so you'd have issues if your router was 20x stronger (IE the client can hear the router, but it cannot be heard in return, so the connection would "be there" but it wouldn't work).

In general most routers broadcast around 80-120mw, which means that the lower power on the low 5GHz channels really is only about half the broadcast power of the upper ones.

Of course doubling up the broadcast power is still something nice.

In testing my Archer C8 at a fixed position roughly 12ft from the router, line of sight choosing channel 148 my average transfer speed from the router to my laptop is 58MB/sec. If I choose channel 36, the average transfer speed drops to 54MB/sec. Granted, that is less than a 10% difference, but at extreme range it is a little more apparent. 2/3rds of the way across my house and a floor up, I can get 10MB/sec down choosing channel 148, but on channel 36 it is only 8MB/sec.

Get the laptop about 5ft from the router and line of sight and there is effectively no difference between channels (all selections result in roughly 61MB/sec).

So in general, if you can and there is no interference, select channel 148+. If there is, go the lower channels. There is some difference, but it isn't night and day.

Another example if it helps, my outdoor router (only the antennas are outdoors), a WDR3600 in testing on 5GHz at a distance of 30ft line-of-sight I can get around 15MB/sec with the upper channels and around 13MB/sec on the lower channels. At 70ft line-of-sight it is about 11MB/sec upper channels and 8MB/sec lower channels. At 15ft line-of-sight both channel selections result in 25MB/sec.

Of course if it is "free", take the extra performance. In my house I have two routers running on opposite sides, but if do co-channel on both there IS interference, though small. Setting up my laptop and my tablet hammering a file transfer on both placed about 10 feet apart in the middle of my house (equidistant from the routers, though obviously each client is closer to the router it is connected to) I see about a 25% performance hit on both instead of choosing the lower 5GHz on one router and the upper 5GHz on the other router (zero impact then). Now if the clients are on opposite sides of the house, there is effectively no interference when doing the same test.

Now if you have a post-FCC regulatory change, there isn't really a concern as the power levels are the same on both parts of the band (now if DFS channel selection was common. Sigh).

 

[Hogan773]

Unless you are really limited before, speedtest won't show a difference. Most people's internet connections are a lot slower than their WLAN speeds.

In my experience, the difference between the lower 5GHz channels and the upper ones on routers that are pre-FCC regulatory changes is about 3-4dB, IE only about a 2x difference in signal strength. Most routers do NOT broadcast at the full FCC limits and all clients are limited to between 25-50mw anyway, so you'd have issues if your router was 20x stronger (IE the client can hear the router, but it cannot be heard in return, so the connection would "be there" but it wouldn't work).

In general most routers broadcast around 80-120mw, which means that the lower power on the low 5GHz channels really is only about half the broadcast power of the upper ones.

Of course doubling up the broadcast power is still something nice.

In testing my Archer C8 at a fixed position roughly 12ft from the router, line of sight choosing channel 148 my average transfer speed from the router to my laptop is 58MB/sec. If I choose channel 36, the average transfer speed drops to 54MB/sec. Granted, that is less than a 10% difference, but at extreme range it is a little more apparent. 2/3rds of the way across my house and a floor up, I can get 10MB/sec down choosing channel 148, but on channel 36 it is only 8MB/sec.

Get the laptop about 5ft from the router and line of sight and there is effectively no difference between channels (all selections result in roughly 61MB/sec).

So in general, if you can and there is no interference, select channel 148+. If there is, go the lower channels. There is some difference, but it isn't night and day.

Another example if it helps, my outdoor router (only the antennas are outdoors), a WDR3600 in testing on 5GHz at a distance of 30ft line-of-sight I can get around 15MB/sec with the upper channels and around 13MB/sec on the lower channels. At 70ft line-of-sight it is about 11MB/sec upper channels and 8MB/sec lower channels. At 15ft line-of-sight both channel selections result in 25MB/sec.

Of course if it is "free", take the extra performance. In my house I have two routers running on opposite sides, but if do co-channel on both there IS interference, though small. Setting up my laptop and my tablet hammering a file transfer on both placed about 10 feet apart in the middle of my house (equidistant from the routers, though obviously each client is closer to the router it is connected to) I see about a 25% performance hit on both instead of choosing the lower 5GHz on one router and the upper 5GHz on the other router (zero impact then). Now if the clients are on opposite sides of the house, there is effectively no interference when doing the same test.

Now if you have a post-FCC regulatory change, there isn't really a concern as the power levels are the same on both parts of the band (now if DFS channel selection was common. Sigh).

Thanks for this. This is consistent with my limited unscientific testing. While both got good connections, the 148 channel prob was a few db better. I've just left it on 148 and am going to move on to other areas of thought/concern in my life now

My R7000 also seems to be holding up better without the slowness and dropouts that I was experiencing. Hopefully they don't return. I decided to unplug the ASUS AC66 that I was wirelessly bridging to the R7000 in order to blanket my house in wifi goodness. The R7000 on its own can reach everywhere and I'm thinking that perhaps over time somewhere in the R7000 to Asus to client devices chain, something started to go awry which might have caused one of the routers to get confused or slow. I'm going to Ebay the Asus and just live with one router now.......