Upgrading to three stream wireless network

[RamGuy]

With three notebooks featuring 3x3 stream (450mbps) capable network cards (two of them being MacBook Pro's) I'm going to replace one of my current access points in order to utilise the extra potential.

Currently I'm using a Netgear WNDR3700v1 for 2.4GHz N-only access point and a D-Link DAP-2553 for 5.0GHz@40Hz N-only access point.

So either I replace the DAP-2553, or I'll replace the WNDR3700v1 and start using the DAP-2553 for 2.4GHz N-only instead of the WNDR3700v1. First I have to test and figure which one will do the best work as 2.4GHz N-only access point.


What I'm trying to figure out is which 3x3 (450mbps) stream wireless router / access point that will provide the most stable and best 5.0GHz@40Hz connection, for compression my current DAP-2553 running 5GHz Channel 36 on 40Hz channel width in N-only mode with WPA2 only encryption barely manages to provide 5GHz connection for the entire house. The access point is placed onto of a shelf in the middle of the house and even though the reception at the far end of the house are right on the edge it works so I can't really complain. This gives the idea about what kind of coverage I'll be needing to cover the house, so which ever 3x3 capable solution I go for it should not have worse coverage than the DAP-2553.

The availability of 3x3 stream capable router / access points is really limited, for what I can see all that's available on the Norwegian market are these:

- Apple AirPort Extreme Base Station / Apple Time Capsule 2011 edition (just released)
- Cisco / Linksys E4200
- Netgear WNDR4000


For 5GHz@40Hz 3x3 stream N-only the WNDR4000 seems to have an edge to the E4200. But if the antenna design is somewhat alike the one in WNDR3700v1 it might be a real pain placing in the centre of the house as the antennas seems to be rather directional upwards from the top of the unit. How the E4200 and Apple AirPort Extreme compares I can't really say.

Smallnetbuilders review of the previous generation of Apple AirPort Extreme was far from impressive, but the whole limited router part doesn't really matter in my case as I'm going to run it as an access point only anyway. But neither the coverage or performance seemed that impressive, but the biggest change for this new fifth generation AirPort Extreme just released is a major bump in the antenna power output and a supposed remap of the antenna design making the 5GHz coverage about 20% better.

Reading this shows a massive bump in 5GHz@40Hz power output.


So the big question is whether to go for the E4200, WNDR4000 or the new AirPort Extreme Base Station.

 

[Mangusta1969]

With three notebooks featuring 3x3 stream (450mbps) capable network cards (two of them being MacBook Pro's) I'm going to replace one of my current access points in order to utilise the extra potential.

<snip>

So the big question is whether to go for the E4200, WNDR4000 or the new AirPort Extreme Base Station.

My experience with the E4200 router on 5GHz was very poor. When the 5GHz RF band was enabled, my E4200 gradually lost range over time on the 2.4GHz band and had to be rebooted to recover anything approaching its original range on that RF band. I suspect an internal component heating problem may have caused this issue. I eventually had to disable the 5GHz radio in order to avoid the problem.

More importantly for your question, although the E4200 worked well with my MacBook Pro and a Mac Airbook at extremely close ranges (10-25 feet), its 5GHz RF transmitter and receiver could not contend with even a single interior house wall, so be aware of that range issue on the higher RF band.

Perhaps I have a defective E4200, but Cisco support was useless on solving the problem. BTW, other users have reported the "gradually decreasing range" issue that I experienced on various internet forums. If you decide to go with an E4200, make sure to buy it from a source that is friendly with money-back returns in case you are unhappy with its performance.

 

[thiggins]

Three stream N will not provide wider coverage in either band. Like dual-stream N, it can provide higher throughput at a given location with strong to moderate signal strength. Under lower signal levels and when using 40 MHz bandwidth mode, performance can be worse. See http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...ss-n-gaming-adapter-reviewed?showall=&start=2

 

[RamGuy]

I'm not aiming at getting better coverage at all.

What I want is a three stream capable router / access point that got at least the same coverage and range as my current DAP-2553 provides when running 5GHz@40Hz mode.

 

[RamGuy]

I ended up trying out the new Apple TimeCapsule / AirPort Extreme as I was afraid that the antenna design of the WNDR4000 is much like the one in WNDR3700v1 which was very hard for me to place for proper coverage of our house, and because there have been lots of bad reports about the E4200.

And so far I'm impressed by Apple's TimeCapsule as the range reach even further than the D-Link DAP-2553. Places where the DAP-2553 would be right on the edge and drop-out at times the TimeCapsule have no issue at all. The WNDR3700 doesn't manage to reach this area at all.

Not only is the range impressive but the connection is more stable and better performing. For the very first time I can finally stream 1080P MKV movies from my server to my MacBook Pro without slowdowns or bandwidth issues.

 

[OmBreNoiRe]

Wow RamGuy you just answered my questions... Indeed I'm EXACTLY in the same situation (replacing the very good 2553 by E4200 vs WNDR4000 vs Airport Extreme) !

So still happy about the airport extreme ? I think I will buy one or two very soon