What's new

Comparing attenuation/throughput across Wireless Testing method revisions

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

Nick Maynard

New Around Here
I'm considering three routers for my next upgrade - for a rather large home.

Specifically, they are the Netgear R7000, Netgear R7800, and Linksys EA8500. The EA8500's 802.11r support is a big plus for the situation where coverage isn't up to snuff and we need to install extenders.

However, getting a straight comparison of attentuation/throughput for these routers isn't great.

The R7000 was retested on 2014-01-27, which should be Wireless Testing revision 7 (http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-reviews/32325-ac1900-router-wireless-retest).
The R7800 was tested on 2016-03-03, which should be Wireless Testing revision 8 (http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...ghthawk-x4s-smart-wifi-gaming-router-reviewed).
The EA8500 was tested on 2015-05-26, which should be Wireless Testing revision 8 (http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...00-mu-mimo-smart-wi-fi-router-reviewed-part-2).

AFAICS I can do a straight comparison between the R7800 and EA8500. But relating those R7000 numbers is difficult. Does anyone have any suggestions? Is there a conversion table somewhere?
 
numbers is difficult. Does anyone have any suggestions? Is there a conversion table somewhere?

hi

its hard to directly compare but what i can tell you from the 1900ac series up there is very little improvement in the way of coverage with the 2156M series just reaching a little bit further when tested over 25 meters and through a few walls

throughput wise will be at the hands of the client adapters you use as almost all handheld portable devices are a max of 867M anyway with only a few very new ones having 1300M anyway , the ONLY way to get 2156M syn and thus its throughput is to use the asus pce-ac88 which is also 2156M in a pc type comp

throughput you could expect in real world transfers over windows samba

same room dependant on the wireless adapter used and using 5 gig high band

max throughput rates

867M - 40MB/s

1300M - 60MB/s

1733M - 70MB/s

2156M - 90MB/s plus

at about 25 meters through a few walls etc

867M - 12MB/s

1300M - 20MB/s

1733M - 20 MB/s

2156M - 35 to 40MB/S

at greater distances the expected loss increase

2.4 gig rates are slightly better at 25 meter as the loss is about half where 5 gig is about 66%

------------------------

now the above is just an approximation but its pretty relevant to what ever brand / manufacturer and make as the physics dont change

for a rather large home.

now to change the playing field and beat the physics you change the methodology and forget single transmission solutions and big honking routers ( tm sm2000 ) and instead have the transmissions where you need them , be that by installing ethernet and running multiple wireless access points in the house or by employing one of the new wireless mesh system that are what 2017 will all be about

as an example of the wireless mesh system i have the netgear orbi system and with it installed in my house with the router in the middle and a sat at ether end i get a constant signal and the same throughput anywhere in my house at around 50MB/s ( as the orbi is 768M max on its 5 gig ) but that throughput ensure i have my full 100/40M internet available any where in my house no matter where i am

just my 2 cents

pete
 
Thank you Pete for your reply, and I agree with your reasoning. Nonetheless, handoff is a serious problem for me, so my consideration is down the two routes I've outlined; either not to require handoff at all (the "big honking router"), or an 802.11r -based solution.

In a simple race between the R7800 and EA8500, the latter has clear advantages for future expansion through 802.11r. I am, however, interested in the way the R7000 compares, specifically given the raw numbers smallnetbuilder are so good at. The change in testing methodology is a problem, and is the specific target of my question.
 
Thank you - that's a really helpful link. I hadn't realised the comparison tool allows limiting by test methodology. The EA8500 hadn't been tested under Revision 9 (your link targets the Netgear R8500), but all three of my potential routers had been tested under Revision 8 - hurrah! The link I eventually ended up with was this:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tool...hthawk/2066-linksys-ea8500/2538-netgear-r7800

This helps me, though I guess this doesn't strictly help us address the comparison across revisions. I'm guessing we ... can't? The best we could do is some normalisation effort using devices tested under multiple revisions... but that'd not necessarily be perfect.

Anyway, thank you all.
 
You can't compare results across test methods. Test conditions change and the comparison will not be valid.
 

Latest threads

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top