Mesh Advice - Easy to use and best Bandwidth

[pege63]

Orbi will support ethernet backhaul in a later software release.

Bob Silver
Netgear Product Advisor

It has been said now for several months and still nothing

 

[thiggins]

I been reading and watching a lot of reviews on youtube and it seems that eero has the best range of all the mesh systems. Google Wi-Fi not so much.

Which version eero? How is range measured?

 

[thiggins]

It has been said now for several months and still nothing

I don't understand the focus on lack of Ethernet backhaul. If you use Ethernet, all you are left with is two 2x2 APs connected via Ethernet and waste money on two very expensive and high performance 4x4 5 GHz radios.

There are cheaper ways to get 2x2 APs connected by Ethernet.

 

[pege63]

No i just made a comment on the ethernet backhaul focus.

 

[thiggins]

No i just made a comment on the ethernet backhaul focus.

That's what I meant. The focus on lack of Ethernet backhaul.

 

[pege63]

That's what I meant. The focus on lack of Ethernet backhaul.

I dont care about the Ethernet backhaul, makes no point for me as you say.
Just wondering why everyone else was so focused on it in FW.

 

[sm00thpapa]

The prupose of a mesh system is to blanket your home with wifi. if you want Ethernet backhaul get a normal router.

 

[pege63]

Tell that to the ppl who asking about Ethernet backhaul for the Orbi, thats not even important for the Router.

 

[ikjadoon]

Eh. I came across this thread looking for advice on mesh systems, but it devolved somewhat.

Correct me if I'm wrong...these mesh systems, if wired by ethernet, will provide the widest coverage with the fastest speeds with the most seamless roaming...all with the least setup. Right? Isn't this the dream for any consumer in a large home?

Seems like just a single unit of these WiFi mesh systems outperforms "high-end" single-unit routers. Right?

The best "single" routers:

The best WiFi system routers:

The choice seems obvious, no? You are paying more for the WiFi systems...but that's because even each single unit gives 2x the throughput at long ranges. Have I missed something? Is 2.4GHz uplink @ 45dB attenuation not comparable between these?

 

[thiggins]

You can't compare benchmarks done with different test methods.

The two methods you are comparing use very different test configurations.

 

[ikjadoon]

You can't compare benchmarks done with different test methods.

The two methods you are comparing use very different test configurations.

I'm embarrassed; thank you. I should've done my research (as it's helpfully provided on those very pages!): no rotation for systems, no multipath emulator for systems, unity-gain dipole antennas for systems, and then full 40Mhz on 2.4GHz on systems. Welp.

I'm a bit shy to ask now, but... is there a way to compare mesh single unit vs. routers via the charts, in terms of wireless performance? Or is it more or less accepted that halfway decent dedicated router units outperform most single mesh units? I only ask as, if they're both on wired backhauls, which would give greater coverage with greater speeds?

 

[thiggins]

ikjadoon: No problem. I get tripped up on things all the time....

Comparing multi-point Wi-Fi systems and single point routers isn't possible with the current charts. The test methods are too different.

But a general observation is that Wi-Fi systems should be able to expand coverage over single point systems, just as Wi-Fi extenders can, especially for 5 GHz. The throughput provided in the expanded coverage area, however, can vary widely. The largest factor here is backhaul performance.

Once you introduce Ethernet backhaul, the whole equation changes. Gigabit Ethernet provides higher and more stable bandwidth than any wireless solution and it doesn't vary with distance.

Sounds like an article I should do....

 

[ikjadoon]

ikjadoon: No problem get tripped up on things all the time....

Comparing multi-point Wi-Fi systems and single point routers isn't possible with the current charts. The test methods are too different.

But a general observation is that Wi-Fi systems should be able to expand coverage over single point systems, just as Wi-Fi extenders can, especially for 5 GHz. The throughput provided in the expanded coverage area, however, can vary widely. The largest factor here is backhaul performance.

Once you introduce Ethernet backhaul, the whole equation changes. Gigabit Ethernet provides higher and more stable bandwidth than any wireless solution and it doesn't vary with distance.

Sounds like an article I should do....

That article was huge. Thank you enormously for testing and writing it up. I think it's a 'hot' question these days, especially as the Orbi and COVR have formally packaged the router + extender into a single solution.

I didn't see your reply here until last night (when I saw the homepage article, I thought, "Wow. I was just trying to look this up. What perfect timing!") It was well done; it makes the most sense and the funnels brought it home. What's the weakest link between the devices? It's that backhaul. Even if you can get that 100, 200, 300Mbps+ connection to the node, what connects this wireless node to the root node?

The node to node is the weakest link. I think you summed it up perfectly in this paragraph here:

As I was telling a neighbor just yesterday, Wi-Fi Systems can provide the illusion of better performance, because their multiple access points will show nice, strong signals where there were previously dead spots. But your Wi-Fi devices can reap the benefit of the stronger signal, only if the mesh node / AP providing that signal has the bandwidth all the way back to the point you want to connect to, whether it's the internet or another LAN device.

In lieu earlier, I'd been using the single-nodes compared to single routers in Revision 9 (which are listed on the same page, so presumably the same tests?) and then trying to extrapolate taking backhaul into account.