New Router...How to Choose a New Client?

[Bulldog]

I'm planning to upgrade my router, but this question is about the client:

Long ago...about three years (lol)...the rule of thumb was to match your router with a complementary client from the same manufacturer. Is that still the case today?

If not, I would appreciate some tips on choosing a new client for a desktop PC (Win7). Obviously, the client has to match the router's basic capabilities, e.g., single/dual band, 2/3 stream, etc. Beyond that, how do you choose?

 

[vwgtiron]

intel

I would have to tell you for a fact that you cannot go wrong with Intel on this one. They are just head and shoulders above the crowd.

 

[stevech]

I'm planning to upgrade my router, but this question is about the client:

Long ago...about three years (lol)...the rule of thumb was to match your router with a complementary client from the same manufacturer. Is that still the case today?

If not, I would appreciate some tips on choosing a new client for a desktop PC (Win7). Obviously, the client has to match the router's basic capabilities, e.g., single/dual band, 2/3 stream, etc. Beyond that, how do you choose?

The desktop cannot connect to the router by cat5 cable? Just too hard?
How far from desktop to WiFi router and is the latter centralized and elevated?

Then... I recommend a USB WiFi adapter for the desktop, rather than an internal card. Due to antenna location if using internal. USB with a 6' cable, elevate the USB adapter, etc. Despite small antenna, it'll do well.

Better than a USB adapter: Ethernet to WiFi bridge, with Ethernet connected to desktop PC's ethernet port. These are sometimes called Game Adapters (to make an XBox WiFi). Many such products can be configured as either a bridge or access point (AP) - you want bridge mode.

As to brand/model: hmm, I'd trust the average rating seen on Newegg.com for such products. I have a Buffalo Tech bridge with built-in 4 port switch - it's 11g not 11n, but worked well for a long time.
Here's a newer version
http://www.walmart.com/ip/Buffalo-T...rter-Access-Point-Bridge-WLAE-AG300N/15084821
May be an overkill as its dual-band and you may need only 2.4GHz.

I'd try to spend $50 or less.

 

[thiggins]

It's no longer practical or necessary to match chipset manufacturers in router and client.

Steve's advice is pretty much spot on.

 

[Bulldog]

I appreciate everyone's help, although I would hesitate before criticizing someone's choice to go wireless.

Why is a wireless-to-Ethernet bridge superior to a USB adapter? An adapter is less conspicuous, while the bridge requires another wire going into the computer plus a power cord.

 

[rhombus]

I think the rule of thumb was to match chipset manufacturer rather than the device manufacturer or brand, for reasons of interoperability and performance. Like-for-like, this might still make sense today - but with a mature standard, it's not by any means crucial, unless you want to satisfy the neatness and OCD in you.

You don't have to match the router capabilities: what if you're planning to use just 2.4Ghz to the desktop anyway, or what if a 2-stream adapter outperforms a different 3-stream adapter, or what if you have other preferences and criteria.

There are no magic hints or exceptional devices, but there are generalisations. The recommendation for USB was given on the proviso that it would be connected by a USB cable - allowing flexibility in positioning that an internal adapter can't offer. A wireless client bridge has the theoretical potential of superior design and performance due to a larger size and therefore antenna/circuit layout etc, and its own power supply. A device with external antennas might offer superior performance still if you use high-gain antennas, but things are getting more conspicuous and tricky to find and configure. I think an internal adapter might do just great also, as would plugging a USB direct. The only real way is to try them out and see for yourself, lol.

 

[Bulldog]

Thanks again for everyone's advice. I always know I'll get the real deal in these forums.