Range: G vs N vs AC?

[RogerSC]

I always thought N meant 5Ghz, and B/G meant 2.4Ghz
What is 2.4Ghz N, and what are it's benefits?

Wireless-g only goes up to 54Mbps, wireless-n can go up to 450Mbps. I have a USB wireless-n adapter for my laptop that always connects at 450Mbps on 2.4GHz. or 5GHz. Actual throughput is another question, though *smile*, but wireless-n clients can clearly go much faster than wireless-g clients on 2.4GHz.

To take "full" advantage of wireless-n, though, you need a 3-stream adapter. The rule of thumb is about 150Mbps for each stream. So even single-stream wireless-n is much faster (about 3 times) than wireless-g. My laptop has a built-in single-stream wireless-n adapter, so it connects to the wireless on the router at a maximum connect speed of 144Mbps. That's why I added the 3-stream USB wireless-n adapter to it.

 

[RMerlin]

I always thought N meant 5Ghz, and B/G meant 2.4Ghz
What is 2.4Ghz N, and what are it's benefits?

I think you are mixing a lot of basic concepts here.

2.4 GHz and 5 GHz are the frequencies used by the radios.

2.4 GHz has a longer range but is more interference-prone, and supports b, g and n.
5 GHz has a shorter range but less interference, and supports a, g, n and ac.

 

[L&LD]

If you haven't read the latest article by Tim, it is worth a read.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...oes-an-ac-router-improve-n-device-performance


Make sure you also see the discussion about the article too.

http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=19533


My take is that the newest AC class router will give you better performance than any G class router is capable of. Even with non-AC class clients as the article shows.

And by performance, I mean actual throughput.

For the question of range, that varies so much depending on the local environmental factors that you simply have to buy and try to see if the newest routers will do anything for you, specifically.


My customers from almost two years ago (when I discovered Asus and RMerlin enhanced routers) were initially skeptical about the performance increase they would achieve with the then new RT-AC66U. After installation and setup though, the increased performance, stability and capabilities of their new router made them believers too.


The theoretical is interesting to debate, but the practical is almost always another thing altogether. As Tim found out too.

 

[wuyanxu]

Isn't WRT110 only 1x1 router?

I upgraded from WRT320N to AC68u, I believe that's a 2x2 to 3x3.

I had patchy 2.4GHz N coverage in my study before, after the upgrade, even 5 GHz AC coverage was getting full bars. Even my iphone 4s can get a signal in the driveway, which has a lot of walls and pipework. With this upgrade, I get full bar coverage from my router throughout the house, 5GHz AC for most locations.


Having said that, I'd still wire up your house as first thing to do. It's not hard to do and those flat ethernet cables are very easy to hide under the carpet. Personally I'd only use wireless if the client must be wireless (eg. phones, tablets and laptops designed for portability)

 

[htismaqe]

If you haven't read the latest article by Tim, it is worth a read.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...oes-an-ac-router-improve-n-device-performance


Make sure you also see the discussion about the article too.

http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=19533


My take is that the newest AC class router will give you better performance than any G class router is capable of. Even with non-AC class clients as the article shows.

And by performance, I mean actual throughput.

For the question of range, that varies so much depending on the local environmental factors that you simply have to buy and try to see if the newest routers will do anything for you, specifically.


My customers from almost two years ago (when I discovered Asus and RMerlin enhanced routers) were initially skeptical about the performance increase they would achieve with the then new RT-AC66U. After installation and setup though, the increased performance, stability and capabilities of their new router made them believers too.


The theoretical is interesting to debate, but the practical is almost always another thing altogether. As Tim found out too.

Totally agree. After using 4 AC1900 routers, I can say they were all significantly more powerful with throughput over distance/range than anything I had used before. Some of them more powerful than others but all of them more powerful than any N router I had ever used.

 

[azazel1024]

And that is also sort of the point too. My experiences are a little different that I seem to have a little better actual range with 11n over 11g and 11ac over 11n. Ignoring that though, even if range isn't extended at all, if you can get some kind of signal there now, even if it is a REALLY bad signal, moving up a generation (or two) is going to turn that really bad, can't really do anything with it signal, in to (most likely, but no guarantees) a usable signal.

Previously with 5GHz I could see it and not connect to it with my 11n router, with 11ac, I can both connect to it and get 3MB/sec or so (slow, but usable). Where I was getting ~2MB/sec on 2.4GHz, I can now get close to 4MB/sec on 2.4GHz by moving from 11n to 11ac. Odds are excellent that if I was on 11g, we'd be talking hundreds of Kilobytes per second, not several Megabytes per second.

It changes the whole picture of what a usable wireless connection is.

 

[newjockey]

A bit more detail on my setup: this is a 2 story (with basement) early-1900's Victorian style home with all wood floors and 6" floor mouldings. I'm not skilled or patient enough to wire through walls or ceilings. I considered wiring discretely along floor mouldings, but I'd basically need over 100 feet of cable to get from the router (1st floor hallway) upstairs to master bedroom. It's only about 20 feet away as the crow flies, but as I mentioned in my first post, there is a radiator and chimney in that line of sight which really drops the signal.

A colleague loaned me a Trendnet powerline adapter kit to test. He said if I liked it, he'd sell it to me for $25. I've got it set up and working now. I'm currently still testing, but out of the box, it's working with zero configuration at about 10-12 Mbps on a WAP54G access point (another old freebie). This is considerably better than the <5 Mbps I was getting previously, and has the advantage of a strong signal, so we still have a reliable connection when we shut the heavy wood door.

The main router is a WRT54GL. I have the wireless disabled on it. Downstairs wireless is handled by a WRT110 configured as an access point (sitting right next to the router). On a 50 Mbps connection the WRT110 tops out at about 42 Mbps, and averages in the low-to-mid 30's. My wired machines top out at 40-45 Mbps. I've seen 50 Mbps in the early hours of the morning when neighborhood bandwidth is low, so I know I'm probably not losing much bandwidth from the (admittedly old) hardware.

My understanding is that older G wireless speeds are limited to about 22 Mbps, and that a bridged AP will lose about 50% bandwidth (check me if I'm wrong). This more or less correlates to the 10-12 Mbps I'm getting on the powerlined G AP upstairs.

 

[ChristineBCW]

I suppose we'll always be saying this but, "Lucky you! You're facing a new generation of technology - just in time for you!"

The Powerline (or sometimes called "HomePlug") units moved from 100 to 200 after several years. And from 200 to 500 a couple of years ago. Now, we're seeing the successors to "500's" arrive. These are in the $70-120 range now.

These might double or triple your current file-transfer rates (and maybe you'll 'feel it' with web-page loading as well). But they will continue to enjoy that one great benefit:

"They work or they don't - no fiddling needed."

In this forum, there's the MoCA, HomePlug & HPNA sub-forum. MoCA is the networking that uses older TV-Coax for networking and HPNA is using the same but with Digital TV setups, and is targeting Networking AND Voice-over-Internet-Phone services (VoiP), too. When I want to get educated, I pour over some of those threads and find a whole new world of home-networking. Now if only Hubby would let me have some fun-! Hrumph!!

If you ever have electrical outlets 're-done', those electricians may be happy enough to do 'easy cable pulls' between floors, at least.

 

[fistv]

If you ever have electrical outlets 're-done', those electricians may be happy enough to do 'easy cable pulls' between floors, at least.

Yup, ran into a guy at the hardware store on Sat, Ended up at a coffee shop next door for almost 2 hours with paper and pencil laying out what where and why for the big old farmhouse he and his wife are rehabbing and I got a free coffee and bagel.

 

[newjockey]

My understanding is that older G wireless speeds are limited to about 22 Mbps, and that a bridged AP will lose about 50% bandwidth (check me if I'm wrong). This more or less correlates to the 10-12 Mbps I'm getting on the powerlined G AP upstairs.

I was wrong about the 50% drop. Further testing has shown that I can get up to 21 Mbps from the AP. I ran multiple bandwidth tests from both testmy.net and speedtest.net to multiple servers and at different times of day and did find some combination that maxed out my download speeds on the G-rated access point. So the powerline setup is not doing any bottlenecking either!

I did test a few different outlets with similar results, so I'm pleased with the results.

 

[htismaqe]

I was wrong about the 50% drop. Further testing has shown that I can get up to 21 Mbps from the AP. I ran multiple bandwidth tests from both testmy.net and speedtest.net to multiple servers and at different times of day and did find some combination that maxed out my download speeds on the G-rated access point. So the powerline setup is not doing any bottlenecking either!

I did test a few different outlets with similar results, so I'm pleased with the results.

A bridged AP using a wired uplink will not lose half of its throughput.

A bridged AP with dual radios, using one for the AP and one for the uplink, will not lose half of its throughput.

A repeater or bridged AP with a single radio being used for both clients and the uplink will lose half of its throughput.

 

[azazel1024]

Though if the AP is on the same channel as the router, there will be a performance impact if there is a device talking to the router and a device talking to the AP at the same time. This is why it is suggested that an access point and a router are set to seperate, non-overlapping channels.

 

[Just Checking]

I also have victorian buildings that I am very reluctant to modify. If you have Picture rail, or crown molding, you can run the CAT 5 (I recommend just going to CAT6E if you are doing it) in the picture rail channel or inside/by the Crown Molding. The cables come in different colors so you can try to get something that matches, or at least is less obtrusive.

You might also try purchasing some High Gain Antennas to put on your router. Something like this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/251133737325?_trksid=p2060778.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

The cost is very low for your tight budget and the large antenna size also increases the S/N ratio on both the Uplink and Downlink sides. You have to wait a while to get the antennas from OUS but there are other vendors that would provide them more quickly. The very large antennas look weird but, in this case, size does matter. For under US$10 you should be able to improve the range and signal quality of your existing router on the 2.4GHz frequency.

If you can run a ethernet cable from your primary router to another one that you have set up as an AP which is closer to the dead spot, you will also significantly increase your range without the reduced throughput if you were just doing it all wireless.

The other alternative is to use PLA's (Power Line Adapters). I normally would not recommend them because of their low actual throughput (for me). If you are happy with your present G router, a decent PLA should be more than sufficient for you. You can readily pick up a kit (2 adapters) for around US$20 on Newegg.com when they are on sale. Since they plug into existing power outlets, you don't have to string any cable or spend the money on an expensive router which may, or may not, meet your needs.

 

[Stomper]

Why not use powerline networking? It use the wire you already have in your house, you can plug a wireless AP on it and at 500mbps it's more than enough for a house.

my 2¢.