The effect of wireless hops

[Elisha]

I understand the effects of wireless hops and how if cuts the theoretical bandwidth which in turn the actual available throughput when using a router and extender scenario as well as Mesh setups that don't have a dedicated wireless backhaul!
Is there a chart or resource out there that breaks it down into percentage or hard numbers?

I have a 250/20Mbps service and can consistently get ~330/22Mbps wired and wireless on my main OnHub point. When connected to the secondary ones, I max out at ~215/22 on a 2x2 iPhone 7 Plus and a 3x3 Macbook Pro.
I even moved one of my OnHub point further away so it had to communicate to the other Mesh point instead of the main point and the speed connected to it dropped even more. I don't remember now but I believe I could not exceed ~100Mbps.

In reality the wireless hops only effects those with higher speed service since when I was on a lower 100/10Mbps package, the Speedtest results were the same nomatter which Mesh point I was connected to.
Google is smart that on their built in speedtest in their Google WiFi app, they don't report more than 200Mbps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[degrub]

I understand the effects of wireless hops and how if cuts the theoretical bandwidth which in turn the actual available throughput when using a router and extender scenario as well as Mesh setups that don't have a dedicated wireless backhaul!
Is there a chart or resource out there that breaks it down into percentage or hard numbers?

I have a 250/20Mbps service and can consistently get ~330/22Mbps wired and wireless on my main OnHub point. When connected to the secondary ones, I max out at ~215/22 on a 2x2 iPhone 7 Plus and a 3x3 Macbook Pro.
I even moved one of my OnHub point further away so it had to communicate to the other Mesh point instead of the main point and the speed connected to it dropped even more. I don't remember now but I believe I could not exceed ~100Mbps.

In reality the wireless hops only effects those with higher speed service since when I was on a lower 100/10Mbps package, the Speedtest results were the same nomatter which Mesh point I was connected to.
Google is smart that on their built in speedtest in their Google WiFi app, they don't report more than 200Mbps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

divide by 2 for each paired use of a radio that is simultaneous.

 

[Elisha]

divide by 2 for each paired use of a radio that is simultaneous.

That would be the simplistic way of looking at it but that not exactly my experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[abailey]

It gets complicated. It is roughly 1/2 the max throughput. It gets more complicated if the link between the end device and the first AP is a different speed from the link between the first AP and second AP. Anyway it is roughly 1/2. But this is 1/2 the actual throughput. For example my laptop is 5ghz wireless N with a max throughput of 130Mb/s from my chair (though link speed is 300Mb/s). Anyway if I was going through a repeater (or second wireless hop) then the max throughput would be 65Mb/s. So if my internet speed maxed out at 50Mb/s I would not see any speed difference when downloading from the internet. So to see how much someone would be affected (as far as internet speed), you would have to find their max throughput on their wireless (like using iPerf) and divide that by two and see how that speed compares to their internet speed. If it is higher than their internet speed, they won't see much loss in speed from a repeater (they will gain a little latency). This assumes a decent link between the two wireless hops. This also assumes the AP your device is talking two uses the same radio to communicate with your device and the second AP. Some mesh systems use a dedicated radio for backhaul between AP's so you don't suffer the 1/2 throughput cut.

 

[pete y testing]

Is there a chart or resource out there that breaks it down into percentage or hard numbers?

its not really quantifiable as to be able to show hard figures as there are many variables to consider but placement is the key as to avoid multi hop wifi , in most homes i can see the need for any device to be more than 2 hops ways , eg router + i sat or extender , the issue arises where the third hop is included but unless you live in a mansion i cant see the need for this unless you cant locate the router in a central area

In reality the wireless hops only effects those with higher speed service since when I was on a lower 100/10Mbps package

correct and just like wan to lan throughput only effects those on very high plan speeds it isnt really a concern for most , at some point the technology just cant keep up with the expectations

 

[Elisha]

It gets complicated. It is roughly 1/2 the max throughput. It gets more complicated if the link between the end device and the first AP is a different speed from the link between the first AP and second AP. Anyway it is roughly 1/2. But this is 1/2 the actual throughput. For example my laptop is 5ghz wireless N with a max throughput of 130Mb/s from my chair (though link speed is 300Mb/s). Anyway if I was going through a repeater (or second wireless hop) then the max throughput would be 65Mb/s. So if my internet speed maxed out at 50Mb/s I would not see any speed difference when downloading from the internet. So to see how much someone would be affected (as far as internet speed), you would have to find their max throughput on their wireless (like using iPerf) and divide that by two and see how that speed compares to their internet speed. If it is higher than their internet speed, they won't see much loss in speed from a repeater (they will gain a little latency). This assumes a decent link between the two wireless hops. This also assumes the AP your device is talking two uses the same radio to communicate with your device and the second AP. Some mesh systems use a dedicated radio for backhaul between AP's so you don't suffer the 1/2 throughput cut.

Yeah that all makes sense to me as that is what I understood from wireless hops.
So based on my throughput of ~215Mbps from a Mesh point, theoretically if my ISP speed was higher, I should be getting around ~430Mbps which is pretty much the speed of a single stream AC radio which is 433Mbps.
This calculation or assumption is pretty clear.
However what happens if your ISP speed is let's say 500Mbps and now needs two antennas for the max speed. 433Mbps + 66Mbps.
Theoretically it should be 250Mbps on the Mesh point but is that the case in real life?
And what if on the Mesh point, it connects to the client with 2.4Ghz will full signal strength? Now the 3x3 radio on the OnHub delivers 600Mbps on 2.4Ghz. Would the client be able to manage 200Mbps + 50Mbps or 150Mbps + 100Mbps on the receiving end?

Thanks for all the help guys!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Klueless]

I looked at similar and fooled myself several times.

First off I agree with "divide by two". The wireless extender is busy while the client is talking to it. Then the wireless extender is busy / unavailable to the client while it passes the info to the router ... thus "divide by two".

Since the up-link/down-link to the Internet is often the "pinch point" it may take a couple "divide by two's" before one would see a degradation. Because connections are often asymmetric (down-links being much faster than up-links) you're likely to see a degradation on the down-link before you see one on the up-link.

So to truly benchmark you will need to put a PC on one of your Router's Ethernet ports and benchmark speeds to that. Even then you will not see an exact "divide by two" because when you add a wireless extender you will have changed something ... most likely for the better.

Your device is likely talking to the close-by wireless range extender faster than it was talking to the more distant wireless router. Or another "barely in range" device was pulling down everyones' connection speeds but if it's now in "acceptable range" of the wireless extender everyone will see some benefit.

In any case you're beginning to understand why so many recommend wired access points or, as the OP mentioned, a dedicated back-haul. Netgear offers several several wireless range extenders that allow you to dedicate 2.4 GHz as a back-haul to the wireless router and 5 GHz for the clients (or vice-versa). Linksys also offers some and they are dynamic (they look at what the client connects at and use the other band to talk to the router). This could also be another reason for using a tri-band router, 2.4 and 5 GHz for clients and the 3rd band as a back-haul to the wireless range extenders.

 

[System Error Message]

this is why additional radios are useful i.e. 5Ghz for clients, 2.4Ghz for link or vice versa or having inexpensive APs as dedicated links. These options arent used much when they should be. Dedicated radio bridging improves wifi performance a lot and its even better when used with directional antennas as wifi range is always a problem and theres a limit to the tx power by law. This is why mini PCIe is very helpful. Very few routers have mini PCIe and mikrotik are one of the cheapest ones that have both onboard wifi and mini PCIe allowing for multiple radios and use with different antennas, directional for bridging and omni for the radio that distributes wifi. RouterOS also allows for bonding multiple links even over wifi, this means that same radio chip used for bridging would have both 5Ghz and 2.4Ghz, using both at the same time for extra bandwidth. Its not easy to set it up however and most homes prefer the easiness of just placing a repeater rather than proper wifi backbone and distribution.

 

[sfx2000]

I understand the effects of wireless hops and how if cuts the theoretical bandwidth which in turn the actual available throughput when using a router and extender scenario as well as Mesh setups that don't have a dedicated wireless backhaul!
Is there a chart or resource out there that breaks it down into percentage or hard numbers?

I have a 250/20Mbps service and can consistently get ~330/22Mbps wired and wireless on my main OnHub point. When connected to the secondary ones, I max out at ~215/22 on a 2x2 iPhone 7 Plus and a 3x3 Macbook Pro.
I even moved one of my OnHub point further away so it had to communicate to the other Mesh point instead of the main point and the speed connected to it dropped even more. I don't remember now but I believe I could not exceed ~100Mbps.

MESH is different than Repeaters - hard to explain in layman's terms, but consider that it does work very well... which you have found out directly...

Much if it has to do with multiple radios - which OnHub and most of the other MESH players have, vs a single Radio Repeater - the repeater does have to listen, wait, transmit - in both directions...

Repeaters are not MESH, and MESH is not repeaters...

 

[Klueless]

Repeaters are not MESH, and MESH is not repeaters ... the repeater does have to listen, wait, transmit - in both directions...

You are correct but consider:

• Many repeaters now support both 2.4 and 5 GHz.
• At least some can be configured to use one band for clients and the other band for the back-haul to the wireless router. (This mitigates the "divide performance by two" rule.)

If your house is small enough where you don't need the typical three (plus) node mesh network for $350 (plus) and you already have a router then adding a "properly" configured range extender for about fifty bucks can give you a very affordable genuine make-believe mini-mesh ...