What is your 1Gbit AX 5Ghz 2x2 80Mhz Speeds?

[ViPPaH]

My 7577 on HT80 if I recall got around 600-640 Mbps sustained on both the RAX80 and 120. Closer to 600 Most of the time. The RAX120 is slightly faster in most cases on HT80 especially more so on HT160.

Here's an old post of mine from when I upgraded to the AX200, it has the RAX120 and RAX80, granted the RAX120's HT160 results showed much higher upload than download at the time due to a SMB optimization issue in the firmware when using USB drives:
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/intel-ax200-netgear-rax80-rax120-test-results.56389/

Thanks for your input! I found your post a few days ago, one of the reasons I joined this forum
It seems as if the AX200 card is quite slow when compared to AX Wifi chip of Samsung and iPhone. They use a broadcom chip if I remember correctly.

 

[avtella]

Thing is, you can’t necessarily compare my results to your results that well due to differing testing environments and distances/obstacles. I’d have to compare the Dell to the iPhone 11 Pro Max performance in my own testing. A few iPerf tests right now are showing 640-655 Mbps on my Pro Max, I would expect actual SMB transfers to be lower and less than the AX200 but I don’t know any iOS file transfer apps.

I haven’t checked my AX200 results since maybe 1-2 months after those test charts, I can retest SMB transfers today and see if newer drivers/firmwares had any impact. Probably will also check iPerf.

 

[L&LD]

Thanks for your input! I found your post a few days ago, one of the reasons I joined this forum
It seems as if the AX200 card is quite slow when compared to AX Wifi chip of Samsung and iPhone. They use a broadcom chip if I remember correctly.

https://www.snbforums.com/threads/b...ta-is-now-available.60037/page-31#post-531024

When I tested the RT-AX88U originally, the AX201 cards (which require a specific CPU/chipset) were faster.

Since then, I don't have the AX201 card equipped computer anymore so I can't compare directly, but the drivers have been updated for the AX200 card and show a nice improvement in both range and throughput. No numbers to offer you of those differences (because the computer I have today with the AX200 card is different from the one I had back then), but it is easily observed just using the AX200 equipped computer vs. any N or AC equipped computer side by side.

The AX201 card is not usually a user-replaceable option for existing computers.

The AX200 card is.

And of the upgradeable WiFi cards available it is easily the fastest option.

HTH.

 

[avtella]

Out of curiosity, did you test the AX200 and 201 in the same laptop, because the same card can perform differently and even range wise in various laptops due to antenna positioning and layout across models. My three Dells; the 7577 , XPS13 9350 and Latitude 7450, (All three have AX200) have varying results with the 7577 being the best and the 7450 being the worst. I would expect the AX200 and 201 to be similar as everything is pretty much the same except the location of the WiFi chipset.

 

[L&LD]

No, not possible to test AX200 and AX201 in the same laptop (it would be one or the other) as far as I know.

Agreed that the laptop model tested makes a difference. The AX201 was a Surface Pro 7 and the AX200 cards were tested in different year/model workstation Thinkpads. (I would expect the Thinkpads to have similar antennae and RF characteristics).

I feel the AX201 was faster because it is a CRF module that is meant to be integrated with the companion CNVi that is part of select CPUs in the PCH (Platform Controller Hub) and can benefit from the fast CPU too.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...6155/network-and-i-o/wireless-networking.html

HTH.

 

[avtella]

Actually you can switch from the 201 to the 200. Some laptops yes do have issues with that probably due to the bios being set to use cNVI or the slot only designed for use with that type of card, but have heard of people switching from 9560AC (cNVI) to AX200.

If I recall cnvi was more about reducing costs and simplification looking at Intel’s old slides on Anandtech. Performance wouldn’t be different looking at the way things are done from what I interpreted. WiFi and Bluetooth go over one cNVI link rather than PCIE for WiFi and Bluetooth over USB link respectively on the standalone cards. Of course cnvi uses the WiFi chipset in the CPU but I doubt it’s any different than what’s on the standalone card. I’m sure @sfx2000 or someone with a bit more technical knowledge than a novice like me could give their opinions. If you’re right L&LD I owe you a virtual beer .

 

[L&LD]

@avtella not doubting you, but are you sure it was to an AX200 and not an AX201?

I remember that Anandtech story also. I would think that the CNVi link could be programmable and updatable vs. any hardware-based solution which would require a new card to implement?

Maybe I should buy you a virtual beer now and you could owe me two if (not when!) I'm proved right.

 

[avtella]

Pretty sure AX200 for the person who came from a 9560AC because the 8th gen Core CPUs don’t have the AX chipset, only AC built in so I doubt the AX201 would work.


Here’s one example of going from a stand-alone card to CNVio, a person switched from a QCA card to the 9560ac, 10th post:
https://www.dell.com/community/Inspiron/5584-m-2-slot-for-Wifi-PCIE-or-CNVio/td-p/7363808

Copy and paste of it:
“I installed the 9560 card and it works flawlessly. This means that the Inspiron 5584 with the gen 8 i5-8265 processor is CNVio capable. Again, I wish Dell would make this clear in the literature for the laptop.”