What's new

Wireless router questions (neighboring 2.4/5GHz routers, switch)

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

aoeusnth

New Around Here
Hi,

Got a couple of hopefully easy questions about radio interference and internal switches:

1. If I use something like a Linksys WRT320N as a 802.11n router in 5Ghz, can I put my old 802.11g router (acting as an AP) right next to it without causing interference? I know it is recommended to separate two wireless router/APs by >10 ft if they are both using 2.4Ghz, even if one is N and the other is G, but what if one is using 5Ghz and the other 2.4GHz?

2. As far as transferring data to and from a NAS, is there any difference between using the internal switch of a Linksys WRT320N or something like a Netgear GS108 hooked up to a Linksys WRT400N, assuming of course the PC and NAS are both wired to the switch and no jumbo frames are being used? I chose this particular combination since that is what the review for the WRT320N actually recommends as a better alternative.

Best,
KJ
 
1. If I use something like a Linksys WRT320N as a 802.11n router in 5Ghz, can I put my old 802.11g router (acting as an AP) right next to it without causing interference? I know it is recommended to separate two wireless router/APs by >10 ft if they are both using 2.4Ghz, even if one is N and the other is G, but what if one is using 5Ghz and the other 2.4GHz?
You're probably ok in this case. But if you experience problems (erratic / slow throughput), separate them or reduce transmit power of one of them.

2. As far as transferring data to and from a NAS, is there any difference between using the internal switch of a Linksys WRT320N or something like a Netgear GS108 hooked up to a Linksys WRT400N, assuming of course the PC and NAS are both wired to the switch and no jumbo frames are being used? I chose this particular combination since that is what the review for the WRT320N actually recommends as a better alternative.
No difference. Data flows directly port to port. The only time that the 100 Mbps uplink port comes into play is if traffic is flowing through it.
 
Uh ... huh?

2. As far as transferring data to and from a NAS, is there any difference between using the internal switch of a Linksys WRT320N or something like a Netgear GS108 hooked up to a Linksys WRT400N, assuming of course the PC and NAS are both wired to the switch and no jumbo frames are being used?

I afraid I really didn't understand what you were asking here. I'm still not sure even after reading Tim's response.

If I read correctly, the WRT320N supports gigabit ethernet on all of its ports so as far as wired ethernet throughput goes it should be approximately equivalent to the Netgear GS108 8-port switch. The primary difference would be the number of ports not the throughput, no?

I chose this particular combination since that is what the review for the WRT320N actually recommends as a better alternative.

Out of curiosity, what review were you referring to?

-irrational john
 
If I read correctly, the WRT320N supports gigabit ethernet on all of its ports so as far as wired ethernet throughput goes it should be approximately equivalent to the Netgear GS108 8-port switch. The primary difference would be the number of ports not the throughput, no?

Yes, and my apologies for not wording it as efficiently as possible. I was simply wondering if a dedicated switch (without jumbo frames) would be any faster than the built-in gigabit switch in the WRT320N, assuming both the PC and NAS were wired into the switches. The answer, as I suspected, is no.

Out of curiosity, what review were you referring to?

The one, the review for the Linksys WRT320N where it was suggested that purchasing the WRT400N for simultaneous dual-band radio together with a separate gigabit switch was more sensible than purchasing a WRT320N. The reason I went with a WRT320N was that the 40MHz 5GHz performance was better than the WRT400N in any mode, especially considering I only need to run the wireless signal to the equivalent of the "B" or "C" locations, using the Open Air test terminology here.

As has been repeatedly recommended by Tim and many others here, I carefully managed my expectations and targeted my specific requirements, which led me to the single WRT320N instead of the WRT400N + gigabit switch combo. However since I will eventually want to use jumbo frames I started thinking about a separate gigabit switch, which made me doubt the wireless compromises inherent with the WRT320N, which got me thinking about the WRT400N ... and then I realized by the time I needed the ~20% improvement due to jumbo frames, 802.11n would long since have been ratified and I would probably be looking at a whole new set of wireless products anyway!

So it goes ....
 

Latest threads

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top