pdp76
join:2004-06-24
| reply to No_Strings
Re: Should I buy an "N" router?
My G router is starting to get flaky, I think it's time to get a new one. Just like many others, I only have G clients, namely: 2x laptops, 1x "bridge" (buffalo ethernet client), PS3, Wii, and iPod touch.
Obviously I'm not going to get N speeds on any individual client (duh...) but what I'm wondering is if the N bandwidth will be shared across all G clients.
For example, G only gets a max of 20Mbps in practice, so if I had 2 G clients connected to the same G router running full speed, I'd theoretically get somewhere around 10Mbps to each client. I know it's not this simple, but just for discussions sake...
Now N has a max of around 80Mbps in practice... would I theoretically be able to achieve more than 10Mbps per G client if I had 2 or more G clients connected? If the answer is yes but dependent on which N router, could anyone give any suggestions on which router?
To sum up, I'm just wondering if it's worth it to get an N router from this point of view. I don't think I'll be getting any N clients anytime soon, but if an N router can improve the aggregate throughput of all my G clients, I'd be willing to consider one. Thanks! |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| The theoretical maximum wireless throughput will be limited by your G clients. An N router will not change that - LAN to LAN or LAN to WAN.
The ability of the router to handle multiple heavy-use clients is based on the router's RAM, CPU and firmware and bottlenecked by your Internet connection speed.
Given your circumstances, the only advantages to buying N might be gigabit Ethernet ports and ability to upgrade the clients later. By that time, though, routers will probably be cheaper and have more features if history is any guide. |
|
pdp76
join:2004-06-24
1 edit | I'm not really concerned about wired speeds so the broadband internet connection is not a factor. I also understand the max throughput to a single G client will be dictated by the fact it's G, so that doesn't answer my question either. I'm mainly concerned about the throughput to/from multiple wireless G clients simultaneously on the local LAN/WLAN.
You mention that throughput to multiple clients it is most likely hardware dependent, which I alluded to as well in my original post. So to rephrase my question, is 802.11n technology able to "distribute" its practical max of 80Mbps or so evenly across multiple G clients (i.e. 20Mbps or so to 4x G clients simultaneously), or is that aspect completely hardware dependent? If it is completely hardware dependent, which N routers out there do this the best? Are we entering the realm of MIMO here?
The bare minimum I'd like to see is streaming from one wireless G client to another wireless client G, through the N router, with roughly 15Mbps throughput. |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| I'll try it a different way:
Adding an N router will not let you stream any faster between G clients. Its theoretical maximum throughput - 80 or 108 or 300mbps or whatever it's rated for - has no impact on its global throughput ability. That's all hardware.
Some routers give you the ability to limit bandwidth to some clients to prevent them from starving the connection or allow you to give priority to some clients, but that's a whole different conversation. |
|
pdp76
join:2004-06-24
2 edits | So are you saying that if I'm, for example getting 3Mbps when I'm simultaneously transferring between 2 wireless G clients through my current G router,I will also see 3Mbps when I do the same transfer with the same G clients through an N router?
edit: This is what I'm referring to "Adding an N router will not let you stream any faster between G clients" |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| Yes, that's what I'm saying.
If the hardware (CPU/RAM) of the G router is a bottleneck - that is, it can't process the bits quickly enough and the N router has more internal horsepower, then it's conceivable that you could see improvement.
If the radio on the G router were so crappy or degraded that it was slowing things down due to retransmitted packets, then it's again conceivable that a new router could help.
In neither of those cases would the N spec in and of itself help. A more robust G router would produce the same results. |
|
ccbadd
join:2005-07-03
Corpus Christi, TX
| said by No_Strings  :Yes, that's what I'm saying. If the hardware (CPU/RAM) of the G router is a bottleneck - that is, it can't process the bits quickly enough and the N router has more internal horsepower, then it's conceivable that you could see improvement. ... In neither of those cases would the N spec in and of itself help. A more robust G router would produce the same results. This is not true. Draft N 2.0 with two or more antennas create spacial zones with full G speeds. Look at it like two to four g routers back to back covering a 90 degree zone to fill all 360 degrees. Each zone can send and receive concurrently with the other zones with no radio impact. It's kind of like the move from hub's to switches with copper. So, if the clients are connecting to different zones, they are not sharing airtime, therefore, performance IS increased. The amount of increase will depend on the specs of the router, but most Draft N will perform much better then a G router. |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC | That's good info. Do you have any links to objective tests? Specific models you recommend? We can put them in the FAQ for reference. |
|
ccbadd
join:2005-07-03
Corpus Christi, TX
1 edit | I don't have any test data to link to just some protocol info:
»zone.ni.com/devzone/cda/tut/p/id/7131#toc0
Here is a quote from the link that references the feature:
"The transmitting WLAN device actually splits a data stream into multiple parts, called spatial streams, and transmits each spatial stream through separate antennas to corresponding antennas on the receiving end. The current 802.11n draft provides for up to four spatial streams, even though compliant hardware is not required to support that many." |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| Ah, MIMO. I thought you were talking about something else entirely - something unique to certain routers or specifically to N.
Personally, if inter-node throughput was a big priority, I'd check Small Net Builder or Tom's Hardware to see how the unit performed before buying. |
|
ccotton
join:2009-03-07
Alameda, CA | reply to No_Strings
FYI- 802.11n is still under draft development but WiFi Certified draft products are being sold. 802.11n is still being ratified. |
|
tipstir
join:2004-11-14
Enfield, CT
 ·Cox HSI
| reply to No_Strings
Today I am off site at friends house using his wireless WRN-854T wireless N, been a a few hours still connected no drops in N.
Speed: TX: 150 Mbps / Rx:300 Mbps
Signal Strength: 80%
Link Quality: 100%
I use N at home about 98% is wireless N. Here with him 0% he's still running G even though he also has Linksys WRT-310N I just had installed the updated DD-WRT onto it. Going to use that as wireless drop or Hotspot. With my own N laptop I've been testing out some of his gear to see how well it performs are not. I ran some speedtest from my own..
Tested usng Wireless N
 |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC | That shows the speed of his ISP - irrelevant. Do some peer transfers and measure with Q-Check or some other throughput utility. |
|
tipstir
join:2004-11-14
Enfield, CT
·Cox HSI
1 edit | Well our ISP is the same so the UP speed is now more that what is offered. Another time would be to test as I am back on home base now. I was just accessing wireless he runs a Active Directory 2003 domain in the house. Soon after typing the above he lost the internet but the ISP was at fault this time.. |
|
tipstir
join:2004-11-14
Enfield, CT
·Cox HSI
1 edit | reply to No_Strings
So yes Wireless N router can be used either G/N or just plain wired only..
G/N-WLAN/WWAN LAN/WAN 10/100/1000 Ports
1. DIR-655 A3/1.22B05 firmware
2. DIR-655 A4/1.22B05 firmware
3. WRT-310N (used with dd-wrt v24/sp2/11650 firmware)
4. WNR-854T
G/N-WLAN/WWAN LAN/WAN 10/100 Ports
3. TEW-652BP v1.01 (used with dir-615 c1/3.01 modded firmware)
4. WNR-834Bv2 (used with dd-wrt v24/sp2/11650 firmware)
Notes:
DD-WRT
WRT-310N and WNR-834Bv2 needs special firmware to first be installed. WNR-834Bv2 needs 11650mini.ck flashed first then 11650std.bin. WRT-310N needs mini.bin then the std.bin flashed.
TEW-652BP stock firmware 1.10.8 it's okay but limited. So a header files was put onto the DIR-615 C1/3.01 firmware so you can flash the 652BRP to a DLINK firmware. So you have WAN port speed 10/auto/10/100/100 instead of not having that option.
This router it pron to heat so it has a bad case design where the air vents on the bottom. You would need to stand it up on it's side leaving the bottom part exposed. Even though you can mount it on the wall the air vents would be blocked and causes the unit to over heat.
DD-WRT firmware is WIP (work in progress)
Latest firmware can be found here for DD-WRT
»ftp://dd-wrt.com/others/eko/V24_TNG/svn11650/ |
|
stenman
join:2007-03-07
Salinas, CA
 ·Verizon Wireless B..
| reply to No_Strings
theory or reality
In theory the N router should handle G traffic but in real world tests the G traffic suffered significantly, often more than 50% in mixed environments, and this was worse if the router and the client hardware was from different vendors which is to be expected. The good news is that the client devices are relatively inexpensive.
A similar problem occurs with Ethernet when there is one computer with Jumbo frames enabled and others sharing the router or switch do not. |
|
tipstir
join:2004-11-14
Enfield, CT
·Cox HSI
| reply to No_Strings
Re: Should I buy an "N" router?
Not necessary for mix B/G/N environments are not as worst as you might have thought in the past. Some WNPU chip sets don't play nice or function too well with other brands. Some have some wierd issues as well. That's how show what I mean but owning all 4 from different manufacturers I mixed results.
Atheros
Broadcom
Ranlink
Realtek
Worst one on the list above is Atheros chips I have nothing good to say about them. Broadcom, Realtek and Ranlink are just fine. Netgear and Linksys use Broadcom and Belkin Ranlink, Trendent Realtek in wireless adapters. Dlink and Trendent uses the Atheros more. That's where the WLAN and WWAN have the most issues.
Range and distance
Ranlink
Realtek
Steady Connection
Ranlink
Realtek
Prone to Overheating
Broadcom
Prone to DNS Replay Issues
Atheros
If you're needs in a router is wireless distance and range you might want to look at the Belkin N+. |
|
mobiledog
join:2006-05-01
Marion, IA
·Mediacom
| reply to No_Strings
the best bottom line question for home user thinking about moving to "n" is...
do you have issues with interference with your 802.11 network?
if your network stops when your microwave is on, sell your microwave and upgrade your network to "n".
If your neighbor's garage door opener makes your network go wild, upgrade to "n".
are there specific times of the day that your network appears to struggle to get anything through, either up or downloading? if so, think about trying "n"
IF you decide to go the "n" route, be sure you are buying the 5GHz flavor, and not the 2.4GHz flavor, and that you get the proper matching PC card for your client devices.
as far as speed goes, your home network is probably already faster than your home internet connection will be for some time to come so speed is a bad reason to change to "n"...
hope this helps.
--
Mobiledog, an old timer in wireless and mobile computers |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| said by mobiledog :if your network stops when your microwave is on, sell your microwave and upgrade your network to "n". That made me chuckle and I heartily agree.
A couple of years ago, we did a kitchen remodel that included new appliances. The "old" ones still seemed pretty new to me as the house was new when we moved in and they all still worked fine after 12 years or so.
My laptop would slow noticeably when the microwave was running. I assumed that was pretty typical until we installed the new one. Now, I get no slowing at all. Makes me wonder how much RF I took to the noggin.
The whole "Should I buy N?" debate will soon become moot. Prices are dropping and someday there will actually be a finalized standard. Right now, though, it's still a valid question. I appreciate the thoughtful input. |
|
tipstir
join:2004-11-14
Enfield, CT
·Cox HSI
1 edit | Standard is slated by Sept 2009 for N now.. I did buy another N router as the DIR-655 can't keep a stable N connection or any wireless connection. Still that's a firmware issue or what they're saying at Dlink it's issue with NPU and WPU chip sets being different. I decided to try a another chip set in the past Marvel, Atheros, Broadcom never live up to the promises for N Draft 2.0 mode. Now with Realtek in the wireless N adapter and Ralink PU/WPU for Belkin N+ I don't have the issues I had with Buffalo, Trendnet, Netgear and Dlink N Routers. |
|
