|
[Networking] Verizon Fios Quantum 500/500 is amazing, but ...I just installed Verizon FIOS Quantum 500/500 and I get those speeds and more. However, the high-end desktop in the other room, having it's own network card, cannot obtain connectivity above 55/55 (Mbps). Is there anything I can do that will enable the "wireless desktop" to achieve faster connectivity? Thanks so much.
Xanax3ER |
|
Smith6612 MVM join:2008-02-01 North Tonawanda, NY ·Charter Ubee EU2251 Ubiquiti UAP-IW-HD Ubiquiti UniFi AP-AC-HD
|
Consider Wireless AC if you need to use Wireless and want to see 500Mbps on it. You'll need to get a PCI-e network card and an access point to accomplish this. Otherwise, you could make do going with a beefier wireless N setup, if you don't care for the full 500Mbps on Wireless. Anything capable of 300Mbps link speeds or better on 5Ghz would do. |
|
guppy_fish Premium Member join:2003-12-09 Palm Harbor, FL |
Keep in mind, its still that same radio space, and the new ac routers get the higher throughput in part in using wider channels. To get anything in the three digit mps range, you'll need to have few if any other wireless networks nearby |
|
|
to Xanax3ER
Yeah get rid of wireless. Go to MoCA or powerline.
Wireless can't drive anywhere near that speed, and keep in mind you need to buy expensive ac router and a new ac client. That is like $300-$400. You can get moca or powerline for well under $100. |
|
1 edit |
to Xanax3ER
I've had 500Mbps symmetrical service for a day, and WiFi throughput was wildly inconsistent on AC router (Airport Extreme AC) paired with the latest generation rMBP 15" and 2013 27" iMac both 3x3 MIMO capable, even when a few feet away, no moving objects and highly uncorrelated signals, high RSSI and SINR, etc...
Goes to show that there are so many variables in unlicensed spectrum that could cause that MIMO utilization to drop in a 80MHz channel. You shouldn't have very high expectations for efficient use of 500Mbps service in a wireless environment. Ethernet highly recommended over 300Mbps. |
|
|
to elefante72
Neither MoCA nor powerline will get anywhere near 500Mb/s either. MoCA tops out closer to 100Mb/s in actual speed, and powerline is more like 80 for the "500" stuff. Ethernet is the only way to go to actually get 500 in the home. 802.11ac will probably get there someday as the chipsets improve, but it's not there yet. |
|
|
to Xanax3ER
you want 1/2 gigabit wireless when most wired connections arent rated for that speed... go for it |
|
ModusI hate smartassery on forums Premium Member join:2005-05-02 us |
to Xanax3ER
can you share your speed test results? |
|
1 recommendation |
Here is 500Mbps test over ethernet. |
|
|
dewdudepfSense on xcp-ng Asterisk geek join:2010-03-27 Manassas, VA ·voip.ms (Software) pfSense (Software) DD-WRT
|
to Xanax3ER
The fastest you're gonna get in the 2.4ghz range is maybe 200mbps...that's if there is *nothing else* around you on that channel and you're using wireless-n with a 40mhz channel; and even then...you're only getting 150mbps each direction...and that's *if* your chipset can support that speed. My laptop for example will do 150mbps on 20mhz wireless-n; my tablet will only sync at 65.
802.11ac has a massive theoritical speed of something like 7gps...that's if you can bond all 8 160mhz channels together. Most can't. Most are using 80mhz channels with a max of 4 streams...around 433mbps.
Until the newest generation of 802.11ac becomes standard that supports more than 4 streams, 160mhz channels and can bond channels together....you're not gonna get gigabit.
Still, 500mbps over wireless is only a theoritical possibility; it doesn't exist in practice at the consumer level yet. If you want those speeds; you're gonna have to run a GigE Ethernet to the PC. |
|
1 recommendation |
said by dewdude:Still, 500mbps over wireless is only a theoritical possibility; it doesn't exist in practice at the consumer level yet. If you want those speeds; you're gonna have to run a GigE Ethernet to the PC. There are now AC2400 router models(4X4) that can go over 500Mbps if paired with 4X4 clients to achieve the faster speeds. See the review. » www.smallnetbuilder.com/ ··· rst-look |
|
whfsdude Premium Member join:2003-04-05 Washington, DC
2 recommendations |
to dewdude
said by dewdude:Still, 500mbps over wireless is only a theoritical possibility; it doesn't exist in practice at the consumer level yet. If you want those speeds; you're gonna have to run a GigE Ethernet to the PC. I have 3x UniFI AP-AC units (» www.ubnt.com/unifi/unifi-ap-ac/) and I have no problem sustaining 500mbit/s with my MacBook Air. 80 mhz channels with low power output (I have 3 for density - you can crank to high with only 1). It's totally doable. |
|
guppy_fish Premium Member join:2003-12-09 Palm Harbor, FL |
to Xanax3ER
Its only doable if you have no neighboring networks, the AC spec is better compression for higher data rates, but its still the crowed 2.5 / 5 GHz channels that b/g/n use.
And when you have neighboring networks that are running g for example its hoses using N or higher potential throughput |
|
1 edit |
said by guppy_fish:And when you have neighboring networks that are running g for example its hoses using N or higher potential throughput That's old technology, newer N's and above are not affected by b/g clients even mixed within the network. Newer AC routers has plenty of power to not limit you with throughput specially in the 5 GHz band. FCC recently allowed 1W output power for certain 5G frequencies so expect manufacturers to use the new standard for better range. |
|
guppy_fish Premium Member join:2003-12-09 Palm Harbor, FL
1 recommendation |
Its shared spectrum, no different than wired Ethernet in that for every time slice the packets use at a slower speed, it will reduce the overall bandwidth.
Having higher power on AC will only aggravate neighboring network interference.
The higher speeds depend on more quite channels, sure in a lab, they work great. In a high density environments, no so much |
|
|
to Xanax3ER
Are there useful sites that really upload or video stream at that speed? |
|
|
Depends on what you consider useful. Apple and Microsoft's CDNs can nearly max out my office's 1Gbps connection. Makes getting updates incredibly fast, which is helpful when setting up many new computers in a day. Also good for the occasional iTunes purchase. |
|
1 recommendation |
to Xanax3ER
Best answer... Run some cat5e or cat6. Wireless will only disappoint at this level of speed. |
|
|
to guppy_fish
said by guppy_fish:The higher speeds depend on more quite channels, sure in a lab, they work great. In a high density environments, no so much I can consider my house in a high density environments(at least 15 SSID stations and 2 in the 5G around me) and my RT-N66U can hit up to 300Mbps using 40MHz bandwidth in 5G band. This is an N wireless class router so it's easy to say the higher end AC Asus routers can easily give you 500Mbps in actual environment usage. |
|
Mike Mod join:2000-09-17 Pittsburgh, PA |
to Thinkdiff
able to download a new album in .00029 seconds because waiting for is chumps |
|
|
to guppy_fish
said by guppy_fish:AC spec is better compression for higher data rates, but its still the crowed 2.5 / 5 GHz channels that b/g/n use. FYI 802.11ac is 5ghz only. |
|
|
to bluepoint
said by bluepoint:my RT-N66U can hit up to 300Mbps using 40MHz bandwidth in 5G band. This is an N wireless class router so it's easy to say the higher end AC Asus routers can easily give you 500Mbps i Aren't wireless ratings cumulative, e.g. 150-up/150-down = rated 300? In order to keep with with the 500/500 the wireless would have to be rated at 1GB. Of course this all seems like like overkill to me but even with my plan at 10% of this, I've got as many things wired as I can. |
|
aaronwt Premium Member join:2004-11-07 Woodbridge, VA Asus RT-AX89
|
aaronwt
Premium Member
2014-Aug-21 6:45 pm
I'm surprised anyone on the 500/500 tier would be using wireless on a main PC. I have plenty of Pcs that get over 950Mb/s throughput over my GigE network on cat5e. I've been running gigabit since 2001. But I would never run wireless on my main PCs. As it is GigE is too slow. I wish I could transfer things faster since everytime I transfer a 40GB or 50GB file it still takes a while at 950+ Mb/s throughput.
I will use wireless on my tablets, netbooks and laptops, but the fastest I've seen over wireless in my setups is 150Mb/s throughput with my Asus RT-N56U and RT-N65U APs. |
|
2 edits |
to blue_trooper
said by blue_trooper:Aren't wireless ratings cumulative, e.g. 150-up/150-down = rated 300? In order to keep with with the 500/500 the wireless would have to be rated at 1GB. No, that's not how router/client wireless are rated. Wireless router/client are rated by the number of antennas. So if you have a dual band three antenna wireless N router, it will be rated N900. N900 = 450Mbps 2.4GHz + 450Mbps 5GHz For each band's rating represents the highest link speed a client can connect in that band @40MHz bandwidth. For AC wireless it's another story but the antenna is still a factor. |
|
1 edit |
to Xanax3ER
IF you want to use wireless I recommend getting a new router and wifi adapter. Router should be 802.11ac compatible, I strongly recommend either a ASUS RT-N66AC, or a ASUS RT-N68AC router. For the wifi adapter a ASUS PCE-AC68, or a PCE-AC66. I beieve these should get you much better results. You want to get the matching ones by the way, so either the two 66ac's or the two 68ac's. The 68ac's are capable of a theoretical speed of 1900 Mbps, and the 66ac's 1750Mbps. EDIT - Doesnt have to be matching, but is preferable and ensures performance LINKS: ROUTER 1 - » www.asus.com/Networking/RTAC68U/ ROUTER 2 - » www.asus.com/Networking/RTAC66U/ ADAPTER 1 -» www.asus.com/Networking/PCEAC68/ ADAPTER 2 - » www.asus.com/Networking/PCEAC68/ |
|
|
to bluepoint
said by bluepoint:No, that's not how router/client wireless are rated. Wireless router/client are rated by the number of antennas. So if you have a dual band three antenna wireless N router, it will be rated N900. It's actually rated based on the spatial streams that it can support. Antennas don't factor into the rating, it just helps enable the higher speeds that the spatial streams provide. If you look at the details of an AP you'll commonly find 2x2:2 MIMO, or 3x3:3 MIMO.. The :2 or :3 means how many spatial streams.. :2 is 300Mb/s and :3 is 450Mbs, this also assumes you're using 40Mhz channels, if using 20Mhz then cut that in half. Typically you never want to use 40Mhz channels on 2.4ghz however as it causes even more channel overlap than we already have on 2.4ghz. It's recommended to only enable 40Mhz channels on 5ghz band due to extra channels available. I work for a Networking vendor and we offer the AP choices above, but also offer a 3x3:2 MIMO AP. Both our 2x2:2 and 3x3:2 AP's are rated at 300Mb/sec. I've even seen some companies offer a 2x2:3 AP, giving 450Mb/sec, but this is uncommon in the industry. As mentioned, the antennas help enable the higher speeds due to the Tx/Rx radiation patterns (better signal for lack of better term), but without the extra spatial stream capabilities it wouldn't mean anything in terms of speed capabilities. |
|
2 edits |
Spatial streams always goes side by side with the antennas installed in a router/client. You can not rate a wireless router 3x3 if there are less than three antennas. I want to see a triple streamed router with less than 3 antennas, maybe you can give us a link? For each spatial streams(antenna) @40MHz equals 150Mbps rating. a. single stream (most common with client wireless) 150Mbps b. Dual stream (min standard for N wireless routers) 300Mbps c. Triple stream (mostly seen in N, AC wireless routers) d. Quad stream (latest AC wireless routers) These are based from the wireless routers I've seen and read. » www.techopedia.com/defin ··· treaming |
|
|
On the 2x2:3 I said I've seen some, but uncommon, so just take that with a grain of salt. I agree with your statement, but this is what I've seen on paper tech specs so it has to be honored (possibly just marketecture??). These weren't from known companies so who knows if its even valid. Since they weren't enterprise grade and uncommon/undesired in the industry I moved on and don't remember who makes them, I just know I've seen them. I work with enterprise gear so that's all I really pay attention to.
As for your statement "You can not rate a wireless router 3x3 if there are less than three antennas." Well that's what 3x3 (3Tx & 3Rx) means so I don't understand the comment. Care to elaborate?
There are some vendors who do 2x3, 3x4, etc but only support 2 or 3 spatial streams.. My point is that antenna #'s don't always match up to spatial stream support. |
|
|
said by buckweet1980:As for your statement "You can not rate a wireless router 3x3 if there are less than three antennas." Well that's what 3x3 (3Tx & 3Rx) means so I don't understand the comment. Care to elaborate That's how consumer routers are advertised. A 3x3 router means it's a triple streamed router and if run @40MHz it is rated 450Mbps for each band. said by buckweet1980:There are some vendors who do 2x3, 3x4, etc but only support 2 or 3 spatial streams.. My point is that antenna #'s don't always match up to spatial stream support. The spatial streams are driven by the radios chipsets so it's possible but like what I've said, I have not seen a consumer router being sold as such. |
|
1 edit |
to nycnetwork
said by nycnetwork:Here is 500Mbps test over ethernet. How soon did your full speed become available after upgrading? I have ordered this plan a few weeks ago but there is some problem on Verizon's side getting more than 400Mbps on Verizon's speed test site. I don't think Verizon's in-house network is that congested but who knows? |
|