San Diego, CA
·Time Warner Cable
reply to gatorkram
said by gatorkram:It has better range but when everybody in my apartment building all has 2.4ghz routers (if not two) then it completely ruins that. I have a (pre?) 802.11ac router (netgear r6300) and the 5ghz works flawlessly compared to the 2.4ghz band. Much better range on 5ghz due to less people using it.
I think the issue comes down to range. 2.4 simply works better.
The day the child realizes that all adults are imperfect, he becomes an adolescent; the day he forgives them, he becomes an adult. The day he forgives himself, he becomes wise.
Yea right now 5Ghz is free and clear. When I moved to my current apartment the wifi was absolutely horrid in my apartment, I can always see at least 15 APs
I switched to a dual-band router and almost all of my traffic goes over 5GHz, I was surprised how many devices supported this very underutilized band, even my older blu-ray player and my Galaxy S2 support it.
In this 2.4 ghz nightmare area, 5Ghz is wonderful right now, I can only see one other AP on the band and real throughput is normally 180mbps to my desktop 450mbps adapter.
But newer wifi revisions rely on 5Ghz by default like 802.11ac, the 5Ghz band is going to eventually get more crowded and is capable of using much more spectrum including 80MHz and 160MHz channel support, 2 to 4 times the spectrum wireless N can use.
Spectrum changes take awhile, this spectrum is in use by the government, they'll have to vacate the spectrum. And hardware manufacturer's will have to build wifi gear that utilizes this additional spectrum, before 802.11ac really takes off would be the best time to do this.
For urban and apartment dwellers this is important. 5Ghz will eventually become crowded like 2.4Ghz in many areas.
To dismiss this rare good decision by the FCC as not important is short-sighted.