![]() 80īefore we get to pitting networks against each other, let’s first see if trying to use 160 MHz bandwidth is worth it at all. I limited traffic to this level so that I wasn’t totally saturating the link and because I was limited to using a single Gigabit Ethernet connection to the test console/traffic generator. I used iperf3 running TCP/IP traffic, 2048 kB window size with four simultaneous streams, each set to a 100 Mbps offered load to each STA. Although the Pal supports up to four streams, I configured each to act as a 2×2 802.11ac device (STA). But I ended up running all the tests I’ll be presenting with the doors open.Ĩ0 / 160 MHz bandwidth sharing test configurationįor most of the tests, I used two 5 GHz octoScope Pal devices, which are based on Qualcomm chipsets. I put each router in an octoScope octoBox so that I had the option of "separating" the networks by closing the doors and adjusting the attenuators. – Skyworks SE2623L 2.4 GHz power amp (x4) Qualcomm dual-core IPQ8065 Internet Processor 1.7 GHz For those keeping score, the ASUS is Broadcom-based the NETGEAR uses a Qualcomm platform. I set up two 5 GHz 802.11ac networks, one using an ASUS RT-AC86U to provide a WLAN with 80 MHz wide channels and the other with a NETGEAR R7800 with HT160 mode enabled (found in the Advanced Wireless settings). So that I don’t go all Chicken Little about 160 MHz and the death of Wi-Fi, I ran some experiments to get some data. So does this spell the end of your 5 GHz network performance? Put those two things together and the probability of a 160 MHz 5 GHz network parked next door is headed upward. And it’s also likely that some of those buyers may also pick up an Intel AC 9260 to get some benefit, aside from bragging rights, from that premature purchase. And when you see the first eight stream (all in 5 GHz, not 4 in 2.4 GHz + 4 in 5 GHz like NETGEAR is using to position its AX routers) routers announced, they too will use 160 MHz channel bandwidth as part of the requirements to reach top link rate.Īll that means is that it’s likely you’ll see all first draft 11ax routers support 20/40/80/160 MHz bandwidth modes and DFS. I pointed out in 5 Things To Know Before You Buy A Draft 11ax Router that ASUS’ "AX6000" RT-AX88U is counting on 160 MHz channels, 1024 QAM modulation and four-streams to reach the specified 4804 Mbps maximum 5 GHz link rate.ĪSUS’ "AX11000" GT-AX11000 counts on the same combination, plus the addition of a second 5 GHz radio to push up its link rate. So 160 MHz is unlikely to have had much effect on your home Wi-Fi network’s performance up to now. As you’ll see in a bit, I confirmed that it does indeed support contiguous 160 MHz. I’m told the only 11ac device that supports 160 MHz mode is Intel’s Wireless-AC 9260 M.2 card for notebooks. Since smartphone makers are notoriously secretive about Wi-Fi specs, I have no idea if there are any 160 or 80+80 devices out there. So most smartphone and mobile device makers have opted to not support either 160 or 80+80 MHz bandwidth mode. Supporting 80+80 mode complicates (and increases cost) of radio design in wireless devices. NETGEAR’s R7800 and R9000 and Synology’ RT2600ac are the only ones that come to mind to support 160 MHz bandwidth. Only a handful of designs have opted to support 160 MHz or 80+80 bandwidth, usually more as a marketing ploy to inflate router class numbers, as Linksys did with its Marvell-based "AC3200" WRT3200ACM. (Yes, there is channel 165, but that’s helpful only if you’re running 20 MHz 5 GHz channels).įortunately for those struggling with overcrowded networks, support for 160 MHz channels has not caught fire in 802.11ac. This avoids using DFS channels, but uses all eight 5 GHz channels available to U.S. ![]() ![]() There is also an alternative of "80+80" mode, which allows a gap between two four-channel groups. Router makers have generally avoided the extra complexity of designing their products to support DFS and the extra cost of the separate FCC certification required. without using UNII-2 and 2e DFS channels. As the channel map above shows, this isn’t possible in the U.S. The catch is 160 MHz eats up eight adjacent 20 MHz wide channels. So, for example, a single stream AC device that achieves only a 433 Mbps maximum link rate could double up to 867 Mbps and a two-stream client that maxes out at 867 Mbps count achieve a four stream equivalent maximum of 1.7 Gbps. Its raison d’etre has been to enable mobile clients, which typically support one or two streams, to double their link rates to achieve higher bandwidth. Support for 160 MHz channel bandwidth in 5 GHz is included in the 802.11ac standard. Some tests were rerun due to problems found in the test methods.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |