2.4ghz performing better than 5ghz

[eighteesix]

hey guys--

just moved into a new small apt. ive got my ASUS RT-AC68U blasting out dual 2.4/5ghz frequencies. however, in my bedroom, my desktop (using a wireless pci card) performs much better when connected to the 2.4 frequency. in fact, the 2.4 has a signal strength, on average, of -15dBm better than the 5ghz. the part that perplexes me is that theres a ton of 2.4 networks here--my 5ghz is the only one. ideas?

edit-- for clarification, ive got a macbook that speed tests both frequencies at 60mbps while sitting directly next to the desktop. this desktop/pci wireless card is not reaching those same speeds at all (using TP-LINK TL-WDN4800 Dual Band N900 2.4GHz 450Mbps/5Ghz 450Mbps). just tested both frequencies again and 2.4 averaged 40mbps while 5ghz wouldnt go above 2mbps. i then attempted to reconnect to the network and it simply said cannot connect. bizarre.

more info:

2.4ghz
PHY Mode: 802.11n
BSSID: d8:50:e6:d0:15:98
Channel: 6
Country Code:
Network Type: Infrastructure
Security: WPA2 Personal
Signal / Noise: -53 dBm / -88 dBm
Transmit Rate: 173
MCS Index: 21

5ghz
PHY Mode: 802.11n
BSSID: d8:50:e6:d0:15:9c
Channel: 40,-1
Country Code:
Network Type: Infrastructure
Security: WPA2 Personal
Signal / Noise: -67 dBm / -86 dBm
Transmit Rate: 81
MCS Index: 10

 

[Elixer]

Are you using channel 48, or something else ?
Just saw the edit.. try channel 48, and see if that helps any.

 

[eighteesix]

channel 40

 

[eighteesix]

Are you using channel 48, or something else ?
Just saw the edit.. try channel 48, and see if that helps any.

wtf... that solved it. why?? being that im the only 5ghz network i dont understand.

 

[Berryracer]

On both my RT-AC68U and my RT-AC87U the 5GHz. takes longer to connect upon reboot and when I run a speedtest.net the 2.4GHz gets -1ms less than the 5GHz.

I can never figure out why but it does perform better it's not just you

 

[DainBrammage]

On both my RT-AC68U and my RT-AC87U the 5GHz. takes longer to connect upon reboot and when I run a speedtest.net the 2.4GHz gets -1ms less than the 5GHz.

I can never figure out why but it does perform better it's not just you

You have fallen into the trap most people fall into. The speed of your wifi has next to nothing to do with your speed tests to an Internet site or 802.11n frequency. The speed is in how fast your data packets travel over medium (air) to your AP.

802.11n MCS index on 2.4 and 5Ghz are exactly the same .

 

[eighteesix]

You have fallen into the trap most people fall into. The speed of your wifi has next to nothing to do with your speed tests to an Internet site or 802.11n frequency. The speed is in how fast your data packets travel over medium (air) to your AP.

802.11n MCS index on 2.4 and 5Ghz are exactly the same .

so when are they different?

 

[Jamsan]

You have fallen into the trap most people fall into. The speed of your wifi has next to nothing to do with your speed tests to an Internet site or 802.11n frequency. The speed is in how fast your data packets travel over medium (air) to your AP.

802.11n MCS index on 2.4 and 5Ghz are exactly the same .

Could be me... but his comment seemed extremely sarcastic

 

[razel]

5Ghz has a harder time travelling through walls than 2.4Ghz. Testing right next to an AP also isn't the ideal signal. The signal coming out of a WiFi antenna is a doughnut.

If your AP is in the corner of your home, make a parabolic reflector out of aluminum foil or even a large coffee can to change it into a bubble. You can also use a alumimum backed cardboard up against your wall to block neighboring a WiFi signal that's causing issues.

Either way, like DainBrammage mentioned don't fall into these hype traps. I don't blame you if you did. At least you know better now. Many of my devices support 5 Ghz and I've love to move to 5 Ghz since it's quieter, but I have found no reason to do since strategically placed alumumin foil work well even on my Belkin router from 2005. Argueably, I've found that the older routers, when things get busy, there is increased latency since their processors are slower, however, their radios tended to be stronger and more reliable.

 

[Emulex]

twice the power to travel @ 5ghz compared to 2.4ghz - roughly, you would need twice the milliwatts * antenna gain @ 5ghz to be as effective as 2.4ghz.

Crappy multi-band omnidirectional antennas won't help much either!

 

[azazel1024]

twice the power to travel @ 5ghz compared to 2.4ghz - roughly, you would need twice the milliwatts * antenna gain @ 5ghz to be as effective as 2.4ghz.

Crappy multi-band omnidirectional antennas won't help much either!

Vague unqualified statement is vague an unqualified.

In an open environment, like outdoors in an open field, 2.4GHz and 5GHz have the same propogation.

Indoors where you have walls, you need a heck of a lot more than twice the power for the same range. It depends heavily on the wall construction/materials that the signal is passing through. You generally get roughly twice the attenuation per inch of material for 5GHz versus 2.4GHz. This equates to a lot more than twice the power needed.

Example, a single 2x4 wall will attenuate 2.4GHz roughly 4dB, but 5GHz roughly 7dB. That is twice the attenuation. Now, however, you hit the next 2x4 wall and the 2.4GHz signal is attenuated 4dB again, but the 5GHz is attenuated 7dB again. That is now actually FOUR times more attenuation than the 2.4GHz signal.

Or you can look at a thicker wall, for example, a brick wall might attenuate 2.4GHz 8dB, but it'll attenuate 5GHz 12-13dB, over twice the attenuation, because the signal had to pass through more material.

Signals attenuate in free space obeying the inverse square law, that means 6dB of attenuation for each doubling of distance, so this makes distance as important as obstacles.

The moral of the whole physics lesson is, that, yes, 5GHz has a lot less range indoors than 2.4GHz (generally, rule of thumb is half the range, but that varies SOOOOO much depending on wall construction/floor construction and how open the construction is). To make up the difference in range, you'd need a lot more than a doubling in power. For a very open concept, a simple doubling in power MIGHT make up the difference if its a giant loft apartment with maybe only a single wall in the way. For something like a bungalow, or worse a concrete block home, you might need 10-20x the 5GHz radio power for the same range as 2.4GHz inside the structure.