WiFi vs Wired Speeds

[unevendozen]

Hey everyone,

I am getting really tired of my WRT54G consistently only giving me 10 Mbps or so when my wired connection is between 40 and 50 Mbps. Is this normal?? I know wifi will never be (until maybe AC routers) as fast as wired, but is such a difference normal?? 10 Mbps wifi on a 50 Mbps connection? Ugh. I am thinking its time for a new router but I am not very schooled in the differences. Looking at routers on Newegg and other sites, it seems like theres no one brand or model that stands out. Seems like none of them get 5 eggs.

Ideally I'd just like something reliable that can offer at least half my wired speed. Perferrably more. Any suggestions?

Thanks

 

[serpretetsky]

I dont have any router recommendations, but in case you are curious typical 802.11g speeds usually hover around 20Mb/s (2.5MB/s)

 

[VirtualLarry]

I dont have any router recommendations, but in case you are curious typical 802.11g speeds usually hover around 20Mb/s (2.5MB/s)

On a good day, with no interference.

 

[BrightCandle]

I get more like 1 MB/s out of my 802.11g connection on 2.4 Ghz, but then I am surrounded by about 15 2.4Ghz routers. On 5.0 its quite a bit more reliable but still I don't see better than about 2.5 MB/s.

Despite AC's claims in peak bandwidth the practical bandwidth is considerably lower than the peak. You shouldn't realistically expect to get more than about 100Mbit/s out of it at any reliable rate for a consistent period. It might peak higher but it doesn't sustain very well.

The honest answer is wireless trades convenience and portability for a significant drop in transfer rates. Is not anything you can do about it but move to a wired connection when you need more bandwidth.

 

[JackMDS]

This is a Fun for commuting in a Big City.

Do you ever seeing it replacing the Trucks used in constructions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_(automobile)

 

[SecurityTheatre]

This is a Fun for commuting in a Big City.

Do you ever seeing it replacing the Trucks used in constructions?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_(automobile)

Hacked?

 

[Fardringle]

Hacked?

Nope, it's a perfect (albeit a bit vague) example. Some people think those cars are fun and convenient but would never use them to haul construction equipment.

Wireless is convenient and "fun", but should never be relied on when you need a stable and fast connection.

 

[SecurityTheatre]

Nope, it's a perfect (albeit a bit vague) example. Some people think those cars are fun and convenient but would never use them to haul construction equipment.

Wireless is convenient and "fun", but should never be relied on when you need a stable and fast connection.

 

[JackMDS]

Nope, it's a perfect (albeit a bit vague) example

LOL, its in the late fashion of posting here.

Vague description/info about the Networks the way it used, hardware involved, and the environment involved in the case of Wireless.

-----------------
OP, using this Wireless Router with one Dual Band capable Wireless Client all in the same Room, probably will get you a full usage of your Internet Bandwidth via Wireless.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833320091

----------------
As for 5 Stars (Eggs), there can never be 5 Stars.

Manufacturers of Entry Level products can not test each one of the Millions of the ""plastic"" boxes that they manufacture.

QA is based on statistical formulas. As a result, there is always defected products ending up in the hand of innocent paying consumers.

The disappointing consumer awards this review with one Star and after few such reviews No more 5 Stars.

The Stars system is better then Nothing and can not be taken on face value. One needs to know how to intercept it in each case.

BTW it is the same with Cars.

Rolls Royce, Lamborghini and the like, test every individual car, most other manufactures use QA Statistical formulas

For most cars the test is driving them for few hundred feet off the assembly line to the New cars parking lot.

 

[aigomorla]

My buddy linus does a very good video on the question your asking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sue1Zvmh8JA

Wifi will NEVER get close to wired... NEVER.

OP.. get a powerline adapter... and wire it... if you cant direct hardwire....

 

[VirtualLarry]

My buddy linus does a very good video on the question your asking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sue1Zvmh8JA

Wifi will NEVER get close to wired... NEVER.

OP.. get a powerline adapter... and wire it... if you cant direct hardwire....

Pretty good video. Unfortunately, I don't nearly enough free power outlets for powerline.

 

[aigomorla]

Pretty good video. Unfortunately, I don't nearly enough free power outlets for powerline.

larry if ur anything like me..

u wont accept anything then 1gb lan... and even then ur gonna wish for LAGG interface on dual 1gb lan... and even then ur still gonna wish for a 10gb connection. :biggrin:

 

[Phynaz]

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/

 

[mindbomb]

you can't beat gigabit ethernet with wireless, but op is using a router with 100 megabit.
so you probably can get better wireless speeds with 600 megabit wireless n or wireless AC.

 

[smitbret]

Just to throw in my $.02.

I have been running a cat5e along some duct work to combine my switch downstairs with the router upstairs. Router is a TP-Link Archer C7 and the switch is some NetGear Gigabit switch that costs about $36 on Newegg.

Using that setup, I will get normal sustained transfers of about 700mbps between my server and tower; roughly 80-90 MB/s.

Price dropped on that router so I picked up a second one and set it up as a bridge between up and downstairs. Running 5Ghz 802.11ac the LAN test came back around 240mbps. I have transferred a couple of 4GB iso files and they sustain about 24 or 25 MB/s. Signal strength is -44db about 15 feet straight through some metal ducting, a wall and a floor.

UPDATE: I messed with the location of the bridge a little bit and shifted it away from some metal ducting and reran some tests between my wired PCs on both ends. db increased to -43. Reran LAN Test from the server (connected to the router) to the Tower PC (connected to the bridge) and got the following:

Test 1 - 364mbps Write/345mpbs Read (300MB transfer)
Test 2 - 275mbps/426mbps (300MB transfer)
Test 3 - 358mbps/415mbps (500MB transfer)
Test 4 - 346mbps/448mbps (500MB transfer)

Transferred a 4GB .iso and it maintained 45-48MB/s. The entire transfer took less than 2 minutes.

Good enough for me to cut the cord.

Still questioning my sanity, though, since it ended up costing $270 to replace a $10 cable for half the performance. I guess I can write off the first $150 though since I needed a new router anyway.

 

[ibex333]

I get more like 1 MB/s out of my 802.11g connection on 2.4 Ghz, but then I am surrounded by about 15 2.4Ghz routers.

If that's the case, spite them for creating so much interference. Hack into their wireless networks and use their connection. ; ) I hate wireless pollution.

Wifi will NEVER get close to wired... NEVER.

NEVER say never.

 

[notposting]

If that's the case, spite them for creating so much interference. Hack into their wireless networks and use their connection. ; ) I hate wireless pollution.



NEVER say never.

Wired is progressing however, as well. Outside of something beyond our current understanding I don't think it is possible for wireless to ever surpass wired.

* by outside of our understanding, I mean some sort of alien technology involving instantaneous quantum magic sort of stuff

 

[smitbret]

Wired is progressing however, as well. Outside of something beyond our current understanding I don't think it is possible for wireless to ever surpass wired.

* by outside of our understanding, I mean some sort of alien technology involving instantaneous quantum magic sort of stuff

I think, though, that wireless is progressing fast enough that it could make wired networking impractical or unnecessary for home use. In reality the average user doesn't really have need of anything more than a tbase 10/100 network. Gigabit is overkill for most let alone 10GbE. Wireless speed seems to be progressing similar to the CPU pace of the early 2000s. Every 6 months we see something new. AC1900, now? Sure there are power users out there but you can still stream Netflix to 3 different PCs across just about any decent network with a $40 router.

It's too bad 802.11ac tech is stuck on the 5Ghz band.

 

[Juddog]

I think, though, that wireless is progressing fast enough that it could make wired networking impractical or unnecessary for home use. In reality the average user doesn't really have need of anything more than a tbase 10/100 network. Gigabit is overkill for most let alone 10GbE. Wireless speed seems to be progressing similar to the CPU pace of the early 2000s. Every 6 months we see something new. AC1900, now? Sure there are power users out there but you can still stream Netflix to 3 different PCs across just about any decent network with a $40 router.

It's too bad 802.11ac tech is stuck on the 5Ghz band.

Gigabit is not overkill; in fact it's perfect for streaming 1080p content from a media server to my PS3 (I can barely stream 720p over wireless).

If you want a solid connection that always works, then wired is the only way.

 

[alkemyst]

My buddy linus does a very good video on the question your asking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sue1Zvmh8JA

Wifi will NEVER get close to wired... NEVER.

OP.. get a powerline adapter... and wire it... if you cant direct hardwire....

801.11ac has proven to do so in the lab for acceptable client bandwidth.

If you debate that 10Gbps+ is within wired standards, then yes ultimately wired will be faster than WiFi with our current technology.

My money is on within 5-10 years there were be no physical cabling for end user devices as far as networking goes and no one will be complaining about speed issues.

 

[Sheep221]

801.11ac has proven to do so in the lab for acceptable client bandwidth.

If you debate that 10Gbps+ is within wired standards, then yes ultimately wired will be faster than WiFi with our current technology.

My money is on within 5-10 years there were be no physical cabling for end user devices as far as networking goes and no one will be complaining about speed issues.

It is only matter of time when electromagnetic interference will be so high that it will complicate the use of all these things.
Cellular networks, wifi, radio, TV, satellites etc are not yet densely used but soon enough these connections may become unstable, interfere with each other or pose another safety risks because they are generated by physically present electromagnetic fields.

 

[alkemyst]

It is only matter of time when electromagnetic interference will be so high that it will complicate the use of all these things.
Cellular networks, wifi, radio, TV, satellites etc are not yet densely used but soon enough these connections may become unstable, interfere with each other or pose another safety risks because they are generated by physically present electromagnetic fields.

That's the layman's belief. Overseas there is much higher saturation and these devices work fine.

You are also confusing things together that work on totally different bands.

 

[Lorne]

Usable does not mean faster or good enough, Or we would not be on this fine website.

 

[mindbomb]

Gigabit is not overkill; in fact it's perfect for streaming 1080p content from a media server to my PS3 (I can barely stream 720p over wireless).

If you want a solid connection that always works, then wired is the only way.

you would probably be totally fine with 100 megabit. bluray quality video is only like 50 megabit, tops.

 

[smitbret]

Exactly. An HD video stream from Netflix is going to be less than 10mbps. There's just not much need for a normal home network above 100mbps. The cost is marginally more for gigabit so you might as well spend a little more for the headroom, but home networks are just not clogging up.