Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan
We're already at the limitations of a lot of consumer equipment. Despite Wireless "G" equipment being rated for 54Mbps, it's highly unlikely that anyone using it will get anywhere near it. Even if you're right next to your router, you're extremely lucky to hit 45Mbps. Move to another room and that'll drop below 30Meg.
|
Wireless G isn't capable of more than 25mbps at any distance. The technology simply does not allow it. You won't get 30 or 45 at any distance.
Quote:
|
It's a problem with the technology, but also that most people's equipment is just poor. Wireless-N is even worse in terms of advertised speeds vs real speeds. I've seen so many Wireless-N users sitting at around 72Mbit that it's not even funny.
|
Wrong. Wireless-N is far better in terms of advertised speeds vs real speeds. G will achieve 25 out of 54 at best. N will achieve 60 out of 72. 65/72 is the default, standard, basic rate of N. Speeds above 72/144 have to be disabled by default on most wifi certified devices.
Quote:
|
Same reasons - the equipment in use is often a cheap model that does the bare minimum to hit that Wireless-N standard.
|
No.
Quote:
|
Go ahead and look at most laptops on sale now - they're all wireless-N, but they'll only use 1x1 antennae, instead of the (much better) 3x3 arrangement, or even 1x3 that you need to hit the 300Mbit that Wireless-N is rated.
|
Completely wrong. Most laptops have 2x2, and 2x2 is 300mbit. 3x3 is 450, not 300. Wireless-N doesn't have any single speed rating (up to 600 is easily possible), just because 300 is the most common rating so far doesn't mean wireless-N is only 300.