Thread: Superhub Superhub 2
View Single Post
Old 09-01-2013, 17:26   #47
qasdfdsaq
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,207
qasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronze
qasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronzeqasdfdsaq is cast in bronze
Re: Superhub 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan View Post
Why is that backwards? (Not a wireless expert, actually asking).
The main benefits of an additional antenna/MIMO stream/transceiver chain/whatever you want to call it are increased spectral efficiency (more speed at a given amount of bandwidth), improved beamforming (more signal strength and immunity to interference) and diversity (more robust signal and immunity to interference).

The 2.4Ghz band is bandwidth limited and prone to interference, so that is exactly where you would benefit most from having an additional antenna. The 5Ghz band already provides double the bandwidth with in most cases, pretty much no interference, and theoretically ten times more allowed transmit power, meaning that's where you get the least benefit from having a third antenna.

Also, in practice, 5Ghz performance is often limited by the speed of the router's CPU rather than wireless, especially at above 300Mbps (2 streams) so going to 450 (3 streams) often makes little difference. At 2.4Ghz performance is typically bandwidth and interference limited, so the 50% better efficiency is more likely to map to 50% more actual performance.
qasdfdsaq is offline   Reply With Quote