New AMP Wi-Fi extender

ABCDEF-Hex said:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amped-wireless-extender-networking,26272.html

I have a new Apple Extreme 802.11ac. I was going to use my old Extreme to extend my network via a wired connection. This new AMP plug-in would be easier than running the wire but would it be as good coverage wise and as compatible as the 2 Extremes.

Click to expand...

Personally, I would go for an Express for the purpose. They are both $99.99, but the Express can be bought for $75 from Apple Refurb the last I checked.

Altemose said:

Personally, I would go for an Express for the purpose. They are both $99.99, but the Express can be bought for $75 from Apple Refurb the last I checked.

Click to expand...

The Express won't extend the "ac" network it's maxes out at "n".

marzer said:

The Express won't extend the "ac" network it's maxes out at "n".

Click to expand...

Doesn't really matter since this extender, while offering AC support for the connection to the router will only give less than N speeds to clients. Making an observation here.

Altemose said:

Doesn't really matter since this extender, while offering AC support for the connection to the router will only give less than N speeds to clients. Making an observation here.

Click to expand...

Given a wirelessly extended AP can provide maybe 50% of the bandwidth for client access, the Express will provide no more than 150Mbps on 5Ghz, 75Mbps on 2.4Ghz.

marzer said:

Given a wirelessly extended AP can provide maybe 50% of the bandwidth for client access, the Express will provide no more than 150Mbps on 5Ghz, 75Mbps on 2.4Ghz.

Click to expand...

Since the 5 GHz AC signal degrades so quickly, they might be only putting in 300-600 Mbps transfer rate from the Extreme to the extender. Either way you cannot go wrong, but something to consider is printer sharing off the extender Express, AirPlay, and having a Ethernet port where there wasn't before.

Altemose said:

Since the 5 GHz AC signal degrades so quickly, they might be only putting in 300-600 Mbps transfer rate from the Extreme to the extender. Either way you cannot go wrong, but something to consider is printer sharing off the extender Express, AirPlay, and having a Ethernet port where there wasn't before.

Click to expand...

Unless throughput is your priority, then it's best to go with the AMP as it will provide twice the network speed that the Express can provide as a wireless extender.

ABCDEF-Hex said:

I always receive great information posting here.

I probably should have stated my needs better in the original post.
This is just a small home network.
I am trying to extend the range to the farthest part of the house for Apple TV and iPad use.

Thanks Again.

Click to expand...

In that case your old extreme will do the job without having to run any wires. Set it's wireless mode to "extend existing network" and select the new Extreme as the network to extend, it will provide sufficient bandwidth for your iPad and Apple TV.

marzer said:

Unless throughput is your priority, then it's best to go with the AMP as it will provide twice the network speed that the Express can provide as a wireless extender.

Click to expand...

The Express carries its own benefits. For personal reasons, I would want the Express. However, since the OP has the Extreme why even bother dropping $100 on either option?

ABCDEF-Hex said:

I always receive great information posting here.

I probably should have stated my needs better in the original post.
This is just a small home network.
I am trying to extend the range to the farthest part of the house for Apple TV and iPad use.

Thanks Again.

Click to expand...

Than the Extreme will be fine.

marzer said:

In that case your old extreme will do the job without having to run any wires. Set it's wireless mode to "extend existing network" and select the new Extreme as the network to extend, it will provide sufficient bandwidth for your iPad and Apple TV.

Click to expand...

What a good use of used and older hardware!

Altemose said:

The Express carries its own benefits. For personal reasons, I would want the Express.

Click to expand...

Yes it does if you need/use those extra features. Otherwise a faster performing extender based on the latest standard may be preferable. Particularly over time as computing/peripheral devices get replaced, obsoleting older wifi standards.

marzer said:

Yes it does if you need/use those extra features. Otherwise a faster performing extender based on the latest standard may be preferable. Particularly over time as computing/peripheral devices get replaced, obsoleting older wifi standards.

Click to expand...

In all honesty the best is running Ethernet to the "extender" or an AP for this.

Altemose said:

In all honesty the best is running Ethernet to the "extender" or an AP for this.

Click to expand...

Not in either of these cases, the Express or AMP, as each of these only provides a 10/100Mbps port. Depending on the distance you can get faster speeds wirelessly on the Express, the AMP will definitely be crippled extending via Ethernet.

marzer said:

Not in either of these cases, the Express or AMP, as each of these only provides a 10/100Mbps port. Depending on the distance you can get faster speeds wirelessly on the Express, the AMP will definitely be crippled extending via Ethernet.

Click to expand...

This is if they were to use the Extreme that is already owned. The AMP would be crippled, but the Express would not as the 2.4 GHz supports 150 Mbps. Halve that and you have 75 Mbps that is susceptible to interference and distance. Under ideal conditions, the 5 GHz would give 150 Mbps of usable bandwidth to the client.

Altemose said:

This is if they were to use the Extreme that is already owned. The AMP would be crippled, but the Express would not as the 2.4 GHz supports 150 Mbps. Halve that and you have 75 Mbps that is susceptible to interference and distance. Under ideal conditions, the 5 GHz would give 150 Mbps of usable bandwidth to the client.

Click to expand...

If the AMP OR Express is extended via cable, the fastest theoretical throughput either can provide is 100Mbps, as the Ethernet port connecting back to the main router on BOTH is only a 10/100 port.

If you extend an "ac" network wirelessly with the Express the fastest you will achieve on 2.4 GHz is approximately 75 Mbps. Extending 5GHz wirelessly with the Express, the fastest the Express will achieve is approximately 150 Mbps.

Extending an "ac" network wirelessly with the AMP you can get 150Mbps on 2.4Ghz and 433Mbps on 5Ghz on an extended link, according to their specs. Obviously a significant speed advantage over the n-only Express.

marzer said:

If the AMP OR Express is extended via cable, the fastest theoretical throughput either can provide is 100Mbps, as the Ethernet port connecting back to the main router on BOTH is only a 10/100 port.

If you extend an "ac" network wirelessly with the Express the fastest you will achieve on 2.4 GHz is approximately 75 Mbps. Extending 5GHz wirelessly with the Express, the fastest the Express will achieve is approximately 150 Mbps.

Extending an "ac" network wirelessly with the AMP you can get 150Mbps on 2.4Ghz and 433Mbps on 5Ghz on an extended link, according to their specs. Obviously a significant speed advantage over the n-only Express.

Click to expand...

Quite obviously you are right about the AMP. However, those are theoretical specifications. The real world version is very likely to be much less, but still significantly higher than the Express. Why not just plug in the Extreme since it has the Gigabit backplane to the AC Extreme? I know Ethernet is a hassle, but it is well worth it for Gigabit devices.

Altemose said:

Quite obviously you are right about the AMP. However, those are theoretical specifications. The real world version is very likely to be much less, but still significantly higher than the Express. Why not just plug in the Extreme since it has the Gigabit backplane to the AC Extreme? I know Ethernet is a hassle, but it is well worth it for Gigabit devices.

Click to expand...

But the OP already stated it's only for an Apple TV and, presumably, a roaming iPad. Neither of which are gigabit devices. Extending the network wirelessly provides enough bandwidth for those two devices. If more devices are added in the extended area, running a wire might be worth it.

ABCDEF-Hex said:

I think I learned even more from the extended discussion.
I'm going to try the older airport extreme.

Does the following sound right?

We have 2 older iMacs (2007) but my wife now uses the iPad more than her iMac. I use her iMac for grid computing.

If I were to move her iMac into that part of the house it would be better to run a wire back there.

If I did move it but only used it for grid computing it might still be OK.
(small downloads - mostly cpu).

Thanks again marzer and Altemose for all you help.

Click to expand...

You can run one wire lead to the Extreme's WAN port and then plug the iMac into the LAN port on the second Extreme. It will be full Gigabit Ethernet.

ABCDEF-Hex said:

I think I learned even more from the extended discussion.
I'm going to try the older airport extreme.

Does the following sound right?

We have 2 older iMacs (2007) but my wife now uses the iPad more than her iMac. I use her iMac for grid computing.

If I were to move her iMac into that part of the house it would be better to run a wire back there.

If I did move it but only used it for grid computing it might still be OK.
(small downloads - mostly cpu).

Thanks again marzer and Altemose for all you help.

Click to expand...

Yes. Wiring the two routers together will give you better network performance into the the further reach of the house. Esp. if you do Mac-to-Mac transfers, etc., then the gigabit connection will come in handy.

If you extend using a cable connection, you'll want to set the old Extreme in bridge mode (allowing the new extreme to perform DHCP services, etc.) and use the same wireless SSID and password if you want the convenience of one wireless network ID throughout the house.

marzer said:

Yes. Wiring the two routers together will give you better network performance into the the further reach of the house. Esp. if you do Mac-to-Mac transfers, etc., then the gigabit connection will come in handy.



If you extend using a cable connection, you'll want to set the old Extreme in bridge mode (allowing the new extreme to perform DHCP services, etc.) and use the same wireless SSID and password if you want the convenience of one wireless network ID throughout the house.

Click to expand...

If the OP plugs a Ethernet line from the LAN port to the WAN port on the second Extreme it will work. Also, reset the base station and make sure you're running 7.6.4. Then using AirPort Utility 6 on a Mac or an iOS device, setup the base station.

When you first see the setup screen it will say "Setup AirPort Extreme to extend 'SmithWireless'". Click next and it will then ask you details. It will also find out it is connected via Ethernet and will change the title to "Setup AirPort Extreme to extend 'SmithWireless' over Ethernet".

I recommend using the new utility for this as it allows the guest network to be shared with the roaming secondary base station. The older 5.6 can be used after to do the rest of the configuration.

Altemose said:

If the OP plugs a Ethernet line from the LAN port to the WAN port on the second Extreme it will work. Also, reset the base station and make sure you're running 7.6.4. Then using AirPort Utility 6 on a Mac or an iOS device, setup the base station.

When you first see the setup screen it will say "Setup AirPort Extreme to extend 'SmithWireless'". Click next and it will then ask you details. It will also find out it is connected via Ethernet and will change the title to "Setup AirPort Extreme to extend 'SmithWireless' over Ethernet".

I recommend using the new utility for this as it allows the guest network to be shared with the roaming secondary base station. The older 5.6 can be used after to do the rest of the configuration.

Click to expand...

If the routers are wired by Ethernet cable, there no point in "extending" the wireless, as that will reduce the wireless throughput as was already discussed. Actually, I'm not even sure you can extend the wireless from a hard wired access point. But if the option exists, I recommend against it.

If the two routers are hard wired it only makes sense to get the full performance from it and use the "create wireless network" to get the full benefit. Using the same SSID/password for seamless roaming.

If the OP is running Mavericks, Airport Utility 5.6 will not run, Mt. lion was the last OS that supported it.

This example uses the old utility, but the idea for setting the routers up is still applicable:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4260

marzer said:

If the OP is running Mavericks, Airport Utility 5.6 will not run, Mt. lion was the last OS that supported it.

Click to expand...

If needed, you can use AU 5.6 with Mavericks :
http://coreyjmahler.com/2013/10/24/airport-utility-5-6-1-on-os-x-10-9-mavericks/

(works fine).

Bruno09 said:

If needed, you can use AU 5.6 with Mavericks :
http://coreyjmahler.com/2013/10/24/airport-utility-5-6-1-on-os-x-10-9-mavericks/

(works fine).

Click to expand...

Thanks. I haven't seen that since I last research for progress. However, for what the OP is trying to accomplish, Airport Utility 6.x will work fine.

marzer said:

If the routers are wired by Ethernet cable, there no point in "extending" the wireless, as that will reduce the wireless throughput as was already discussed. Actually, I'm not even sure you can extend the wireless from a hard wired access point. But if the option exists, I recommend against it.

If the two routers are hard wired it only makes sense to get the full performance from it and use the "create wireless network" to get the full benefit. Using the same SSID/password for seamless roaming.

If the OP is running Mavericks, Airport Utility 5.6 will not run, Mt. lion was the last OS that supported it.

This example uses the old utility, but the idea for setting the routers up is still applicable:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4260

Click to expand...

It is the terminology that AU 6 uses. It says "Setup AirPort Extreme to Extend 'SmithWireless' over Ethernet" They made it so people could easily understand it and it also allows the roaming network to host the guest network.

Both ways accomplish the same thing, but AirPort Utility 6 is easier. It also sets up the guest network to allow roaming. The second base station is not connected wirelessly but rather Ethernet.