Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sorry to dredge up an old post, but I have a question about ethernet connections. I have had it with wifi in my house (large, double brick) and I am having Cat 6 run to one end of the house (and using some Cat 5e to the other end of the house that I did not know was there - was in the walls!). I will have TC as my WLAN router, and two AEBS at either end of the house, connected by ethernet. I will plan to create new networks on each of the AEBS but use the same name and setting as the AEBS. I am told this is the way to do it.

But, crucially, I am hoping to connect a number of devices to the AEBS via ethernet (ATVs, a MacPro, Mac Mini, PS3 etc) and am hoping I am going to get high speed for transfers as well as max IP connectivity. Can you let me know what settings I need to adjust to assure 1000 as opposed to 100 per your post?


Go to "Network" in settings. Then click on your "Built In Ethernet" device on the left if it isn't already selected. Click on "Advanced" near the bottom right corner of the pane. Next, click on the "Ethernet" tab that comes up (far right). Finally, select "1000baseT" in the "Speed" drop down and click OK. This will force OSX to use a Gigabit connection rather than auto-select it (which sometimes doesn't pick the right speed here for some unknown reason). Keep in mind that if you connect it to a 100baseT connection/hub/switch/whatever, it will not work in this mode (i.e. 1000baseT requires a full gigabit connection all the way to the router, so use gigabit switches, etc. where appropriate).

If by AEBS you mean the Airport Express Base Station, it won't work because they are 100baseT. Just connect the Cat6 cable to a Gigabit switch on the far end instead (they don't cost that much; I use one here in the same room as my router to give me more connections) of the AEBS (you don't need to create a new network; the switch will extend the primary one from the Time Capsule and maintain the Gigabit speeds).
 
Sorry to hijack the thread but there are some Wi-Fi experts in here by the look of things. Can I get some advice?...

I just signed up with a new cable ISP and I'm on a 64 Mbps connection with 5 Mbps upload speed. I hardwired my late 2009 MacBook Pro to the cable modem and speedtest.net showed my consistent 60+ Mbps down and 5+ Mbps up - it really felt like a rapid connection. The ISP eventually sent me my wireless router - a D-Link DIR300. I noticed that this was a "G" router (which looked about 10 years old!). Am I right to think that in optimal conditions the best this router can do is 54 Mbps? Anyway, I contacted them and said it was awful. They sent me a D-Link DIR600 N 150. I did some tests on this and it wasn't much better. As I said previously, when hardwired to the modem I saw amazing speeds. I then tried to hardwire to the new router and I was lucky to see 30-40% of what I got directly to the modem. I couldn't believe it, I guessed it would be the same, hardwired. Wirelessly I've been getting around 20-30 Mbps depending on the time of day.

The ISP have offered me a refund (albeit only €25) for the D-Link DIR600 as I'm still not happy but I'm wondering what to get next. I created a thread here with some questions about the AirPort Extreme Base Station and the Time Capsule so if any of you experts can spare a minute I'd be extremley grateful. I live in quite a small apartment so my devices will never be more than 10m away from the router and 99% of the time my MacBook will be about 2 metres from the router with no walls or anything in between (I can see the current one clearly from here) - this will mean I can utilise the 5GHz band on a good router, right?... :)
 
Last edited:
You shouldn't be losing performance using a wired connection to a router connected to the cable modem. Something isn't right there. I have a 10Mbps connection with my cable company (they do offer 50, but for more $$$) and 10Mbps is what I get through a wired connection to my router. I get the same wireless because that is far less than my average wireless connection, although I think there may be more overhead for lots of small files with wireless (feels like it anyway; sustained normally measures the same). For wired connections, I have Gigabit connections (not sure what that DLink is using, but 60Mbps is still within usable limits of a 100T connection).

I'm curious why you are getting a router from your ISP? Are you renting it? I just went to Best Buy and bought a Netgear router. It was only a bit over $100.
 
You shouldn't be losing performance using a wired connection to a router connected to the cable modem. Something isn't right there. I have a 10Mbps connection with my cable company (they do offer 50, but for more $$$) and 10Mbps is what I get through a wired connection to my router. I get the same wireless because that is far less than my average wireless connection, although I think there may be more overhead for lots of small files with wireless (feels like it anyway; sustained normally measures the same). For wired connections, I have Gigabit connections (not sure what that DLink is using, but 60Mbps is still within usable limits of a 100T connection).

I'm curious why you are getting a router from your ISP? Are you renting it? I just went to Best Buy and bought a Netgear router. It was only a bit over $100.

Hey, thanks for your reply. Most ISPs over here offer wireless routers as part of their subscriptions. I'm returning the D-Link though as it's a poor router. I don't think it's got Gigabit Ethernet ports so maybe that's the problem? Either way, I tried hardwiring to the modem and got 60+ Mbps then straight away tried hardwiring to the wireless router (which was connected to the modem via Ethernet) and I got around 20-25 Mbps. As you said, I figured I should have been getting more than that when hardwired. I'm quite sold on the idea of an AirPort Extreme Base Unit at the moment. I know they're quite expensive but, just like my MacBook Pro, I can see it being something that's hassle free and that lasts a long time. Do you think, with one of those, that I should then be getting 'better' speeds wirelessly? My MacBook Pro would be utilising the 5GHz N band whereas my girlfriend's MacBook and our iPhones would be utilising the 2.4GHz N band - I like the idea of the AirPort Extreme Base Unit using simultaneous dual-band. This means that regardless, my MacBook (which will be about 3 metres from the router in the same room) will always be on the 5GHz band, right? Thanks for your help.
 
Hey, thanks for your reply. Most ISPs over here offer wireless routers as part of their subscriptions. I'm returning the D-Link though as it's a poor router. I don't think it's got Gigabit Ethernet ports so maybe that's the problem? Either way, I tried hardwiring to the modem and got 60+ Mbps then straight away tried hardwiring to the wireless router (which was connected to the modem via Ethernet) and I got around 20-25 Mbps.

I don't think Gigabit would be the issue given the cable modem isn't Gigabit and still uses the same 100BaseT Ethernet connection. It could just be the router or a setting on the router, though. I'm not familiar with that model so it's just speculation.

see it being something that's hassle free and that lasts a long time. Do you think, with one of those, that I should then be getting 'better' speeds wirelessly? My MacBook Pro would be utilising the 5GHz N band whereas my girlfriend's MacBook and our iPhones would be utilising the 2.4GHz N band - I like the idea of the AirPort Extreme Base Unit using simultaneous dual-band. This means that regardless, my MacBook (which will be about 3 metres from the router in the same room) will always be on the 5GHz band, right? Thanks for your help.

It should do a lot better than a G device, yes (distance from the router plays a part as well, of course). It's a gigabit device and I've never heard of it limiting bandwidth. If it had the problem too, then there's something else going on there (like a software setting on the computer or something else unknown).
 
The advantage of a dual band radio is that you can let the B/G devices use the 2.4GHz band and let N devices use the 5GHz band and basically avoid the problem of G or B devices slowing your N network down,

Except in the iPhone 4/4S's (802.11b/g/n Wi-Fi) case. It can only use the 2.4GHz band.
 
no, you shouldn't be "clearing" 300mbps. There's a big difference between link speed and data throughput. 802.11n is theoretically capable of 300mbps with channel bonding, but it's not realistic.



This is not a secret. Higher frequencies are faster, but not stronger. Lower frequencies are stronger, but slower.



The frequency band is not a factor here.



Nothing you have needs 300mbps to operate. Your internet connection is nowhere near that speed.



As far as i've seen, 5ghz is marketed as an alternative, not the new standard.



The 802.11n standard wasn't ratified until late last year. What was being used was a draft standard. The vast majority of wireless access points were, and still are, 802.11g. Iphones and ipods use wifi almost exclusively for the internet. An 802.11g network in the 2.4ghz band is sufficient for the speeds that an average broadband connection offers.


amen!

----------

Just because your speed odometer in your car shows it can go up to 180mph doesn't mean you should "easily" be able to hit or, or even hit it at all depending on the speed governor.
 
You're absolutely right 5Ghz has far inferior range when penetrating walls - found this also.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.