Don't bother with wireless N on the iPad unless you're really close to your router.

[arbitrage]

That is very interesting, and goes against other people's theories about the antennae in the iPad. You get 150 when connected to the Airport Express....

I'd say that from this testing, it looks like the iPad is maxed at 150 as suggested by another poster due to the number of antennas and that the real issue is the dual band time capsules and Airport extremes. Or at very least a combo of TCs/AEs and the iPad.

 

[mpuck972]

I have both a T/C "N" router, and a Linksys Wireless "G" router. I had been connecting to the "N" router with the iPad, and today I noticed that when I was 30-40 feet from the routers I was down to one bar on the wireless and page loading was slow. I switched to the "G" and got full strength and the same pages were loading much faster.

So there is an issue here somewhere, whether it be a T/C antenna issue, or an iPad firmware issue.

The OP is not crazy.

 

[jebbe]

Yes, nobody is connecting at 300mbit. How do I know this? Well, I've tested several iPad WiFi models, on several routers that are considered "high-end," and found this. Some people I know with iPads (3G and WiFi models) have found the same thing. In fact, if you scour the message boards, you'll find the same.

Is there "hard empirical" evidence? Of course not. But honestly, this is a message board, and the Interwebs. Stop taking it so personally.

Even aside from my claim, what is your claim exactly? What can you provide here?

Thanks for trolling! Have a nice day. Keep snickering..

Keyword here, YOU

Not everyone else

 

[sapporobaby]

Thanks for trolling! Have a nice day. Keep snickering..

Not the troll card. Ah when all else fails.......

 

[fpnc]

What are you using to test these speeds?

I'm using the data rate from my Time Capsule.

Link rates as reported in the Airport Utility do not measure true data throughput. You shouldn't use that to determine the actual data transfer rate or whether setup A is better than B. However, you can measure file transfer throughput using an app like Air Sharing to see how your wireless router/iPad are really working together. Next best would be to use a utility like SpeedTest.net -- although with SpeedTest you are subject to the limitations of your ISP and/or the server that is delivering the stream over the internet.

I'm using an original-generation Airport Extreme (100Mb) and when I use Air Sharing on my iPad from one or two rooms away I get up to 20Mbps with file transfers over 5GHz 802.11n. However, from this same location I never see rates over 10Mbps when using the SpeedTest.net app.

However, when I switch to using a dedicated 802.11g router (Belkin-G) I see file transfer rates using Air Sharing of about 18Mbps so the differences between these two routers (one running 802.11n and the other 802.11g) seem to be fairly minor. In any case, 2.4GHz networks should generally have greater range than 5GHz setups, so YMMV.

 

[sapporobaby]

Game, set, match: fpnc

Nice post.

 

[WilliamG]

Whatever. You can all believe what you want. There are two groups of people in this thread:

1.) The group of people who haven't tested this, don't care, or aren't technologically savvy enough to understand what it is I'm even saying.

2.) The group of people who HAVE tested this, and have found that I'm not talking out of my ass.

So I'll be done here, and you can close this thread. It's pathetic how some of you act on these boards.

 

[sapporobaby]

Whatever. You can all believe what you want. There are two groups of people in this thread:

1.) The group of people who haven't tested this, don't care, or aren't technologically savvy enough to understand what it is I'm even saying.

2.) The group of people who HAVE tested this, and have found that I'm not talking out of my ass.

So I'll be done here, and you can close this thread. It's pathetic how some of you act on these boards.

You just got owned with fact by fnpc and now you're gonna take your ball and go home. Hey Einstein or maybe you prefer the name "the Enlightened One". Talk about tech savvy. How about proving what fnpc said wrong? He is !00% correct with facts to back it up. He proved that you don't know the difference between throughput and transfer speeds, and that you were using the wrong data to support your theory.. He is also correct (factually) about Speedtest.net giving misleading or inaccurate info. As I have 200 Mbps here in Finland, and Speedtest is useless because it only reports up to 100 Mbps. Damn it has to hurt being you. Anyway, thanks for playing and do come again. (Bring facts, not opinions)

 

[fpnc]

I posted these links a few days ago in another forum. They are a pretty good overview of 802.11n and what you should do to get the best performance with wireless networks. The link to smallnetbuilder also explains why you shouldn't use the link rate to try to estimate real-world throughput.

http://db.tidbits.com/article/10849?print_version=1

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30664/228/

 

[jaw04005]

I’m not sure what’s attracting all the negative attention. I guess the thread title.

However, the OP is talking specifically about iPad and an AirPort Base Station/Time Capsule (Early 2009).

There seems to be a problem with that specific configuration.

There’s no reason the iPad should connect with a transmit rate of 39 on 802.11n and 54-55 on 802.11g in the same room using those particular routers.

In that specific case, you would get better performance using 802.11g.

 

[Aduntu]

Of course. I have the same findings as you. I have no trouble maintaining a connection over N. I do, however, find that the further away I move from the router, the more N 5 suffers, and G 2.4 actually ends up being the more usable network.

For the record, I'm in the same boat as you, connection-wise.

Also, the 2.4Ghz band is naturally going to reach a greater distance than the 5Ghz band. Higher frequency equals increased bandwidth with decreased range. Lower frequency equals decreased bandwidth with increased range.

It's also important for all to understand that the 802.11n pre-standard on Apple's routers is proprietary. It's entirely possible there are issues with their implementation.

 

[sapporobaby]

For the record, I'm in the same boat as you, connection-wise.

Also, the 2.4Ghz band is naturally going to reach a greater distance than the 5Ghz band. Higher frequency equals increased bandwidth with decreased range. Lower frequency equals decreased bandwidth with increased range.

It's also important for all to understand that the 802.11n pre-standard on Apple's routers is proprietary. It's entirely possible there are issues with their implementation.

It is not so much negativity on my part as the fact that the info passed here is being touted as gospel, when in fact the links that fnpc posted spell out the truth of the matter. Link speed is not data throughput but it was passed of as being an indicator of performance.

 

[HiRez]

I have an Airport Extreme base station. All devices are in the same room, within 25 feet of the base station. Using Automatic channel and Interface Robustness turned off.

802.11n (802.11 b/g compatible) 2.4 GHz mode:

(iPad) signal -40, noise -96, rate 39, type 802.11b/g/n
(iMac) signal -60, noise -90, rate 130, type 802.11b/g/n
(iPhone) signal -62, noise -96, rate 54, type 802.11b/g

802.11n only 2.4 GHz mode:

(iPad) signal -45, noise -96, rate 39, type 802.11n (2.4 GHz)
(iMac) signal -62, noise -90, rate 78-130 (fluctuating), type 802.11n (2.4 GHz)
(iPhone) not available

802.11n only 5 GHz mode:

(iPad) signal -54, noise -96, rate 39, type 802.11n (5 GHz)
(iMac) signal -71, noise -90, rate 108, type 802.11n (5 GHz)
(iPhone) not available

So it appears there is little improvement in the raw connection rate for my by switching to 5 GHz n-only (and it also means my iPhones or older guest computers won't work). And in fact, it looks like it makes the signal a bit weaker and the speeds a bit slower, if anything. 2.4 n-only doesn't seem to be any better than mixed b/g/n mode. So back to b/g/n 2.4 GHz for me. It does seem odd that my iPad connects at a lower rate than my iPhone though (devices in the same place).

 

[fpnc]

...There’s no reason the iPad should connect with a transmit rate of 39 on 802.11n and 54-55 on 802.11g in the same room using those particular routers.

In that specific case, you would get better performance using 802.11g.

Let's not confuse the "Rate" shown in the AirPort Utility as something that tells you your current or actual data throughput. Even if your G router/setup says "54" as a rate you are likely getting far less than that in actual data throughput. In fact, unless you are very close to the router you'd be lucky to get even 50% of that "rate" when actually transferring data. The same is true for 802.11n, those link rates reported by the AirPort Utility (such as 300, 150, or whatever) don't indicated real-world data throughput.

When going from room to room over wireless you'll likely see data transfer rates that are only a small fraction of the "Rate" reported by the AirPort Utility. In fact, until you perform actual data transfer tests there is probably no way to know for certain whether these "Rates" shown by the AirPort Utility should even be compared to one another when testing different setups. The only thing you can probably say is that the actual data throughputs will never be equal to or higher than the rate that is reported by the AirPort Utility (and even here we have to assume that the AirPort Utility is reporting the "correct" rate for each connection).

As a point of reference, I've tested my iPad using two different routers (one a Belkin Wireless-G and the other a first-generation AirPort Extreme-N) and when actually transferring data I see very little difference between the G and N setups (or between 2.4GHz and 5GHz). On the average, however, there might be a very slight advantage to the AirPort Extreme running at 5GHz. In these cases I'm always testing from exactly the same distance and position, room-to-room from about 25 feet away.

As for the AirPort Utility reporting a rate of "39" for the connection to the iPad, well, that's one statistic (or observation) but I wouldn't rely on that as the only form of proof that there is a problem with either the AirPort Extreme, Time Capsule, or the iPad itself.

Thus, all these comparisons of "Rates" are probably somewhat misguided. Test actual data throughput (averaged over multiple trials) and then we'll have something to discuss. Note that I'm not claiming that 802.11g can't be faster than 802.11n and as has been noted several times in this thread if you're indoors with lots of distance and walls between you and the router then you may be better off running at 2.4GHz rather than 5GHz.

 

[WilliamG]

It is not so much negativity on my part as the fact that the info passed here is being touted as gospel, when in fact the links that fnpc posted spell out the truth of the matter. Link speed is not data throughput but it was passed of as being an indicator of performance.

Reposting what someone else says doesn't make you clever. Never have I disagreed with what fnpc politely writes, and in fact, you'll note he actually agrees with me, perhaps not specifically, below.

...and as has been noted several times in this thread if you're indoors with lots of distance and walls between you and the router then you may be better off running at 2.4GHz rather than 5GHz.

I have done Speedtests over N 5 and 2.4 G, and the 2.4G is always, always faster than the N 5 with the iPad. I know that Speedtest isn't the "ultimate" test, but if you're running the same test over N and G, and G is faster in the same location, that is fairly conclusive that G is just plain faster. I can also attest that when streaming Air Video from my bedroom, several rooms away from the TC, I have trouble with 720p over 5 N, and NO trouble over 2.4 G. I get occasional pauses with N, and none with G. And I actually disagree with fnpc about the "link speed is not indicative of actual speed." And let's not forget he's not exactly citing scholarly sources, so his evidence is no more empirical than mine. While I agree that even connecting at 300mbit doesn't mean you're getting 300mbit, I know that in MY experience, that when my iMac is connecting at 300mbit and my Mac mini is connecting at 170mbit or thereabouts, my iMac transfers much faster to the Time Capsule when doing file-transfer tests.


Once again, I don't have empirical evidence, but honestly - I don't care.

By the way, do you have empirical evidence that a Ferrari 458 Italia is a better-driving car than a Dodge Neon? An analogy to illustrate, and no doubt sapporobaby will rip me to shreds as he is wont to do, but right now, it's too early for any empirical evidence. And even if I gave you numbers, you'd still be, "Oh well that's just YOUR experience." Get off your high horse, dude (aimed at sapporobaby, not fnpc).

Oh, and it's gone on too long. I HAVE provided empirical evidence. Sapporobaby I suggest you use a dictionary. I ran with it for a while, but I figured the Internets are filled with misinformation enough that I'll just call you on it:

Empirical evidence: based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

So as you can see, I have indeed provided empirical evidence. Unless you want to get all Kantian and get into the validity of truths, my empirical evidence are my findings, verified and repeatable by many people in this thread. I do my best to provide useful information when I post. If you have nothing useful to contribute, please don't bother anymore. If you fail to show some form of useful refutation when you reply, what is your purpose?

 

[fpnc]

I can add another data point to the link rate issue. I tested my iPhone 3GS with the same router setup as my iPad and even though the iPhone shows a link rate that is higher than my iPad, the iPad transfers files twice as fast as does the iPhone.

Now here we are testing different devices so there is more than just the wireless speeds to contend with but it does show that raw link rate is not the end-all, be-all of wireless data transfer performance.

The reason I continue to bring this issue up is that I've seen far too many post from people in the past who are confused and worried when their data transfer results are "low" even when the link rate reports that their connection is running at 300 or 150. I've even seen posts from people giving advice that if you don't see 100Mbps or better over 802.11n then you must have problems with your network (where here that person was confusing link rate with actual data throughput - trying to argue that 802.11n would always be faster than 100Mbps wired Ethernet - which is almost never true).

 

[WilliamG]

I can add another data point to the link rate issue. I tested my iPhone 3GS with the same router setup as my iPad and even though the iPhone shows a link rate that is higher than my iPad, the iPad transfers files twice as fast as does the iPhone.

Now here we are testing different devices so there is more than just the wireless speeds to contend with but it does show that raw link rate is not the end-all, be-all of wireless data transfer performance.

The reason I continue to bring this issue up is that I've seen far too many post from people in the past who are confused and worried when their data transfer results are "low" even when the link rate reports that their connection is running at 300 or 150. I've even seen posts from people giving advice that if you don't see 100Mbps or better over 802.11n then you must have problems with your network (where here that person was confusing link rate with actual
data throughput - trying to argue that 802.11n would always be faster than 100Mbps wired Ethernet - which is almost never true).

I would be interested to see what kind of results you see when you move further away from the access point, over G and N. I see very little difference with my iPad when close to my Time Capsule but things change dramatically when I move further away. At that point, it's clear that G works a ton better. I believe that is normal for 2.4 vs 5ghz bands, but I guess the point is that most people aren't in the same room as their router when using the iPad, hence I suggest using the G network.

 

[msduncan]

I would be interested to see what kind of results you see when you move further away from the access point, over G and N. I see very little difference with my iPad when close to my Time Capsule but things change dramatically when I move further away. At that point, it's clear that G works a ton better. I believe that is normal for 2.4 vs 5ghz bands, but I guess the point is that most people aren't in the same room as their router when using the iPad, hence I suggest using the G network.

So I'm running an Airport Express as my primary router.

Just to make sure I'm running on the right setting according to the results of your test, I should switch it from:

802.11n(802.11g/b compatible)

To this:

802.11n only (2.4GHz)

Am I correct? Going into manual setup, that's the only option I can find that explicitly says 2.4GHz. Just want to make sure I'm testing and using at the right settings.

 

[WilliamG]

So I'm running an Airport Express as my primary router.

Just to make sure I'm running on the right setting according to the results of your test, I should switch it from:

802.11n(802.11g/b compatible)

To this:

802.11n only (2.4GHz)

Am I correct? Going into manual setup, that's the only option I can find that explicitly says 2.4GHz. Just want to make sure I'm testing and using at the right settings.

No you want to switch from 802.11n-ONLY 5Ghz to 802.11b/g 2.4Ghz.

 

[stealthman1]

I've been doing some tests on the iPad, and just a few rooms away, my signal rate is only 29mbit via my Time Capsule's logging/stats menu in N mode, whereas I get a solid 54mbit via G mode.

So:

N = reduced range, and most of the time reduced speed. Stick to G mode. Thank you for reading. Carry on.

I'll remember that next time I'm at your house...WTF???

 

[spectre51]

I changed my network (Airport Extreme - non-dual band and Airport Express) from the 5ghz N only to 2.4 b/g/n. Once I did this my iPad gets much better signal strength all through the house. I don't have the connection issues in the bedroom anymore. Guess I will leave it at 2.4ghz b/g/n for a while and see how the rest of my network does (AppleTV streaming from MacMini downstairs and podcasts from iMac down the hall)

At least by setting it to the 2.4ghz b/g/n mode I can unplug my linksys access point that was being used for 2.4ghz devices and not have to worry about it locking up and having to reset it once a day.

Once I get another airport express to extend the wireless better to the bedroom then I'll go back to the 5ghz N only

 

[fpnc]

I would be interested to see what kind of results you see when you move further away from the access point, over G and N. I see very little difference with my iPad when close to my Time Capsule but things change dramatically when I move further away. At that point, it's clear that G works a ton better. I believe that is normal for 2.4 vs 5ghz bands, but I guess the point is that most people aren't in the same room as their router when using the iPad, hence I suggest using the G network.

I'd suggest that it would be easier to just go over to the SmallNetBuilder link and look at their test results from using many different wireless routers in a multi-room environment (they even have a compare feature). SmallNetBuilder measures actual data throughput and it will probably surprise a lot of people to see how low actual data transfer rates are over typical wireless networks.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com

In my case, I know that my AirPort Extreme/iPad performs just as well in 802.11n at 5GHz as it does at other settings but YMMV depending upon the construction of your home, the local interference, the device you are using, etc.

 

[Shank2001]

Wireless N us way better than G in my location.

Here are my experiences with a early Time Capsule set to N 5ghz only, an apple TV, and an iPad 3G.

I also have a dlink router set up using G only for my iPhone 3GS. And I can alternate between networks to compare on the iPad.

Apple tv data rate:270 a few rooms away from router
iPad in same room as router: 150
iPad in different room with two walls between router/iPad: 120
iPad in bathroom where my iPhone 3GS has random disconnects from wifi using G: 120

Overall my iPad stays connected WAY farther from my routers than my iPhone and, in fact, have never experienced a disconnection with it on any network. It also has much higher data transfers from wireless N than from G from every location. From my testing there is no doubt in my mind that in my location (very saturated with other 2.5ghz networks, by the way) wireless N blows wireless G away in every way on my iPad.

 

[WilliamG]

You're getting 150mbit reported link speed from your Time Capsule to your iPad? What model TC is it, and what security settings are you running?

 

[Shank2001]

Yes I am getting 150 data rate with my iPad as reported by my Time Capsule. The model is a first gen. TC from 2008.

Security is set to WPA2 Personal. Time capsule firmware is 7.4.2.

As you can see from the screenshot, at this moment ipad is connected at 150, AppleTV is connected at 216.

I am not sure why the AppleTV has dropped so far from the 270 it was reporting before.

I use my Dlink 655 for DHCP serving and it serves all my other G devices, so that is what the other screen is for, to show that these are indeed my iPad and Apple TV.