Ethernet vs. wireless N on the mbp.. which one do you use?

[jjahshik32]

When I use the mbp on my desk connected to the 23" ACD.. is it faster using the ethernet as to wireless N?? Or I shouldnt bother and just use the wireless N?

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...thernet_vs_802_11g_n_wireless_networking.html

Just found this and thought is it really true, wireless N that much slower than ethernet?

 

[Freyqq]

gigabit ethernet (1000) is faster than N wireless

regular 10/100 ethernet is slower than N wireless

 

[Vanarak19]

gigabit ethernet (1000) is faster than N wireless

regular 10/100 ethernet is slower than N wireless

how is the second statement true? real world vs real world, 10/100 should demolish Wifi-N.

the most ive seen out of wifi-n is 75 Mb/s which is just under 10MB/s. where as the ethernet 100 should be doing close to 12MB/s, with 0 interference issues, and no wifi troubles.


ive been using wireless g as of late here for internet. I used to plug into the router right under the laptop/desk, but ive grown accustomed to not liking that wire sticking out.

Now, wifi-N has the potential to be faster in the near future, but for now, ill still use the 10/100. my view is based solely on real-world numbers, not "theoretical" maxes, who ever hits those

 

[e12a]

at work we've got an airport extreme.

So its both.

But i prefer Gigabit.

 

[Solesk]

it really all comes down to how often you transfer large files.

if your just surfing the web then it makes no difference. or if your just copying the occasional file.

for large amounts of data you'll still be better off with a gigibit switch. and those arent that expensive anymore. i have one and love it.

 

[Mumford]

how is the second statement true? real world vs real world, 10/100 should demolish Wifi-N.

the most ive seen out of wifi-n is 75 Mb/s which is just under 10MB/s. where as the ethernet 100 should be doing close to 12MB/s, with 0 interference issues, and no wifi troubles.


ive been using wireless g as of late here for internet. I used to plug into the router right under the laptop/desk, but ive grown accustomed to not liking that wire sticking out.

Now, wifi-N has the potential to be faster in the near future, but for now, ill still use the 10/100. my view is based solely on real-world numbers, not "theoretical" maxes, who ever hits those

You argue against using the "theoretical maximums" but proceed to use fast ethernet's (100Mb/s or 12.5MB/s) theoretical maximums in your examples.

Talking purely in maximums, 802.11n should be 2.5x faster than fast ethernet. However, I will agree that in real world use fast ethernet almost always significantly faster than 802.11n... why?

It wasn't too long ago that 100Mb/s was the new great thing. We all had hubs, not switches. The shared nature of a hubbed network slowed it greatly. Packet collision on a wired network is a thing of the past, switches made the difference that you see now in speed comparisons between fast ethernet and 802.11n.

If you can somehow find an area completely free of interference (I suspect the only way to do this would be in a Faraday cage), and ran your 802.11 network with no obstacles in between source & destination, you would see much better speeds.

 

[anirban]

If I were you, I would go with the Ethernet, if the cord is not an issue for you.

 

[creator2456]

Wireless anything is a convenience and will almost always be slower than the wired alternative in real world applications.

 

[Vanarak19]

You argue against using the "theoretical maximums" but proceed to use fast ethernet's (100Mb/s or 12.5MB/s) theoretical maximums in your examples.

Talking purely in maximums, 802.11n should be 2.5x faster than fast ethernet. However, I will agree that in real world use fast ethernet almost always significantly faster than 802.11n... why?

It wasn't too long ago that 100Mb/s was the new great thing. We all had hubs, not switches. The shared nature of a hubbed network slowed it greatly. Packet collision on a wired network is a thing of the past, switches made the difference that you see now in speed comparisons between fast ethernet and 802.11n.

If you can somehow find an area completely free of interference (I suspect the only way to do this would be in a Faraday cage), and ran your 802.11 network with no obstacles in between source & destination, you would see much better speeds.

there has been very few instances where i havent achieved maximum 10/100 transfer speeds on the wired method. Sure Wifi is "getting there" but it still has a ways to go to compete with 10/100, and thats really too slow these days too.

wifi has the advantage of being wireless, so that may weigh in as a huge plus. But for someone like me, i like to have that extra 2MB/s for just using a wire.

something i forgot to mention. When i use 2 seperate laptops on the same router, and transfer files from one to the other, using wifi-n, it is much slower than 12MB/s. something to do with the wireless setup on the router just not being able to handle two signals coming/going at once.

we are getting there though, for sure

 

[TaylorB]

I use Wireless N and it seems to work completely fine with my connection. I have the option to be directly connected but my connection works fine.

 

[alphaod]

I can get 15MB/s downloads with my ethernet, I get about 6MB/s with N-wireless.