Teardown of Apple's New AirPort Extreme Reveals Hard Drive Slot, but No Connectors

[RamGuy]

Picked one up from my local Apple store last night in Burlingame. So sadly the same problem as the previous model as the coverage compared to my current Buffalo router is terrible. Especially out to my garage/office where I have the latest Airport Express and an old Airport Extreme hooking up my Mac Pro. I had high hopes with the new design and wanted to replace the Buffalo router as some of the Apple devices will drop occasionally when I turn on WPA2.

Speedtest records almost no loss with the Buffalo router but with new Extreme is as bad as the old one with almost no signal.

Will try some more testing tonight but this may be a return to store.

What kind of Buffalo router do you have?
Wireless transmission is a real pain it the butt.. I've been testing quite a few routers the past years with varied results.. But what I've learned poisoning of router and the antennas can play a big role in how things play out.

Like both the Netgear WNDR3700 and WNDR4500 I've had seems to have somewhat directionally antenna output so placing it sideways with the top part pointing the direction I want my signal gave me significant better performance compared to having it just sitting flat, and placing it the other way gave me horrible signals.

My D-Link DAP-2553 enterprise grade access point had worse signal strength compared to both of the above, even though it featured external antennas I could never seem to place them in any direction that would give me decent results.

The Apple Time Capsule (5th Gen, aka previous model) had okay signal strengths but I never managed to focus the signal in any particular direction forcing me to place it in the centre of where I want my signal to spread from.


The most important thing I've learned though is that "higher is better", mounting or placing your router / access point as high as possible for less interference might be key. If that wont solve your issues try to move it around, placing it on the side and whatnot especially if there is no external antennas to play around with.

If you have several wireless devices make sure they are on different spectrums so they don't mess with each others signal. And if you want good coverage you are normally better of going with 802.11G only mode, my results have always pointing at 802.11G having quite a bit better range compared to 802.11N but of course you are sacrificing speed. Using 2.4GHz over 5.0GHz is also a no-brainer if you want extended coverage as 5.0GHz signals have a much harder time punching through wall and other objects.

 

[newyorkone]

the extreme (without harddrive) needs a fan?

Yes and it's not a bad idea. Most routers end up dying because of heat. My current AE has performed beautifully for almost 4 years, but before that I went through a Dlink or Belkin once a year.

Probably going to pick this one up to replace the current one.

 

[fpnc]

As for the Buffalo router showing better range that the AirPort Extreme, I assume that they are both using the same radio frequencies since the 2.4GHz band will generally have better range between rooms than 5GHz (given no other issues, such as interference from other 2.4GHz devices).

As for the USB2/USB3 controversy, it's already been shown for several reasons to be a non-issue for wireless access (i.e. the debate is over). Also, to repeat from one of my earlier posts, USB3 is known to cause problems with 2.4Ghz WiFi signals to the point where if you try to enable USB3 on some of the new 802.11ac routers from D-Link you will get the following warning, "Please note that enabling USB 3.0 may adversely affect your 2.4 G wireless range." In fact, D-Link doesn't even market USB3 support, probably for this very reason.

 

[michial]

I only have a 2012 cmbp. Would this give me better range and throughput than the asus rtn66u?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

OK, then return to IDE drives, 64 MB RAM, and 54 MBit/s networks, if you hate progress.

WTF are you talking about? I'm talking about you harping on about some theoretical nonsense and now you're talking about the stone ages.

My 802.11N promises 300Mbit theoretical speeds. The problem is that it does not deliver them EVER. I can put my Macbook Pro right in front of my router and it will still never attain anywhere NEAR 300MBit/sec. I've seen maybe 180Mbit/sec at most. Two rooms over and I'm luck to get 60-90Mbit/sec. And that is FAR CRY from the speeds my Gigabit Ethernet cable can deliver even on my old PowerMac from 2001. I've seen sustained transfers over 100MB/sec (800Mbit+) with Gigabit. Frankly, I'd be AMAZED if 802.11AC can even manage 60MB/sec in the real world (approaching the theoretical limits its forbearer promised).

Frankly, I'd like to see Apple start including 10Gigabit Ethernet standard at the same time so those of us that need/want stable high speed connections at home can get them in our office. There is no point in using WiFi in my den as it's wired for Gigabit and WiFi would only slow it down. But Gigabit is over a decade old. It should be updated as well. Sadly, most PCs still come with 10/100 only even and that is SAD.

 

[haruhiko]

Given that the 2TB Time Capsule has a similar price to an AEBS + a 2TB 3.5" harddisk plus SATA vs USB 2 (on the AEBS), I think this time I will opt for the TC rather than AEBS.

 

[haruhiko]

WTF are you talking about? I'm talking about you harping on about some theoretical nonsense and now you're talking about the stone ages.

My 802.11N promises 300Mbit theoretical speeds. The problem is that it does not deliver them EVER. I can put my Macbook Pro right in front of my router and it will still never attain anywhere NEAR 300MBit/sec. I've seen maybe 180Mbit/sec at most. Two rooms over and I'm luck to get 60-90Mbit/sec. And that is FAR CRY from the speeds my Gigabit Ethernet cable can deliver even on my old PowerMac from 2001. I've seen sustained transfers over 100MB/sec (800Mbit+) with Gigabit. Frankly, I'd be AMAZED if 802.11AC can even manage 60MB/sec in the real world (approaching the theoretical limits its forbearer promised).

Frankly, I'd like to see Apple start including 10Gigabit Ethernet standard at the same time so those of us that need/want stable high speed connections at home can get them in our office. There is no point in using WiFi in my den as it's wired for Gigabit and WiFi would only slow it down. But Gigabit is over a decade old. It should be updated as well. Sadly, most PCs still come with 10/100 only even and that is SAD.

My AEBS from 2009 (at least from the network activity app) gives my MacBook Pros and Airs 300Mbps over WiFi. What router are you using?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

My AEBS from 2009 (at least from the network activity app) gives my MacBook Pros and Airs 300Mbps over WiFi. What router are you using?

And what did you measure that speed with? The device saying it can do 300Mbps is a far cry from it actually doing it. Given overhead and range limitations, I don't believe any router can actually obtain the true maximum.

As for my router, I use a Netgear WNDR3700 Dual Radio 802.11N router.

 

[clayj]

Picked up my 3 TB Time Capsule today. Exported out the config from my previous-gen AirPort Extreme, removed the AirPort Extreme, hooked up the new TC, set up the basic parameters (network name, WiFi password, IP address, etc.), and then imported the DHCP reservations and IPv4 port mappings ONLY from the exported configuration file. So far, so good.

Here are some benchmarks for anyone who's interested -- WiFi speed:

2012 MacBook Air, just a few feet away: 270 Mb/s
iPhone 5, just a few feet away: 72 Mb/s
iPad 3, in my bedroom (about 40 feet away): 65 Mb/s
Apple TV, in my living room (about 25 feet away): 65 Mb/s

I like the white color, and I understand why Apple went with it (because all their WiFi gear is white), but I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't choose black if it were available.

 

[Tech198]

lol... opps

Future improvements ?

 

[believlle]

Picked up my 3 TB Time Capsule today. Exported out the config from my previous-gen AirPort Extreme, removed the AirPort Extreme, hooked up the new TC, set up the basic parameters (network name, WiFi password, IP address, etc.), and then imported the DHCP reservations and IPv4 port mappings ONLY from the exported configuration file. So far, so good.

Here are some benchmarks for anyone who's interested -- WiFi speed:

2012 MacBook Air, just a few feet away: 270 Mb/s
iPhone 5, just a few feet away: 72 Mb/s
iPad 3, in my bedroom (about 40 feet away): 65 Mb/s
Apple TV, in my living room (about 25 feet away): 65 Mb/s

I like the white color, and I understand why Apple went with it (because all their WiFi gear is white), but I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't choose black if it were available.

always, did you test the file accessing(read and write) speed over a wired gigabyte lan which could show us the max io performance of new TC?

 

[johnmcboston]

Here are some benchmarks for anyone who's interested -- WiFi speed:

2012 MacBook Air, just a few feet away: 270 Mb/s
iPad 3, in my bedroom (about 40 feet away): 65 Mb/s

... but I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't choose black if it were available.

How about when the Air is 40+ feet away?

And I would have gone for black as well. "hides" itself a bit better.

 

[MrCubes]

can you test the file RW speed via wired lan? then we could see the full IO power of the TC processor.

I will do at some point. Just not had time to set up a reliable test yet. It's nice and easy to use Speedtest.net over the internet

In the meantime it looks like clayj has done just that a few posts above.

 

[believlle]

I will do at some point. Just not had time to set up a reliable test yet. It's nice and easy to use Speedtest.net over the internet

In the meantime it looks like clayj has done just that a few posts above.

thank you~
clayj did the test for wireless transfer speed. and i'm looking for a file R/W speed via a wired line which could show us how fast TC can make since LAN will not be affected by distance and other env : )

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

And if you honestly believe you will actually get anywhere NEAR that kind of performance in the real world with WiFi, I have some swamp land to sell you....

Agree 100%. But, the faster signaling rate means more time slots to share among a bunch of competing devices, even if dropped frames means individual streams never achieve the maximum data rate in real life. In real life, people probably will want to watch Netflix HD content over their wireless while doing their backup and have everything work smoothly, including have the backup proceed at full speed.

One reason why the new AirPort Extreme may only support USB2 is that USB3 causes pretty significant interference with 2.4GHz wireless devices (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.). Apparently this is a serious enough issue that Intel has even written a white paper on this problem.

The website SmallNetBuilder also noted that in their test of the latest D-Link 802.11ac router that when you enable USB3 capability on that device the D-Link firmware gives you the following warning: "Please note that enabling USB 3.0 may adversely affect your 2.4 G wireless range."

Interesting. I have one "low-interference" USB 2.0 cable that came with a device. I wonder if the equivalent exists for USB 3.0? Or would the main interference be within the Time Capsule itself? This seems like a solvable problem.

In fact, D-Link only advertises USB2 support even though their hardware is USB3 capable (if user enabled via firmware). SmallNetBuilder also tested the hard drive access with and without USB3 enabled and they found that USB3 only added about 4MB/s to the file transfer speeds. Even with USB3 enabled the transfers topped out between 12 and 27MB/s which is easily within the range of USB2.

Can you quote the source? It would be interesting to see exactly what they were comparing.

One can conclude, therefore, that in terms of wireless access the lack of USB3 support in the new AirPort Extreme is a non-issue (in fact, it may be a good thing if you need to use the 2.4GHz band for WiFi).

The only remaining issue might be what if you don't need 2.4GHz support and you want to access the USB drive over a wired network (1Gb ethernet)? In that case you might GUESS that USB3 would help but given that the total throughput on any device is finite it might not make much of a difference there either (given the chipset, firmware, etc.).

Actually my current Extreme has already lasted 4 years, so it lasting 3-5 years isn't that outlandish!

I have a 6-year-old AE that is still working. The first (or close to) model that supported 802.11n.

To all those that think a router needs USB 3 - check what the actual transfer rate of a hard drive is - it will come nowhere close to saturating USB 2, let alone USB 3.

Unless you're connecting an SSD to this - but what would be the point of that?!?

Others have commented, but, I will too anyway. This is simply not true. I have posted numbers long ago on USB 2.0, FW400, and FW800 using 4-5 year old Seagate backup drives. USB 2.0 < FW400 < FW800. And now FW800 < USB 3.0 for the fastest drives.

One of the additional problems with USB 2.0 is that it is also a CPU hog, so, when you are doing the backup, you are loading down the processor, and adding latency which also slows transfers further. 2.0 was always lame, which is why so many people went with FW all those years. USB 3.0 finally solved these problems (CPU load, latency, bus utilization, speed). Why would you prefer to stick with 2.0?

That's not really true. Just about any SATA hard drive that is made today can transfer data at 100MB/s or better and in the real world USB2 tops out at something around 40MB/s (although raw bandwidth for USB2 is 480Mb/s or about 60MB/s). In any case, wireless transfers will be even slower than what you'd get with a directly attached USB2 drive, so for WiFi access USB2 is probably okay even with the faster 802.11ac devices.

I think you would find USB 3.0 a performance plus even so because of the reduced latency.

I've been pretty happy with my WD MyBook Live. At $129 for a 2TB NAS on GigE with decent performance it fits the "cheap" part of the bill. Compared to my TC (1st gen) it's a speed demon!

I haven't tried the GigE NAS. Certainly the FW800 is a speed demon.

WTF are you talking about? I'm talking about you harping on about some theoretical nonsense and now you're talking about the stone ages.

My 802.11N promises 300Mbit theoretical speeds. The problem is that it does not deliver them EVER. I can put my Macbook Pro right in front of my router and it will still never attain anywhere NEAR 300MBit/sec. I've seen maybe 180Mbit/sec at most. Two rooms over and I'm luck to get 60-90Mbit/sec. And that is FAR CRY from the speeds my Gigabit Ethernet cable can deliver even on my old PowerMac from 2001. I've seen sustained transfers over 100MB/sec (800Mbit+) with Gigabit. Frankly, I'd be AMAZED if 802.11AC can even manage 60MB/sec in the real world (approaching the theoretical limits its forbearer promised).

Frankly, I'd like to see Apple start including 10Gigabit Ethernet standard at the same time so those of us that need/want stable high speed connections at home can get them in our office. There is no point in using WiFi in my den as it's wired for Gigabit and WiFi would only slow it down. But Gigabit is over a decade old. It should be updated as well. Sadly, most PCs still come with 10/100 only even and that is SAD.

Are there new PCs sold that are still 10/100 only? I haven't bought anything hostwise that wasn't GigE in recent years. The different in chip prices are in pennies. I would be suspicious of/avoid any host device that wasn't 10/100/1000-- it would make me suspect that rest of the engineering for the device. There is more to performance than just the bandwidth a particular device requires. One device may only need 10 Mbps, but, there is a serialization delay in transmission, jitter caused by competing flows, and the bandwidth and latency of other devices to consider. It makes sense for the whole "ecosystem" to use Gigabit Ethernet as the standard. It is (practically) free.

Also agree with you about 10 Gigabit Ethernet. It has been used in large clusters for a long time, but, now that everyone is thinking 4K video, I think 10 Gigabit Ethernet will catch on too.

 

[name99]

WTF are you talking about? I'm talking about you harping on about some theoretical nonsense and now you're talking about the stone ages.

My 802.11N promises 300Mbit theoretical speeds. The problem is that it does not deliver them EVER. I can put my Macbook Pro right in front of my router and it will still never attain anywhere NEAR 300MBit/sec. I've seen maybe 180Mbit/sec at most. Two rooms over and I'm luck to get 60-90Mbit/sec. And that is FAR CRY from the speeds my Gigabit Ethernet cable can deliver even on my old PowerMac from 2001. I've seen sustained transfers over 100MB/sec (800Mbit+) with Gigabit. Frankly, I'd be AMAZED if 802.11AC can even manage 60MB/sec in the real world (approaching the theoretical limits its forbearer promised).

Frankly, I'd like to see Apple start including 10Gigabit Ethernet standard at the same time so those of us that need/want stable high speed connections at home can get them in our office. There is no point in using WiFi in my den as it's wired for Gigabit and WiFi would only slow it down. But Gigabit is over a decade old. It should be updated as well. Sadly, most PCs still come with 10/100 only even and that is SAD.

You would find life more interesting (and less frustrating) if you took a little time to learn about this technology.

The "speed" of WiFi defines the PHY speed, the speed at which bits are encoded. This is not the same as the perceived speed, the MAC speed, because a substantial amount of time (40 to 60%) of the time is spent not transmitting bits but everyone being quiet trying to figure out who gets to send the next packet. (Go read about the 802.11 MAC to understand why this is so.)

As for 10G ethernet, it is a fact of life that it still takes up a LOT of silicon and a LOT of power. Things are not nearly as bad as they used to be. We've moved from two large PCI cards to a single chip, but it's still not a small, cheap, low-power chip. We really are bumping into fundamental physics here. Go look at the specs for Cat7 cables --- they are insane. This is not just copper wire, it has to be crazy pure because even minor amounts of oxygen impurities reduce the frequency range supported; the twisting of the wires is precisely defined, etc etc.

It is very likely, IMHO, that we may never see 10G ethernet on a mac motherboard. Rather it'll appear as a thunderbolt dongle, like the current TB-GigE dongle. This is kinda the whole point of the (slow, I know) transition to TB --- instead of a bunch of different ports on a device, provide the same number of TB ports and plug whatever you want into them. It's frustrating that the whole transition is taking so long, but I'm guessing this is important enough to Intel that it's going to continue. At some point the TB controller will presumably move onto the CPU die (and if Intel had any sense they would do this ASAP, like with Broadwell next year). At that point it moves into every PC and hopefully takes off.

 

[g4cube]

After posting previously my expectation to see one or two 2.5" drives in the new TIme Capsule, I got my 3 TB today, and found one big Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5 " drive.

Overall, this TC installs easily, but it is a lot heavier than one might expect. Close to 3.5 lbs.

Really a nice piece of networking equipment.

 

[believlle]

After posting previously my expectation to see one or two 2.5" drives in the new TIme Capsule, I got my 3 TB today, and found one big Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5 " drive.

Overall, this TC installs easily, but it is a lot heavier than one might expect. Close to 3.5 lbs.

Really a nice piece of networking equipment.

can you test the file RW speed via wired Gigabit LAN? then we could see the full IO power of the TC processor, so far no one shows that.

 

[\-V-/]

I went for this on Kickstarter (campaign has ended now):

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects...c-touchscreen-wifi-router-smart-home?ref=live

Price: $99
802.11ac
3x3 MIMO antennas
USB 3.0
Dual core ARM SoC
LCD touch screen for control and configuration
Wall mountable
Z-Wave and Zigbee for home automation

Click the Updates tab (or click below) to see the revised specs (half-way down the page):
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects...11ac-touchscreen-wifi-router-smart-home/posts

Thx for bringing this to my attention. I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

 

[twoodcc]

i'm still not sure if like the new design or not, but eventually i'll have to get one. i think i'll pass on the time capsules though. they should have made them 3 TB and 4TB, and then i'd buy it for the same price points

 

[otismotive77]

strange, unusual design and the missing usb 3.0 port are a deal-breaker for me.
apple should change the new design or they should switch back to the old one.

 

[CosmoPilot]

I'm curious if anyone knows whether or not any of Apple's 802.11n devices/computers support beamforming?

 

[BR3W]

the Netgear WNDR3700 I've had seems to have somewhat directionally antenna output so placing it sideways with the top part pointing the direction I want my signal gave me significant better performance compared to having it just sitting flat, and placing it the other way gave me horrible signals.

can you describe this orientation more clearly? I have a WNDR3700 as a bridge from the house to the shop and can't seem to get a reliable, strong signal. I'm having a difficult time visualizing how you are aiming your router. I'd appreciate it if you gave me a reference point (like where the power button is pointed or the logo, or something along those lines), please.

Right now I have it standing up (vertically, on it's side so it's longest from bottom to top) with the flat side (that would normally be the top) pointed out the window toward the shop.

 

[RamGuy]

can you describe this orientation more clearly? I have a WNDR3700 as a bridge from the house to the shop and can't seem to get a reliable, strong signal. I'm having a difficult time visualizing how you are aiming your router. I'd appreciate it if you gave me a reference point (like where the power button is pointed or the logo, or something along those lines), please.

Right now I have it standing up (vertically, on it's side so it's longest from bottom to top) with the flat side (that would normally be the top) pointed out the window toward the shop.

From my experience the antennas are oriented is such a way that they beam up towards the top of the router (the Netgear logo) so you get best signal strength when you put it vertically like you do and face the top (Netgear logo) towards your desired location, thus making the bottom part (the one with the default IP-address etc..) having the opposite results.

 

[Brian Y]

That's not really true. Just about any SATA hard drive that is made today can transfer data at 100MB/s or better and in the real world USB2 tops out at something around 40MB/s (although raw bandwidth for USB2 is 480Mb/s or about 60MB/s). In any case, wireless transfers will be even slower than what you'd get with a directly attached USB2 drive, so for WiFi access USB2 is probably okay even with the faster 802.11ac devices.

That wasn't my point. My point is that the AEBS supports SMB and AFP. You try getting anywhere near to 100MB/s through either of those, to USB 2 or 3.