Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by brianbkny, Feb 13, 2007.
do you think I would really see a speed difference? I do like the usb option though.
Yeah, Here is mine
Getting a faster wireless router (like the new Airport Extreme) would increase the speed of your wireless network (useful if you have another 802.11n device around the house you copy files to, like the TV), but it shouldn't increase the speed of your Internet connection.
Your cable/dsl modem is the bottleneck there.
Well, to adequately answer that, we'd need to know the actual speed of your Internet connection. The results they are showing are a bit inflated.
I have a 256kb Maximum download which would come to 32KB/sec
My upload is limited to 128kb which would be 16KB/sec
But, they show my results as:
So, obviously, not quite accurate.
Let us know what your actual connection speed is (as in the plan you have paid for with your ISP), and that will give us some better numbers to work with.
Also, to determine whether you would see any improvement, we'd also need to know what you are currently using. As in which specific Airport system (if that's what you're using).
You also need to understand that you must have an 802.11n Interface in your computer as well if you want to benefit from the higher speed of the new Airport base station.
So, let us know what equipment you are using, what base station you are using, if you are using any other routers / switches, and what computer system you are using. All of that will figure into the final answer as each device has it's own maximum speed.
If I don't have the answer, I'm sure someone else would be able to help if they have accurate numbers to start with.
Exactly. That's why I proposed he let us know exactly what plan he is on. The test results are not really helpful since they are not accurate (at least not in my case).
But, generally, I have found that the local network even at 10-BaseT speeds, is generally faster than the fastest Internet connection. I am getting ready to upgrade to Cable with a 3 MB transfer rate, and that is still going to be well under the speed that an old 10BaseT connection would support.
For comparison, if my memory is right, 802.11b should be comparable to a 10BaseT connection.
802.11G should be roughly half of 100BaseT. And, I'm not currently aware of the maximum speed of 802.11n (haven't been following it that closely).
But, generally, if you have 802.11b or 802.11g, then you are already going to be fine unless you are one of the few who can afford an Internet connection that is actually faster than that.
Based on the speed you cite of 9355 Kb/sec from the test, that is still only about 1 MB per second. If 802.11n transfers roughly 10 MB or 11 MB per second, then that would still be much faster than your current Internet connection.
So, in short, with the little information you provide, I don't see the new Airport hub providing you with better performance.
Now, if you have a really, really, really fast connection that isn't reflected in your test results, then that might be different.
Holy crap guys, i have a wireless G router. And a HIGH SPEED internet connection and this is what i got on my test.......
The real advantage of wireless N is the expanded range, and the transfer rate on the network between two N devices.
If it helps any, if I use the closest place on the map, speedtest.net only shows 8Mbps. I picked the next closest place and got this:
802.11n is @ 100MB transfer rate .. or 10/100 ethernet connection card
Thank you. Good information. So, that should be pretty decent throughput now.
Of course, I have a hard-wired network here. And, I know the only time I've ever come close to it's maximum throughput is when I've sent files directly from one machine to another. It's absolutely amazing to watch things fly that way. Really puts the Internet to shame.
my plan is apparently 5Mbps or 8Mbps down and 384Kbps or 512Kbps down
With that in mind, you should be fine with even the slowest of wireless connections. If you have a wireless router that supports at least 802.11b, then you should be just fine.
While definitely not the most authoritative answer out there, you could refer to this document (and it's chart) for a brief and simple run-down.
Of course, degradation of the signal could play a factor. So, the more recent the standard, the better your odds are of maintaining the throughput. Older standards will typically slow down as the signal quality decreases. So, if that is an issue, then you may consider it.
But, if your signal is strong, and there are not any decreases due to signal strength, then I would stay with what you have.
Like other posts have said, simply getting the new airport will not increase the speed of your internet connection. Now if you currently have a 802.11.g router and you decide to get the n standard then that could bring a increase in speed. But whats great about the n standard is that its supports more users and the signal strength is strong and extends farther. If you have a large house or might want to enjoy a better connection on th porch or the deck or maybe even the back yard with a laptop a n standard all around would provide that. But if you have two different standards the speed of your connection will run at the lower standard. And of course the type of internet that your receiving tell your true speed. But most of the numbers are inflated because very few people actually use up all of the capable speed due to either distance or a crowded connection.
If you got a gigabit ethernet connection on 1 system and 10/100 on another system then the bottleneck is @ 10/100 connection location.. To get the best speed in transfers is ideally to have Gigabit to Gigabit connection = 1000MB transfer ..
O' Yeah .. My Network Geeky-ness just came out
Well, I wired the network myself (I used to do that work for a living years and years ago). So, it's at least up to 100BaseT Cat5e Standards. But, the fastest switch I have on the network is a 10/100. And, I don't have any systems with greater than a 10/100 card in them. So, I can't really test higher than that.
I suspect that if I put a Gigabit system in here, and set it to talk with another one, that I'd probably get the higher rate. But, then again, there's not really any point.
I rarely move files over the network from one machine to the other (probably once a year). All other transfers are small enough to do with a flash drive. So, I generally only use it for Internet.
And, of course, there's no way I can dream of affording an Internet connection that would outpace a 100 Mbps transfer rate. I'm just not that rich.
As it is, it's going to cost me nearly $100 a month to get the privilege of 3.0 Mbps. So, there's no way I could ever dream of affording a 100Mbps connection to the Internet.
I think my 10/100 gear still has some life left in it