Wireless vs Wired

[dukebound85]

I have a question. I have 50Mbps internet. My mbp is wireless N and I just got a wireless A/C router 300Mbps and 433Mbps on the two bands.

Why is it I can get the full 50Mbps that I am paying for when wired in the 10/100 ethernet connection but about half when on wifi (which has greater capacity than the 10/100 ethernet ports)? This is the case even if I am 1foot from my router with the computer.

I noticed this with my 300 Mbps n router as well.

FWIW I have the D-Link DIR-810L router and a mid 2012 cmbp

Are they wireless settings I can adjust?

 

[theluggage]

Why is it I can get the full 50Mbps that I am paying for when wired in the 10/100 ethernet connection but about half when on wifi (which has greater capacity than the 10/100 ethernet ports)?

(a) Advertised WiFi speeds are an even greater work of fiction than wired ethernet and broadband speeds. http://www.speedguide.net/faq/what-is-the-actual-real-life-speed-of-wireless-374 - so a typical wireless A/C connection is really only just in the same league as the 10/100 ethernet.

(b) 2012 cMBPs only have 802.11n wifi adapters, so you're not going to get the full speed of the newer 802.11ac router anyway.

Moral of the story: nothing beats a cable.

 

[brentmore]

Why is it I can get the full 50Mbps that I am paying for when wired in the 10/100 ethernet connection but about half when on wifi (which has greater capacity than the 10/100 ethernet ports)? This is the case even if I am 1foot from my router with the computer.

In a broad sense, there are far more factors (obstacles) at play when using wifi that may prevent you from reaching those theoretical max throughputs. Other RF devices, physical barriers, hardware difference, firmware versions all have an effect.

Also, not sure if you were exaggerating or not, but you will not necessarily get the best wifi throughput with your device just a foot from the router.

Go wired if you're looking for simplest way to get the most speed.

 

[dukebound85]

In a broad sense, there are far more factors (obstacles) at play when using wifi that may prevent you from reaching those theoretical max throughputs. Other RF devices, physical barriers, hardware difference, firmware versions all have an effect.

Also, not sure if you were exaggerating or not, but you will not necessarily get the best wifi throughput with your device just a foot from the router.

Go wired if you're looking for simplest way to get the most speed.

I wasn't exaggerating as I was setting it up via a short ethernet cable.

What I did notice is that I get about 20-30Mbps on the 300Mbps band at 2.4ghz and I get the full 50Mbps on the 433 band at 5Ghz.

Why is this? Both bands from what I can understand should be able to easily accommodate the 50Mbp. Is this typical of the 2.4Ghz band?

----------

(a) Advertised WiFi speeds are an even greater work of fiction than wired ethernet and broadband speeds. http://www.speedguide.net/faq/what-is-the-actual-real-life-speed-of-wireless-374 - so a typical wireless A/C connection is really only just in the same league as the 10/100 ethernet.

Even so, wouldn't a 300Mbps band at 2.4 Ghz even if only in real life able to obtain 10/100 be able to deliver my internet speed of 50Mbps? Why is it at 20-30Mbps? Why is it the 5ghz band has no issue?

(b) 2012 cMBPs only have 802.11n wifi adapters, so you're not going to get the full speed of the newer 802.11ac router anyway.

While true, my internet connection is much less than what N is capable of supporting right? even if N is the bottle neck in my network

Moral of the story: nothing beats a cable.

I agree, especially in intra-net file transfers

 

[brentmore]

I wasn't exaggerating as I was setting it up via a short ethernet cable.

What I did notice is that I get about 20-30Mbps on the 300Mbps band at 2.4ghz and I get the full 50Mbps on the 433 band at 5Ghz.

Why is this? Both bands from what I can understand should be able to easily accommodate the 50Mbp. Is this typical of the 2.4Ghz band?

I think you're confusing terminology here a bit. 300Mbps and 433Mbps are data rates, not bands. 5GHz is a higher frequency than 2.4GHz, and is often less congested than the 2.4GHz band. Compared to 2.4GHz (with the same channel width and supporting hardware), you'll see higher throughput with 5GHz.

BLUF: There are lots of unknowns in your setup, but 5GHz will generally give you higher data rate but won't go as far. 2.4GHz can penetrate walls better but will not give you as high of a data rate.
Both should accommodate that 50Mbps, so take a look at your physical setup, possible interference sources, etc.

 

[rigormortis]

some stuff to point out
----


if you look at those wifi speed tests, you can only get the top speed if you are within 6' of the base station

buy wireless routers that use "mimo"
--> mimo ensures each wifi client connects to the router at its own top speed. without mimo everyone connects at the slowest speed of the client. if one client connects at 6mbps then everyone connects at 6mbps.

buy routers and wifi adapters that are at least "2 x 2"
--> a lot of 802.11n gear is actually 1 x 1. you need 2 x 2 spatial streams to do 300 mbit over 5ghz.
if you have any doubt about your equipment, you can ask the wifi alliance website for is certification papers

if you are using an older router (non mimo) check your multicast setting.
--> muticast will prevent clients that are farther away from connecting to your wifi network, so they won't drag the connection down. multicast settings are no longer supported in airport utility 6.x.x. versions

a good example of spatial streams is the iPhone 5, or any other cellular phone from that time period.
it might say its 5ghz in the specifications, but it only 1 x 1 spatial streams. so even if your wifi network is 802.11n 450 mbit , your iPhone 5 will never get any faster then say umm 50 mbit or so over wifi. because its technically impossible for it to be any faster.

i forget ,. its been a while its around 54 to 65 mbit at @ 5 ghz iirc

the wifi alliance says that in order to say something is 802.11n it has to be at least 2 x 2 spatial streams and use mimo. . but cell phones and usb keys can say they are 802.11n, and only have 1x1 stream and they get away with it

according to wikipedia , it looks like every single airport extreme to come out since 2007 was mimo. so thats good to know

 

[rigormortis]

roku just posted this on Facebook

10 ways you are killing your wireless signal.

it is good read
http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/10-ways-you-might-be-killing-your-home-wi-fi-signal

 

[glenthompson]

Are you sure about the wired speed? Your MBP has gigabit Ethernet so unless the router doesn't support it you should get the higher speed.

As theluggage said, nothing beats cable. That's why I hardwire anything in a fixed location.