AX is Faster than AC Wireless Standard?

B

Boris_yo

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
224
I thought AX is superior to AC in that it is made to handle way more simultaneous devices than AC and it improves energy saving of mobile devices ans IoT devices.

But I didn't know it improve bandwidth transfer rate twice compared to AC. At least that's what one guy claims it does. He says he has internet fiber connection, has AX standard ISP wireless modem router and his wireless connection is 800 Mb/s at home which I find hard to believe. Up to now the fastest I saw other people report with AC device is 450 Mb/s.

I am from Middle East. Fiber internet is still in a process of rollout across country.
 
Yes, AX will be faster than AC, I think I've done faster than that on AC but I could be thinking I've just seen connection rate and not throughput.

AX, will of course include verything of AC and before but also include the 6Ghz band which would allow for more bandwidth. Beyond that, the 6Ghz spectrum isn't going to be used like 2.5 and 5. From what I've been told by vendors, all the actual setup and discovery and setup is going to be done in 2.5/5 and then the client will be told about 6ghz, up there it will be all connection space. For enterprise, they also stated that it's going to be such a higher bandwidth density per AP that you're going to want to look at wiring for multi gigabit per link to the Access Point.
 
bigstusexy said:
Yes, AX will be faster than AC, I think I've done faster than that on AC but I could be thinking I've just seen connection rate and not throughput.
Click to expand...
Data rate is direct transfer between 2 devices while throughput is indirect transfer between 2 devices that have other devices between them?
Like if you measured data rate between PC and smartphone with router in between you would be measuring throughput?
But if you connected PC and smartphone directly with no router, you would rely on data rate measurement?
 
No. In this case, by data rate I mean what the service has deemed the theoretical maximum of the connection to be. For throughput I mean what I can actually achieve.

For example, right now I've got a laptop in front of me with an AC connection and I'm using windows 10. If I look at the connection properties - I'd say my data rate is 866Mbps. If I use iperf3 to test to a machine on the same switch (should be ideal conditions) I get... around 93 Mbps - that's bits, not bytes.
 
bigstusexy said:
If I use iperf3 to test to a machine on the same switch (should be ideal conditions) I get... around 93 Mbps - that's bits, not bytes.
Click to expand...
I see now. Windows claims 866Mbps is theoretical maximum but throughput you get is 93Mbps?
I wonder now that what if that person who claimed over 800 Mbps based his speed on theoretical maximum speed.
 
Yeah, I think it could be faster. I believe I've seen over 300Mbps file transfers but I wasn't being scientific about it, and this current session has been on for weeks and been hibernated. All of that will effect performance in windows over time.

Also people may not confuse it like you said. The thing about wireless is that it's so effected by many things. I once wanted to transfer some files from my laptop, it's an ultra lite so Ethernet is done by a dongle and I didn't feel like getting it. I knew but what I did a few minutes before it would only take a few minutes to send so I sat it down and did something else. 15 minutest later I go back and it's still working away. Longer story short, when I plugged it into charge, the speed dies. If I move it to a certain table, speed dies. It still has a full signal though.
 
Boris_yo said:
He says he has internet fiber connection, has AX standard ISP wireless modem router and his wireless connection is 800 Mb/s at home which I find hard to believe. Up to now the fastest I saw other people report with AC device is 450 Mb/s.
Click to expand...

There are so many variables, leading to a massive difference between a best-case scenario and a "typical" scenario. I can see some pretty amazing speeds over 5Ghz 802.11AX in my living room, but this is very close to a best-case scenario.

-The AP is mounted high up on the wall so it has line-of-sight to almost the entire room. 5Ghz does not penetrate very well through solid objects so speed tanks quickly when you have solid objects between you and the AP.
-My main couch is only about 10ft away. Distance is still critical when talking about WiFi.
-My house is far enough from my neighbors that I don't have any interference on 5Ghz (and barely any on 2.4). This is huge, because the interference from having other nearby networks on the same channel will tank your speed quick
-This also means I can use 80Mhz and even 160Mhz WiFi channels without any consequences. Interference from nearby networks is such a major issue, that in crowded areas using a wide-spectrum channel can actually reduce performance, since a wider channel is going to overlap with an increased number of other networks.
-I also have several APs spread throughout the house, so I'm not forcing every device in the entire house to use one AP.

So while I can see speeds close to 1Gbps in that near best-case scenario, there are others who might be living in an apartment complex with 30 nearby networks, with their AP tucked behind their entertainment center, trying to access it through several walls, and every device they own all connecting to that same AP... speeds are going to be lackluster at best.
 
I don't have AX yet, but I can see 350mpbs+ with my AC connection to my phone and laptop so i'm not really that concerned. For anything more than that, I have wired.

I also have an Asus AImesh network and between my two nodes I have 50~ devices connected at all times, so I feel that AX will be worth it once my dumb devices catch up. However, a large portion of my devices are really dumb devices such as lights, smart plugs and google home minis - where the bandwidth and extra cost really isn't necessary.
 
Boris_yo said:
I thought AX standard is supposed to solve that.
Click to expand...

AX is a lot better at handling multiple simultaneous devices compared to previous specs, but there is still plenty of benefit to be had from running multiple access points spread throughout the house (connected via ethernet). 5Ghz has very poor penetration through walls. The new 6Ghz bands available with WiFi 6E are even worse in that respect. With only one access point, there will some places where the signal strength is great and other places where it will be terrible, all mostly depending on what the WiFi signal has to pass through between you and the access point. With multiple access points, there is a much better chance that the bad coverage spots from one access point will be covered fine by one of the other access points.
 
I get 600 with AC with my iPhone 13 Pro Max. The Router is upstairs in my bedroom on the other side of the house and I am in the garage on the opposite side.
It's probably 30+ feet through 4 walls and the floor.
 
Wired>Wireless, and the chase to try to get wired speed on wireless is endless.

I'd ask that guy to show you an iperf report--I bet he won't even know what that is, and then it would be obvious he doesn't know what he's talking about.
 
TheSlySyl said:
However, a large portion of my devices are really dumb devices such as lights, smart plugs and google home minis - where the bandwidth and extra cost really isn't necessary.
Click to expand...

Are these IoT devices that you refer to as dumb?

GotNoRice said:
With multiple access points, there is a much better chance that the bad coverage spots from one access point will be covered fine by one of the other access points.
Click to expand...

Multiple access points are still better than MESH system and by how much?
 
jmilcher How is it troll like? Before trolling was coined, people like me with my unfamiliarity with topic were told to do their homework. They were not deemed to be asking about something they know little about for their own amusement.
 
Boris_yo said:
jmilcher How is it troll like? Before trolling was coined, people like me with my unfamiliarity with topic were told to do their homework. They were not deemed to be asking about something they know little about for their own amusement.
Click to expand...
Good point. Did you do your homework? All of the questions you are asking are very easily answered with a few minutes doing a google search. I am guessing that is why there are a lack of answers to this thread. Many of these boards no longer answer basic questions, since you have many more resources at your fingertips. Back when forums were all the rage, the internet was not a wealth of accurate knowledge. Things are much different not. I think people expect others to do their homework before asking basic questions.
 
Boris_yo said:
Multiple access points are still better than MESH system and by how much?
Click to expand...

Yes, multiple access points connected via Ethernet is better than a mesh system. A mesh system is great at extending coverage to a larger area when you are unable to lay Ethernet, but issues with signal degradation through walls are potentially amplified because the signal is now making multiple wireless hops in some cases before reaching the end device. When using APs and a wired backhaul, there is only ever one wireless link between the AP and the end device (and your device switches between APs seamlessly as needed). Wireless mesh systems also tend to be a bit more expensive whereas with multiple Access points you can use any access point, even a mix of brands and specs. You will still need to make sure nearby APs are not transmitting on the same channel, etc.
Boris_yo said:
GotNoRice TheSlySyl I thought you get high throughput due to MIMOx4 / 6 antennaes as each contributes to combined high throughput.
Click to expand...

MIMO is more about being able to talk to more devices simultaneously with less performance penalty, but if you are just using one AP, you are still at the mercy of it's specific coverage area, regardless of how many antennas it has.
 
I do get high throughput due to MiMo, but when you have as many devices on my network as I do - there's gonna be network congestion no matter what. My Mesh system helps quite a bit with that (my Node is hardwire connected, so it doesn't take up wireless bandwidth) but I still have a LOT of devices talking to eachother on my network.

I don't have an AX router or enough AX devices to upgrade to one yet though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top