Streaming 4k video locally over a local network 2.4 Ghz or 5 Ghz wireless ?

ng4ever

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 18, 2016
Messages
1,600
I know 5 Ghz wireless is better and faster but I want the greatest distance.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,304
Neither is better. Both are tradeoffs.

A good 2.4GHz signal will go further and still provide plenty of bandwidth for 4k streaming.

If you can't get a good 2.4GHz signal where you need it... you won't get a 5.0GHz signal regardless, and you'll need to start improvising.
 

Vengance_01

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2001
Messages
6,100
2.4 and 5ghz can stream 4k if your talking about web riped 4k content. Without knowing goals or equipment its hard to help you.
 

GotNoRice

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 11, 2001
Messages
9,599
2.4Ghz will generally give you more distance, especially if the signal has to go through walls and other objects. That all assumes no interference however. One of the biggest downsides of 2.4Ghz is only having 3 non-overlapping 20Mhz channels, less if using a signal wider than 20Mhz. That means you are going to get interference if you live anywhere near your neighbors. 5Ghz gives you much more opportunities to use a channel with less or no interference.

When it comes to streaming 4K, it will come down to the bitrate of what you are viewing. Many streaming services offer 4K at such low bitrates that a quality 1080P version would actually look better, but it allows them to advertise/market their service as providing "4K". These types of streams would likely be fine. On the other end of the spectrum, something like a direct BluRay rip (with no further encoding/compression) would probably not work well on anything but a very good wireless signal.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
30,300
Neither is better. Both are tradeoffs.

A good 2.4GHz signal will go further and still provide plenty of bandwidth for 4k streaming.

If you can't get a good 2.4GHz signal where you need it... you won't get a 5.0GHz signal regardless, and you'll need to start improvising.
Yep. 5ghz has greater bandwidth, but is more easily stopped by walls and other obstructions.

2.4ghz tends to be more congested in densely populated areas just because it has been around in volume use for so long. It also tends to have lower max bandwidth, but a benefit it has is that it goes through walls and other obstructions much easier.

Either band should be able to support 4k streaming unless there is a problem.

In general, I would try to use 5ghz first due to it being less congested. If you have difficult terrain or walls, fall back to 2.4ghz.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,304
Really, the answer can be 'both'. Powerline networking can also work, which is what I've resorted to during aparement living. Current link from the switched network to the living room stack averages 700Mbit to 900Mbit, and well, that's plenty especially given that the internet only hits about 440Mbit!
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
30,300
Also, if you live in a highly congested area where other WiFi routers/access points, cordless phones and older microwave ovens are causing you heartache and disrupting your signal, you can play around with all of these consumer all in one router toys, and never find one that will do the trick.

I had this problem back about 10 years ago when I lived in a very densely packed area with condos. I tried everything, including the best rated consumer router at the time, the Netgear N600 (WNDR-3700) and it couldn't cut through the congestion either.

Then I asked around here on the forums, and people recommended getting a Ubiquiti Unifi wireless access point, and it made all the difference. It cut through the interference like it wasn't even there, and provided amazing performance and range compared to what I had before.

The Unifi products really are that good. I'm not quite sure what black magic they use to make their signals impervious to congestion but they are just that good. As a home user they are alittle bit more challenging to use though, as they are an Access Point only, so you need to connect them with a wire to your network and have a separate router. They also need to be set up using the Unifi software. A one time setup can be done using a desktop or laptop using the software, and it continues to work even when the desktop or laptop is offline, but if you want realtime statistics and other things, that software needs to be running 24/7. For me this wasn't an issue, as I already had a server I could run it on, but for some it may be too much.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
30,300
This can be done with a phone (they have an app), and it runs quite well of a Pi 4, where it can run alongside a piHole installation and anything else one would want.
I did not realize that. They may have added this feature long after I set up my dedicated Unifi Server VM.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,304
I did not realize that. They may have added this feature long after I set up my dedicated Unifi Server VM.
Unifi is comparatively fairly easy. UNMS is a bit of a pain if you're using their Edgerouters (like I am), because it wants x86 base hardware and a Linux kernel. I've run both virtualized on an x86 appliance, but that's quite a bit more annoyance than just using the Raspberry Pi imager to load the latest Ubuntu LTS onto an SD card and then following the web instructions.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
30,300
Unifi is comparatively fairly easy. UNMS is a bit of a pain if you're using their Edgerouters (like I am), because it wants x86 base hardware and a Linux kernel. I've run both virtualized on an x86 appliance, but that's quite a bit more annoyance than just using the Raspberry Pi imager to load the latest Ubuntu LTS onto an SD card and then following the web instructions.
Ah. I bough tone of their Edgerouters once but wound up returning it under their return policy. I was very disappointed in its ability to run QoS.

I run pfSense now on custom hardware, in large part because I want to run as high speed OpenVPN connection on the router as possible.

The Unifi server just runs inside a dedicated VM (well, LXC container actually) on my big 4U all in one VM/NAS server.

This is probably way more than what the OP is going for thouhg.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,304
Ah. I bough tone of their Edgerouters once but wound up returning it under their return policy. I was very disappointed in its ability to run QoS.
Yup. The Edgerouter 4 I have below is really the minimum spec unit you'd want while being able to turn on all the features, and it ain't cheap for 'just a router'. I got mine on sale, mostly because it's set up like most enterprise routers are with respect to configuration and so forth, and that's really what I wanted.
I run pfSense now on custom hardware, in large part because I want to run as high speed OpenVPN connection on the router as possible.
I'm working up the mental commitment to stand one of these up again. My x86 appliance has a J3160 in it, which has AES-NI, but I'm not sure I'm comfortable with my configuration skills to the point that I'm willing to risk WAF points by putting it on the edge :D. I did run Untangle for a bit, but it crashed regularly and introduced some annoying lag.

Of course, what I really want to test is Wireguard, I just need robust remote locations to do that at.
This is probably way more than what the OP is going for thouhg.
Eh, if they're running a server, they'll get there eventually. First it's a question of base capability, then one of performance optimization, and then (assuming standard consumer perspectives) it's one of security.

I think that once the general 'IT conscious' folks start to realize just what's possible and what's actually vulnerable, UTM interest for home and small office is going to skyrocket. People are going to want logs of everything, to have reports on all of it, and to ensure hard separations between information nodes at every layer in the stack. They just don't know it yet!
 
Top