• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Wi-Fi 8 demonstrated with first prototype connection

erek

erek

8=D
2FA
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
17,773
Keep in mind, the advancement is done by China's TP-Link

"US Weighs Action Against China-Linked Router Giant TP-Link": https://hardforum.com/threads/china-vs-the-us.1997943/post-1046204652)

1760395143831.png

1760395152535.png


"The goal is to provide better performance in environments with low signal, or under high network loads, where an increasing number of devices are sharing the same connection. Wi-Fi 8 can theoretically manage more devices at once, and reduce lag when positioned further away from your router or moving around your home. That should provide users with a smoother gaming and streaming experience, and prevent freezes, drops, and “robot voice” from occurring during video calls.
“Wi-Fi 8 marks a fundamental pivot — moving beyond peak speeds to prioritize reliable performance in challenging real-world conditions,” Qualcomm said. “It’s designed to bring Wi-Fi closer than ever to the reliability and responsiveness of wired infrastructure.”"

Source: https://www.theverge.com/news/798780/wi-fi-8-prototype-tp-link-test-explained#comments
 
considering it is a good case when you reach 50% of your maximum wifi max speed (any wall/significant distance), having much more of it than your ISP limit (assuming you do zero internal networking) can still be useful.
 
this is the wifi on my HP Mini Z,
HP Mini Z WiFi Speed Test.png


I wish Routers had tools on them to measure the max bandwidth speed between a device and the router.
 
erek said:
what's your equipment capable of?
Click to expand...
It's not my equipment. It's my ISP. My modem is 1Gbps capable, and my router's WiFi is 7800 Mpbs capable, but it's expensive for 1Gbps and more so for 2Gbps here.
 
Meh?

I stopped paying attention to new WiFi standards years ago.

With every single release the IEEE 802.11 Working Group fails to address the problem of the blatant performance lies in the industry when it comes to WiFi performance.

They need to do something about the fact that the numbers proudly paraded around router and WLAN devices - for a large variety of reasons, including half duplex, signal interference and signal penetration) bear no resemblance what so ever to reality.

I stayed on my three old Unifi UAP-AC-LR's way after new standards were made available, only upgrading to a pair of Ruckus Wi-Fi 6 devices mid last year, and when I did it was less to get the new standard than it was to finally rid myself of my last Unifi crap.

Even with a Wi-Fi 7 backwards compatible Intel BE200 WLAN card in my laptop, I can never get anywhere close to the bandwidth promised by the Wi-Fi 6 router.

It might be due to the inevitable air wave congestion in the 2.4 and 5Ghz bands in densely populated areas, but still. If you need to live in some podunk town in the middle of nowhere in order to hit anywhere near max performance on these things, then what use are they when the country is what, like 86% urbanized on average?

They need to take some responsibility for the fact that the overwhelming majority of users of this technology never se anywhere near advertised performance, and as such their entire industry is a lie.

What it all comes down to is that WiFi regardless of new standards is never fast enough, never low latency enough and never reliable enough to replace hard wiring everything of significance.

In my house, if something doesn't need to move around, it gets hardwired. WiFi is for laptops, tablets and phones only. The goal is to move as much traffic as possible off WiFi, and only use WiFi where it is absolutely necessary. And for that purpose, my Ruckus WiFi 6 devices are fine, and will be probably for the next 20 years. The only thing that will get me to upgrade is an end to support and security patching, not because I have any interest at all in WiFi7 or even 8.

WiFi - to me - remains as irrelevant today as it was back when I got my first Linksys WRT54G router in 2005. I only got it back then because my previous HP branded wired only router had died, and it seemed like Wi-Fi variants were all there was, at least in the consumer space. (I hadnt gotten into buying Enterprise network hardware yet back then)

I actually kept the Wi-Fi turned off on it until 2007 when I got my first iPhone. It was only then I had any use for Wi-Fi at all.
 
Now as far as TP-Link goes, I have to admit, I am a little bit confused.

I used to actually think they were Chinese, but then a couple of years ago when I googled them, their headquarters were in Irvine, Ca.
 
cpufrost said:
Iperf will.

https://iperf.fr/
Click to expand...
what are the settings to use since it looks like I have to have a PC as a host and another PC as the client?
I want to see the max bandwidth speed between my PC's wifi and the router itself.

1760408089784.png

Why does iperf only show 1Gbps?
Oh, ran it again and it is now at near 2.5 speeds, but I am curious about the max wifi speed of the router with my other PC.

1760408234225.png

1760408061355.png
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
What it all comes down to is that WiFi regardless of new standards is never fast enough, never low latency enough and never reliable enough to replace hard wiring everything of significance.



WiFi - to me - remains as irrelevant today as it was back when I got my first Linksys WRT54G router in 2005.
Click to expand...
Hard disagree. Sometime around 802.11ac or ax wifi got really good. These days i dont bother wiring in even to play some counterstrike. 802.11n or g were worthless for any competitive fast paced games. And the throughput is decent for day to day stuff.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
They need to do something about the fact that the numbers proudly paraded around router and WLAN devices - for a large variety of reasons, including half duplex, signal interference and signal penetration) bear no resemblance what so ever to reality.
Click to expand...

Everybody knows those numbers are for when your device is real close to your access point. Like 3 feet away, cause too close and it's bad too.

I'm a bit less jaded. wifi 5 (ac) was alright, wifi 6 (ax) is nicer because the new encoding applies to 2.4Ghz where most of my devices actually connect. wifi7's multilink operation stuff seems like it should result in more 5Ghz usage, but I'm sure it will be a while before I upgrade, and I'm sure it would be hard to get working when I have multiple APs for a big house.

I need to dig in and try to get roaming assistance working again, I was hopeful when I got my ax access points, but had a lot of issues with it and the aps in general until I found a good openwrt branch... It seems like worth trying again.
 
Zepher said:
what are the settings to use since it looks like I have to have a PC as a host and another PC as the client?
I want to see the max bandwidth speed between my PC's wifi and the router itself.


Why does iperf only show 1Gbps?
Oh, ran it again and it is now at near 2.5 speeds, but I am curious about the max wifi speed of the router with my other PC.
Click to expand...
Your router must support iperf natively to do that.
Those results look good, OTOH.
 
A big thing people misunderstand about wifi speeds (mostly because of misleading marketing) is that they almost always state the total speed for the router. Not what a single device can get. Even if you have a $1000 8 stream router you aren't going to get the advertised max speed on your 1 or 2 stream phone/laptop/wifi card.

Also they'll say something like wifi 7 can do 46 Gbps. But what they don't tell you is that is only when using 16 spatial streams, something no hardware even does lol.
 
“Sercomm Unveils Wi-Fi 8 Platform at Network X
PRESS RELEASE by Nomad76 Today, 07:13 Discuss (0 Comments)
Sercomm (TWSE: 5388), a leading provider of telecom and broadband equipment, today announced the launch of its next-generation wireless connectivity platforms built on Broadcom's latest Wi-Fi 8 chipset. Designed around the new IEEE 802.11bn standard, Sercomm's Wi-Fi 8 platform delivers deterministic latency, multi-gigabit throughput, intelligent spectrum management, and integrated AI/ML capabilities—the ideal foundation for AI-driven homes. The platform enables operators to elevate subscriber experience while unlocking new service revenues.”
 
sharknice said:
A big thing people misunderstand about wifi speeds (mostly because of misleading marketing) is that they almost always state the total speed for the router. Not what a single device can get. Even if you have a $1000 8 stream router you aren't going to get the advertised max speed on your 1 or 2 stream phone/laptop/wifi card.

Also they'll say something like wifi 7 can do 46 Gbps. But what they don't tell you is that is only when using 16 spatial streams, something no hardware even does lol.
Click to expand...
And no consumer or enterprise backhaul (for single endpoint wifi) will even support those speeds.
It's marketing bliss, no different than a home stereo system with 16,000 watts of "peak" power plugged into a 15A receptacle with a 18 gauge cord! 🙃
 
Screw wireless my game box is always at the coax entry point and my internal media delivery is MOCA.
 
I'm still on dial-up. I still keep calling America Online to end my 3-month subscription I got for free, but when I keep calling to cancel, they keep asking if I want another 3 months for free, so I say yes.
 
My wifi 6 works just fine, before that my 802.11n was just fine as well -- only upgraded because I was switching to a router, switch, ap setup with openwrt.

For good speeds you need correct power for the space you are transmitting in (100% tx power doesn't do any good when 90% of that is going outside the space you are using and the rest is echoing all over the interior space), you need to be on a channel that's not crowded (firmware usually handles this automatically), and you need to eliminate sources of rf noise where possible.

Most devices do a decent job of working in unfavorable conditions, but if you can do it, it really helps things run smoothly. Reducing tx power has the added benefit of reducing heat generation inside the router, which should also lower the noise floor.
 
A giant amount of network usage need absolutely no latency requirement and does not require much stability (streaming with a cache for example, downloading things...), specially relative to what good Wifi can do (look at the above 2ms of ping, over 1 gigabit both ways... that plain just great here), fast paced gaming is a different story but not an usual networking scenario.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
They need to do something about the fact that the numbers proudly paraded around router and WLAN devices - for a large variety of reasons, including half duplex, signal interference and signal penetration) bear no resemblance what so ever to reality.
Click to expand...
As long as a clean 20 foot signal get near the paraded number I do not mind, everyone does the impossible to be otherwise math in their heads


6 GHz tests: 320 MHz vs. 160 MHz (Wi-Fi 7 vs. Wi-Fi 6E)​

Wi-Fi 7*Wi-Fi 6E†
2 feet3,6841,995
10 feet3,5931,963
20 feet3,2811,897
30 feet2,8831,719
40 feet (porch)2,1261,454
120 feet (across street)920617
20 feet (hallway)2,1341,436

a standard "RMS" watt type of metric could be nice to have, say actual data transfer not including overheard, 60 feet / single standard wall with a fridge running in the room... they could still game it a bit, but would give some idea.

But that not that big of an issue for people on hfboard that can easily look real world performance and do not rely on such numbers (for almost anything that involve performance when it come to computers or anything really.... , we do not really at AMD saying that the 7800xt as 37.32 Tflops of FP32 and conclude it is much faster than a 4070 and its 29.15 tflops, nor NVME numbers on the box to judge them and so on)

I feel like, wi-fi is so good now that it is not only useful but good enough for almost anything.
 
LukeTbk said:
As long as a clean 20 foot signal get near the paraded number I do not mind, everyone does the impossible to be otherwise math in their heads


6 GHz tests: 320 MHz vs. 160 MHz (Wi-Fi 7 vs. Wi-Fi 6E)​

Wi-Fi 7*Wi-Fi 6E†
2 feet3,6841,995
10 feet3,5931,963
20 feet3,2811,897
30 feet2,8831,719
40 feet (porch)2,1261,454
120 feet (across street)920617
20 feet (hallway)2,1341,436

a standard "RMS" watt type of metric could be nice to have, say actual data transfer not including overheard, 60 feet / single standard wall with a fridge running in the room... they could still game it a bit, but would give some idea.

But that not that big of an issue for people on hfboard that can easily look real world performance and do not rely on such numbers (for almost anything that involve performance when it come to computers or anything really.... , we do not really at AMD saying that the 7800xt as 37.32 Tflops of FP32 and conclude it is much faster than a 4070 and its 29.15 tflops, nor NVME numbers on the box to judge them and so on)

I feel like, wi-fi is so good now that it is not only useful but good enough for almost anything.
Click to expand...

They couldnt be arsed to try through drywall, huh
 
Verado said:
They couldnt be arsed to try through drywall, huh
Click to expand...
You lose about 1/3rd going 20 ft down a hall vs 20 ft in an open room, so I imagine (if you get a signal at all) through drywall would be not good.

Don't do that.
 
Nobu said:
Don't do that.
Click to expand...
You do not need much of 3000mbs for most things, streaming Netflix will tend to work perfectly fine going through a couple of drywall. "real" wall would be more of an issue.

You start with so much now that you just need 15% of the bandwith to survive to still have more than high quality Netflix stream speed. If you do important conference call, gaming, device that do not have a great wi-fi antenna and controller, then of course wire is worth it or anything a plug is near by / would not be much trouble to bring, but it is good enough that for drywall, if you have the wi-fi router/wif-fi device, I would try it first, change are it is perfectly fine.
 
Last edited:
Eh... my wife doesnt need the speed for the stuff she does on her phone. 4k videos get sent to my tv via jellyfin no problem, and yes I realize there is compression. So yeah... I'm happy with the wifi 5 that I have... my only complaint is the wired part which only has 1Gbps ports
 
sfsuphysics said:
4k videos get sent to my tv via jellyfin no problem, and yes I realize there is compression.
Click to expand...
compression less video will never be used, but even with a relatively slow wi-fi of 250mbs, that twice the maximum video bitrate for the compression used in UHD 4k bluray....

We were doing a lot of things with mere 100mbs and wi-fi will have little issues beating that now.
 
Great, but when we actually see real world speed claims....

Considering the likes of say Ubiquiti, can't hit near what they claim even in a perfect home condition..

My Ubiquiti U6 In-Wall, which is mounted 12 feet away from where I sit, high on the wall, and direct line of sight, with 3 IoT cameras on it (next to no traffic) and 1 laptop, i can only hit 500-600mbps on a good day download and upload is always 3-400mbps...and I have tweaked it to crap and back, mobile, laptop, windows, linux...does not matter.

And if I test 2 wifi devices at the same time, that drops!

So ya, I wish we could sue these companies for excessive false advertising...

Can you imagine :
Max. Client Count 300+
actual devices connected to this single U6 In-Wall like UB claims and it offering any usable speeds...

sure 4.8Gbps when it only has a 1Gb uplink port.. so this thing can handle 4.8Gbps between devices on wifi? ya..okayyy

https://ca.store.ui.com/ca/en/products/u6-iw
1760476939053.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top