Wireless Signal (2.4GHz over 5.0GHz)

B

[BB] Rick James

[H]ard Dawg
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
2,810
What exactly is the difference in the 2.4GHz signal over the 5.0GHz signal? Besides strength is there any reason not to with the 5.0GHz signal?
 
Actually it's not strength. 5 Ghz is a shorter wavelength. Consequently the signal doesn't carry quite as far nor penetrate as well, however the disparity isn't nearly as bad as most people think, especially with newer .11a gear. In some circumstances, alot of 2.4 Ghz phones or other .11b/g AP's in your airspace for instance, .11a equipment can be a decided advantage. Speed is comparable to standard .11g stuff, roughly 25-30 Mb best case scenario real world bandwidth. Well, .11a tends to be more expensive and less common on the shelves. Like non existent on most retail shelves. If coverage is an issue then 2.4 Ghz gear is probably in your best interest. In a small apartment with neighbors running 2.4 Ghz WLAN's it might be better to go 5 Ghz if you can afford it. It's been awhile since I've installed 5 Ghz equipment so I don't know if .11a supports WPA so security could be a factor for you as well. Just check it out with the online retailers.
 
All .a gear supports up to 152 bit WEP
WPA is not available (in the majority of gear anyways)

the stuff is dirt cheap as long as you dont mind ebay

for $800 I managed to get 20AP's with a centralized controller
45 PCMCIA cards
and 15 PCI cards
All corperate grade Orinoco gear

I'm still trying to drum up enough interest in my neighboorhood to start a co-op with a 10/10Mbit+ DS3 line
 
It's probably best to go 802.11g for now and by all means throw away your 2.4Ghz phone and replace it with a 5.8Ghz phone. 802.11a is pretty much going nowhere, and 802.11n isn't going to be finalized and available in standardized products for quite some time.
 
You might be surprised my mom just bought 2.4ghz phones and I have wireless and I have no problem. If you could change the channel on the wireless you'r fine.
 
Correct, occasionally you can get direct sequence phones where you can either change the channel on the phone or the AP. If you have frequency hopping phones, much more common, they are a much more difficult problem to solve. Many times, it cannot.
 
rcolbert said:
It's probably best to go 802.11g for now and by all means throw away your 2.4Ghz phone and replace it with a 5.8Ghz phone. 802.11a is pretty much going nowhere, and 802.11n isn't going to be finalized and available in standardized products for quite some time.
Click to expand...

5.8GHz phone suffer from the same thing that 5GHz wifi does, penetrating walls. I've got a 900MHz phone myself and it works great. However, I haven't had any problems with my friends 2.4 phone or microwaves killing our signal, which goes through a few walls to get to him in the next building.

I'd go with 2.4GHz. It's much more available and penetrates walls better. Even in an apartment the last 2 years I've had no interference from others. I can see 3 other AP's from my place, the main thing is don't leave the default channel like 90% of the idiots out there do. :rolleyes:
 
ok so it looks like the 2.4GHz is the better choice. What about a card that supports both 2.4 and 5.0GHz??? What would it default at? Obviously I'd need a router that supported both; but would I be able to choose between either 2.4GHz or 5.0GHz?? Or would it select the best option?

I'm looking at just going with the 2.4GHz signal but I was just wondering what a dual signal would do.
 
802.11a LAN gear is actually from 5.1 Ghz to 5.3. You commonly just say 5 Ghz. For the record, 5.8 Ghz phones would have NO effect on 802.11a LAN equipment. 5.8 Ghz is part of the .11a spec but is used for point to point or point to multipoint WAN bridging, something you'd never see in your home around 5.8 Ghz phones. Whether 2.4 gear is a better fit for you depends on your environment. As far as the dual band, I don't have that much experience with them but they will have to have two radios so unless the software has a limitation both radios would be on and broadcasting at the same time unless you disabled one of them. It's possible the software would only allow one but I doubt it. I know I'd be pissed if I bought the gear and it did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top