In perfect conditions for Wi-Fi. I live in a high rise and the 2.4 Ghz band is hardly usable. My previous phone didn’t have dual band Wi-Fi and it was much faster on 4G than WiFi.
Plus, modern routers and APs often rely on band aggregation and so even with devices that have dual band, crowded airwaves will have a negative effect on speed.
Wi-Fi is very fast when I’m in my cabin in the countryside. But when I get home with the same devices, it’s barely usable.
You could argue that I need a better router with the newest protocol and gizmos but so far, even with new bands and protocols, Wi-Fi is still a competition of which router and devices will shout louder than their neighbors.
I would argue that the public needs to be better educated or at least saved from themselves with WiFi, however, nobody will be doing that. Having multiple lower-powered APs in a space can dramatically reduce how far outside of your premise the signal travels, and provide fast speeds indoors, however, it only takes one dummy to pick up a long-range AP, and put it in their apartment to ruin the wifi for everyone else around them.
Unless we start EM isolating apartments, or get everyone to start using modern lower-powered WiFi with multiple access points for coverage, things won’t change. I largely consider it to be impossible to fix WiFi in large buildings; especially established apartment buildings. No company is going to spend on 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz isolation insulation to be installed between units just for their renters to have better WiFi, and the general public as a whole… well, it’s basically a fool’s errand to convince everyone to do anything without government regulation, and bluntly, the government, made of the same idiots that make up the general public, isn’t any better and won’t be forcing everyone to “do it correctly”… so we get this dystopian landscape of WiFi for any high-density area.
IMO, new builds don’t really have an excuse not to, it’s a trivial additional cost to install while things are being built, putting AP hookups in the ceilings, and WiFi blocking measures in the walls between units, but they still don’t, because cost. They want to spend nothing and collect huge rent payments for basically squatting on a plot of land.
I have a 10 meter cat5 cable I use for one application that can’t have any interruptions or lag.
Calling it cat5 cable makes any woman who hears me want to leave their man for me. Good to see another king our there using the proper terminology, stay tight player
Physical limit for 2.4GHz is 1.11 gigabits per second or only 143 megabytes per second AT ALL. For 5GHz it’s slightly more than twice as much, but still less than even shitty cat5e, that allows 2.5GBE at 100 meters or in certain conditions 5GBE.
While with cat6 you’ll probably do 2.5gbps to 100m no problem,
Cat6 is 5gbps no problem at 100 meters and 10gbps at 55 meters.
I have 0 faith that a router which doesn’t have high speed ethernet will ever be able to deliver such fast WiFi. If they’ve cheaped out on the ethernet I doubt they’ve splurged on WiFi most devices can’t use. And if you’re talking about fast ethernet, then WiFi is chanceless.
“fast ethernet” is defined as 100mbps. I know what you meant, but there’s an actual industry definition for “fast” ethernet…
Most of the marketing is showing a combined speed at 100% optimal conditions. Unless you live in a faraday cage and have 4x4 802.11 equipment on all of your 5Ghz devices, and 2x2 at least on all of your 2.4Ghz equipment, then do massive, consistent and continual one-way data transfers using UDP or something which doesn’t have window sizes and can support one-way no-reply transfers like with multicast, all with a perfect signal and the highest wireless PHY rates, you’re not going to even remotely see that much speed.
Reliability 100% the snakeboi
But for speed, WiFi can actually out-perform those particular snakebois in many scenarios.
In perfect conditions for Wi-Fi. I live in a high rise and the 2.4 Ghz band is hardly usable. My previous phone didn’t have dual band Wi-Fi and it was much faster on 4G than WiFi.
Plus, modern routers and APs often rely on band aggregation and so even with devices that have dual band, crowded airwaves will have a negative effect on speed.
Wi-Fi is very fast when I’m in my cabin in the countryside. But when I get home with the same devices, it’s barely usable.
You could argue that I need a better router with the newest protocol and gizmos but so far, even with new bands and protocols, Wi-Fi is still a competition of which router and devices will shout louder than their neighbors.
Yes, it seems painfully obvious that the primary driver of new WiFi router sales, is WiFi overcrowding.
I would argue that the public needs to be better educated or at least saved from themselves with WiFi, however, nobody will be doing that. Having multiple lower-powered APs in a space can dramatically reduce how far outside of your premise the signal travels, and provide fast speeds indoors, however, it only takes one dummy to pick up a long-range AP, and put it in their apartment to ruin the wifi for everyone else around them.
Unless we start EM isolating apartments, or get everyone to start using modern lower-powered WiFi with multiple access points for coverage, things won’t change. I largely consider it to be impossible to fix WiFi in large buildings; especially established apartment buildings. No company is going to spend on 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz isolation insulation to be installed between units just for their renters to have better WiFi, and the general public as a whole… well, it’s basically a fool’s errand to convince everyone to do anything without government regulation, and bluntly, the government, made of the same idiots that make up the general public, isn’t any better and won’t be forcing everyone to “do it correctly”… so we get this dystopian landscape of WiFi for any high-density area.
IMO, new builds don’t really have an excuse not to, it’s a trivial additional cost to install while things are being built, putting AP hookups in the ceilings, and WiFi blocking measures in the walls between units, but they still don’t, because cost. They want to spend nothing and collect huge rent payments for basically squatting on a plot of land.
Nope. While WiFi has fancy claims you’re not going to get any more than around 1200mbps at 20 metres on the best day with the best gear.
While with cat6 you’ll probably do 2.5gbps to 100m no problem, and even 10gbps. Even cat5e will do those speeds at certain distances.
Also WiFi is half duplex so you only get those speeds in one direction at a time.
Didn’t know that, thank you!
I have a 10 meter cat5 cable I use for one application that can’t have any interruptions or lag.
Calling it cat5 cable makes any woman who hears me want to leave their man for me. Good to see another king our there using the proper terminology, stay tight player
Cat5, what is this? The year 2000?
At least use cat5e
cat6 or bust!
Hmmm, that reminds me; I need to separate out all the old ones that say “10BaseT”
Cat5e. What is this 2005? Use Cat9.
U wont believe but its almost easier to get cat5e than cat 6 here
I did buy the cable around 2010 for cheap
Physical limit for 2.4GHz is 1.11 gigabits per second or only 143 megabytes per second AT ALL. For 5GHz it’s slightly more than twice as much, but still less than even shitty cat5e, that allows 2.5GBE at 100 meters or in certain conditions 5GBE.
Cat6 is 5gbps no problem at 100 meters and 10gbps at 55 meters.
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/wireless/wi-fi-7.html
TLDR, Intel banned my country
Snaky boi is consistent
I have 0 faith that a router which doesn’t have high speed ethernet will ever be able to deliver such fast WiFi. If they’ve cheaped out on the ethernet I doubt they’ve splurged on WiFi most devices can’t use. And if you’re talking about fast ethernet, then WiFi is chanceless.
“fast ethernet” is defined as 100mbps. I know what you meant, but there’s an actual industry definition for “fast” ethernet…
Most of the marketing is showing a combined speed at 100% optimal conditions. Unless you live in a faraday cage and have 4x4 802.11 equipment on all of your 5Ghz devices, and 2x2 at least on all of your 2.4Ghz equipment, then do massive, consistent and continual one-way data transfers using UDP or something which doesn’t have window sizes and can support one-way no-reply transfers like with multicast, all with a perfect signal and the highest wireless PHY rates, you’re not going to even remotely see that much speed.