TLDR: Why do so many routers support >1Gbit/s on their WiFi while only having 1Gbit/s ethernet interfaces?
So, I’ve been upgrading parts of my home setup and have a router (without AP) that has 2.5G interfaces. My PC also has a 2.5G interface, but that only going to the router is kinda useless (the ISP offers 1G).
The place my PC is at is also a good position for an AP. So, I went looking for a cheap second hand wifi router and stumbled upon quite a few that were boasting >1G connection speeds, not only AX but also AC. Now I know this is often a combined theoretical Max, but still a lot offer >1G for the single band.
The vast majority of these routers, though, have 1G Ethernet ports. Putting that between my PC and router reduces that linkspeed and I can’t actually reach over 1G for the WiFi devices as well. Why would you sell a product like that. Undoubtedly those radio’s were more expensive but their in a package that can’t fully utilize them. I can think of some reasons: marketing, radio’s are mostly not fully utilized anyways, helps with latency, maybe?
Does anyone know why it’s done like this?
Because nobody looks at the Ethernet speeds.
Also, their theoretical max is NEVER achieved.
I remember reading an article long ago that even under ideal conditions in an anechoic chamber, they lose 3% at 12 feet.
There’s also mesh routing these days, and that backhaul channel will eat some of your bandwidth (yes, even if it’s on a different channel)
Bigger number better. Wifi lies about capacity all the time.
You can achieve higher than 1Gbit/s throughput if your wireless devices are connected to the same AP.
I.e. you can transfer photos between your phone and laptop wirelessly if both devices are on MCS index 11 1024 QAM using 2 spatial streams in ideal environment…. Not likely, but it could happen.
