(http://www.extremetech.

com)
HOME (HTTP://WWW.EXTREMETECH.COM)
COMPUTING (HTTP://WWW.EXTREMETECH.COM/CATEGORY/COMPUTING)
WHAT IS 802.11AC WI-FI, AND HOW MUCH FASTER THAN 802.11N IS IT?

What is 802.11ac Wi-Fi, and how much faster than 802.11n is it?
By Jamie Lendino (http://www.extremetech.com/author/jlendino) on August 22, 2016 at 10:26 am
Comment (http://www.extremetech.com/computing/160837-what-is-802-11ac-and-how-much-faster-than-802-11n-isit#disqus_thread)

Faster Wi-Fi: Its something we all crave. Fortunately, its also something we can have, even on a
budget. Its not just about fast Internet speeds to and from your service provider. Its also about
transferring les between devices in your home or oce, streaming video from a network-attached
drive to a television, andgaming with the lowest network latencies possible. If youre looking for
faster Wi-Fi performance, you want 802.11ac its that simple.
In essence, 802.11ac is a supercharged version of 802.11n. 802.11ac is dozens of times faster, and
delivers speeds ranging from 433 Mbps (megabits per second)up to severalgigabits per second.
To achieve that kind of throughput, 802.11ac works exclusively in the 5GHz band, uses plenty of
bandwidth (80 or 160MHz), operates in up to eight spatial streams (MIMO), and employs a kind
oftechnology called beamforming that sends signal directly to client devices.

If youre currently using an 802.11n router or an even older 802.11b/g model, like the perennial
favorite Linksys WRT54G and are thinking of upgrading to 802.11ac, heres what you need to
know.

How 802.11ac works

Years ago,802.11n introduced some exciting technologies that brought massive speed boosts over
802.11b and g. 802.11ac does something similar compared with 802.11n. For example, 802.11n
supported four spatial streams (44 MIMO) and a channel width of 40MHz. But 802.11ac can utilize

eight spatial streams and has channels up to 80MHz wide which can then be combined to make
160MHz channels. Even if everything else remained the same (and it doesnt), this means 802.11ac
has 8x160MHz of spectral bandwidth to play with versus 4x40MHz a huge difference that allows
802.11ac to squeeze vast amounts of data across the airwaves.

To boost throughput further, 802.11ac also introduces 256-QAM modulation (up from 64-QAM in
802.11n), which squeezes 256 different signals over the same frequency by shifting and twisting
each into a slightly different phase. In theory, that quadruples the spectral eciency of 802.11ac
over 802.11n. Spectral eciencymeasureshow well a given wireless protocol or multiplexing
technique uses the bandwidth available to it. In the 5GHz band, where channels are fairly wide
(20MHz+), spectral eciency isnt so important. In cellular bands, though, channels are often only
5MHz wide, which makes spectral eciency very important.
802.11ac also introduces standardized beamforming (802.11n had it, but it wasnt standardized,
which made interoperability an issue). Beamforming transmitsradio signals in such a way that
theyre directed at a specic device. This can increase overall throughput and make itmore
consistent, as well as reduce power consumption. Beamforming can be done with smart antennae
that physically move to track adevice, or by modulating the amplitude and phase of the signals so
that they destructively interfere with each other, leaving just a narrow, interference-freebeam. The
older 802.11n uses this second method, which can be implemented by both routers and mobile
devices.
Finally, 802.11ac, like 802.11 versions before it, is fully backwards compatible so you can buy an
802.11ac router today, and it should work just ne with your older 802.11n and 802.11g Wi-Fi
devices.

How fast is 802.11ac?

In theory, on the 5GHz band and using beamforming, 802.11ac should have the same or better
range than 802.11n (without beamforming). The 5GHz band, thanks to less penetration power,
doesnt have quite the same range as 2.4GHz (802.11b/g). But thats the trade-off we have to make:
There simply isnt enough spectral bandwidth in the massively overused 2.4GHz band to allow for
802.11acs gigabit-level speeds. As long as your router is well-positioned, or you have multiple
routers, it shouldnt matter much. The more important factors will be the transmission powerand
antenna quality of your devices.
And nally, the question everyone wants to know: Just how fast is Wi-Fi 802.11ac? As always, there
are two answers: the theoretical max speed that can be achieved in the lab, and the practical
maximum speed youll most likely receive at home in the real world, surrounded by lots of signalattenuating obstacles.
(http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/wi_80211ac.jpg)The theoretical max
speed of 802.11ac is eight 160MHz 256-QAM channels, each of which are capable of 866.7Mbps,
for a total of 6,933Mbps, or just shy of 7Gbps. Thats a transfer rate of 900 megabytes per second
more than you can squeeze down a SATA 3 link. In the real world, thanks to channel contention,

you probably wont get more than two or three

160MHz channels, so the max speed comes down to
somewhere between 1.7Gbps and 2.5Gbps. Compare
this with 802.11ns max theoretical speed, which is
600Mbps.
In situations where you dont need the maximum
performance and reliability of wired gigabit Ethernet
still a good option for situations requiring the
highest performance 802.11ac is certainly
compelling. Instead of cluttering up your living room by running an Ethernet cable to the home
theater PC under your TV, 802.11ac now has enough bandwidth to wirelessly stream the highestdenition content to your game console, set top box, or home theater PC. For all but the most
demanding use cases, 802.11ac is a viable alternative to Ethernet.

The future of 802.11ac

802.11ac will only get faster, too. As we mentioned earlier, the theoretical max speed of 802.11ac is
just shy of 7Gbps and while youll never hit that in a real-world scenario, we wouldnt be
surprised to see link speeds of 2Gbps or more in the next few years. At 2Gbps, youll get a transfer
rate of 256MB/sec, and suddenly Ethernet serves less and less purpose if that happens. To reach
such speeds, chipset and device makers willneed toimplement four or more 802.11ac streams,
both in terms of software and hardware.
We imagine Broadcom, Qualcomm, MediaTek, Marvell, and Intel are already well on their way to
implementing four- and eight-stream 802.11ac solutions for integration in the latest routers, access
points, and mobile devices but until the 802.11ac spec is nalized, second-wave chipsets and
devices are unlikely to emerge. Chipset and device manufacturers have plenty of work aheadto
ensure advanced features, such as beamforming, comply with the standard and are inter-operable
with other 802.11ac devices.

Nowread:How to boost your Wi-Fi speed by choosing the right channel

(http://www.extremetech.com/computing/179344-how-to-boost-your-wi-speed-by-choosing-theright-channel).

Sebastian Anthony (https://twitter.com/mrseb) wrote the original version of this article. It has since
been updated with new information.
Check out our ExtremeTech Explains (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/extremetech-explains)
series for more in-depth coverage of todays hottest tech topics.

Tagged In
hardware (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/hardware)
wirelesscommunications (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/wireless-communications)
wi (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/wi)
extremetechexplains (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/extremetech-explains)
networking (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/networking)

802.11ac (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/802-11ac) 802.11 (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/802-11)

wirelessnetworks (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/wireless-networks)
802.11n (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/802-11n)
gigabitethernet (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/gigabit-ethernet)
qam (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/qam) beamforming (http://www.extremetech.com/tag/beamforming)

Post a Comment

Comment

Daniel Glass
Its still a draft spec, so its a waste of money to upgrade right now.
http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony
Nah, draft specs are pretty safe. The rst round of almost every WiFi device (802.11b, g, n)
appeared when the spec was still a draft.
Later devices might be faster or more stable but this rst wave of 802.11ac devices should
be ne.

Daniel Glass
You clearly dont remember how early Draft-n devices were incompatible with ocial spec
devices, then.
http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony
Apparently not! My draft-n devices were OK. Any idea which devices didnt work, and
why?
GatzLoc
Been using netgear r6300 for 6-7 months now no problems.
Anthony Muller
I consistently get 353 Mb/s between three walks in a nyc apartment building between my
buffalo ac router and media bridge, so I dont get what the big deal about waiting for non
draft ac routers is.
Mangap
as long as it is upgradeable through rmware I hope still OK
some_guy_said
will eventually replace wired gigabit ethernet networking at home and in the oce, read on.
This is where you lost me. 90% of whats still wired in the home is wired in because of inherent
limitations of using radio waves.
150/300mbps is not holding anyone back at home, unless theyre doing direct computer to
computer le transfers, or have a ludicrous number of devices working on the network
simultaneously.
The primary benet of this will be for public networks that already use wi.

Michael Lippert
OK for now, sure you are mostly correct. Although there are some of us w/ media servers at
home, where having a gigabit wired connection is actually noticeable, the majority of
households care only about connecting to the internet and are limited by the bandwidth
provided by their internet provider.

However, Google ber provides a gigabit internet connection, and if we could kick the
broadband monopolies off their ass to provide bandwidths comparable to many other places
in the world, more of us might eventually have faster internet connections. Im not sure how
that bandwidth will get used, but Im sure it will.

some_guy_said
While I agree in eventuality, there is currently little to no use to having more than 25-50
mbs for a home user. Even the few applications that could use it are generally hampered
by issues upstream of your home connection. (how often does any site offer DLs over a
few mb/s? The biggest hogs, netix and some games, typically top out at 5-7 mb/s)
Current wi is far more powerful than needed even to stream 4k.
So I agree in theory, and this is something that will be eventually needed, but its
usefulness is very limited for at least 5 10 years, due to all the other bottlenecks and lack
of a killer app or a need for one.
I just replaced my old g router and doc2.0 modem. Not because I needed more speed,
but because the old ones were 12 years old and burning out. Only a very connected large
household would have a compelling consumer need for even todays wi tech. So theres
a ways to go.

rrdonovan
Ah yeeessss, radio waves. Have you ever been in a small room with 30 to 40 laptops running
wirelessly? It is like bees swarming over your face. This phenomena occurred when I set up a
small lab with a bunch of laptops for elementary students. The teachers were afraid to enter
because of this buzzing in the face effect. I had to half the number of laptops for this to effect
to minimize. Just how many radio waves, intensity, frequency, etc. does it take to harm
human cells? This needs to be studied. I tried to get the university where I worked to start a
study on radio wave effects on the human body, but nobody was interested. I also dont work
there anymore..
Master Rod

some_guy_said
I cant tell if youre serious. But I would point that youre blasted by electromagnetic
radiation all the time. Its calledlight.
And seeing as radio waves have less energy thanlight, and are non-ionising, the
potential for harm is pretty low.
While large amounts of energy at a very specic wavelength Such as 2.45 Ghz, can
cause a type of resonant frictional heating in a water moleculethats just what it causes
heat in a microwave.
As for your computer labIt could be one of many biomechanical interactions with the
radio waves, or possibly something else. There are lots of unknown variables to this
secondhand story that I cant comment on.

rrdonovan
You cant comment on? Ah! so you know about this. Well, this is no second hand story. I
built the temporary lab. The kids thought it was funny, the teachers did not. It really was
an odd sensation..
some_guy_said

I cant comment on your particular experience because of all the the unknown
variables, the fact that YOUR story is second hand to me, and I am only vaguely
aware of some of the phenomenons that could be involved.
I cant reasonably comment on it, because I do not have enough knowledge or
information to form a valid opinion on your particular experience.
I cant comment on it, because I dont (and cant) know enough about it. Does that
make sense to you?

LT Fang
Since no number of radio wave emitting sources can actually increase the frequency of
the radio waves luckily Einstein has gured out 100 years ago increase in energy of
radio waves, no matter how much energy, cannot increase the frequency. Without an
increase in frequency, no amount of intensity has a single photon energetic enough to
have any effect on us.
Mangap
Now we need standard, where access point can be used by many people. example on stadium
where thousands people there. now it is dicult to implement access point for this situation
Joel Detrow
You mean IPV6?
Mangap
No. Current Access point can only handle around 30 user. (theory say 100) when we use it
on stadium/ event with 1000-10.000 people there we can not use normal access point. we
need special ones
rrdonovan
and how it will eventually replace wired gigabit ethernet networking at home and in the oce,

Just like contraceptives will replace abortion, right?! This writer know not of what he speaks.
There are reasons for direct hardware connect. Security is one of them, speed is another. The
only thing that will replace copper is most probably ber optics, not wireless.
You know technology is similar to Wall Street. Every so often, a new craze debuts. OK, for the
weak minded out there, lets take tablets. The companys producing these products are eecing
the public, their fanboys, and every nut job that believed the pitch that tablets would supersede
desktops and laptops. What we got were shitty underpowered, featureless, products with no
upgrade path. A lot of people bought into this. This let down brought the companys to say Oh,
wait till next year, we have a better tablet. The problem is that the next tablet may have just one
improvement rather than a comprehensive one. Ergo, they milk the public for all they can get.
The sheeple just keep begging for more.
I want a quad core tablet with several usb ports. I want a docking station with external monitor
ports. I want an 8 hr. battery life with at least 4 gig of ram. I want it to run Linux or be at least X86
compatible. Dont even start to talk to me about Android. It should have at least a 160 gig hard
drive, or at the very minimum a 128 gig SSD drive (Much better for overall speed). You hear me
companys. Put your money where your mouth is, and provide us with something worthwhile.
This nickel and dime stuff you are peddling is crap!

Our most recent trend is The Cloud. Oh, My, God! If Washington is getting hacked left and
right, what! You want to dangle a carrot of valuable data in a cloud for everyone to see? WTF!
Are you insane? These Clouds are getting hacked left and right. Granted, maybe for data that
has no signicance to anybody, stuff that is easy to get to with just about any device. But credit
card numbers, bank accounts, corporate data? No way. If your CIO believes in this Cloud
business, get rid of him quick before your shits out in the street.
Sorry about some of my language. Im just passionate about what I write. It is just hard to make
people understand certain technological concepts with out them falling prey to this technology
black hole every so often. As for these technical journalists, most of them should be writing
about little Suzys party, or some such nonsense. Leave the technology writings to us
Technologist who have been around the block a few times.
Master Rod
ps. smart watches, and glasses are coming. Look out.

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

Thanks for taking the time to comment!
I actually have a networking background, so I understand this topic fairly well. If you read the
story, I note that GigE will still have its uses. For the vast majority of use cases, though,
802.11ac (and 802.11n, to be honest) are more than good enough.
As for the rest of your treatise I can kind of see your point. Bear in mind that the PC is
actually dying because of tablet sales, though. I dont think tablets are just a ash in the pan.

rrdonovan
Good Point Sebastian! I stand corrected. Also, Yes you are correct in tablets replacing the
PC eventually. It is just the time element and the PC companys way of hacking out this
piece meal not just ready for prime time hardware. Again, If I had an 8 tablet phone or
phablet, with the specs I requested earlier, I could readily see the end of PCs and laptops.
As for Servers? Well, that is another story. Oh, and keep writing! After a 2nd reading, I nd
that you too are passionate about technology. Onward, through the fog. Enjoy!
Master Rod

preilly2
Sebastian, thank you for the very thorough coverage of the new standard and what we can
expect from it. But seriously, youre a young guy living in the UK and you already own a
massive detached house and gardens? Technology journalism must pay a lot better than I
thought it did!
http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony
OR Im a penniless writer living with my parents!
Or maybe its something in between :)

preilly2
Id rather believe its something in between. Makes me feel better. : )
Hershall Bott
So it sounds like it might be best to wait until the next wave of chipsets come out I dont want
to invest $200 only to have the next wave come out 2 years later.

Singh1699
Do you even need the speed of n at this point? G is outdated as you can get unlimited
50mb+ dl for under 50 per month in Canada. But ven n150 is ne and most stuff is n300.
Singh1699
Id get an n300+ router with solid ddwrt support that is fairly robust as my old g would
overheat tormenting.
Marin Kneevi
Am I missing something or there are multiple places in the article where there is 802.11n written
instead of 802.11ac?! Starting from this means that 802.11n has 8x160MHz of spectral
bandwidth and so on in several places later in the article.
http://www.securitycamera-ny.com/ Mark in NY
is that 802.11ac router very expenience?
https://plus.google.com/+Intercomrepairny/about?hl=en ryan
the router going cheaper now
Adrian Alphamale Levy
Good article Sebastian and funny comments guys.
Zachary Varley
Im trying to understand this topic of ac vs. n (knowing little about computers). It says above
Finally, 802.11ac is fully backwards compatible with 802.11n and 802.11g, and Im wondering
how 802.11n stands, not necessarily becoming obsolete, but with 802.11ac becoming
standardized and n being less usable/compatible.
Im currently comparing refurbished macbook pros (which provide only 802.11n) vs a new one
with 802.11ac. I will be uploading lots of photos and videos (a bit less frequently) so Im trying to
get a grasp on the matter, and how it will ACTUALLY affect me.
Also some_guy_said mentioned download speed/restrictions, pointing that most sites are
limited to a few mb/s, with bigger hosts providing slightly more. Assuming this is true(?) are
upload speeds limited in a similar way?

jone
what is multi-user MIMO?
AK
Cant see it ever completely replacing cabling. Maybe for most home users, but then again the
old wi standards are already sucient for most home users so it wouldnt make much
difference. For people who are serious about their connections I dont think you can replace the
reliability, stability, and uncontendedness (not sure how to phrase that!) you get with wired.
chojin999
At 2Gbps, youll get a transfer rate of 256MB/sec, and suddenly Ethernet serves less and less
purpose
That is not going to happen in the real world.
Just like 802.11n claimed 600Mbps speed is never achieved. The average is just in the 40 to
60Mbps range and rarely up to 80Mbps
802.11ac at best will give 100Mbps to 200Mbps WiFi connection in the real world.
Surely not MegaByte/s nor Gigabits as the marketing claims.

Wired Ethernet is here to stay for a very long time to come. 10Gbps Ethernet routers and
switches are going to drop in price soon now and people will replace the 1Gbps wired LAN
connections with the new one.

Zepid
Not true in the slightest. My Netgear Nighthawk R7000 gets about 400-500 Mbps in
realworld transfers, a far cry from your suggested 802.11ac at best will give 100Mbps to
200Mbps WiFi connection in the real world. It makes running a home theater system to 6
rooms from a central server a reality without ethernet.
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6182/netgear-nighthawk-r7000-ac1900-smart-wi-router-review/index6.html (http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6182/netgear-nighthawkr7000-ac1900-smart-wi--router-review/index6.html)
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/network-wi/3535784/netgear-nighthawk-r7000-80211acrouter-review/ (http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/network-wi/3535784/netgear-nighthawkr7000-80211ac-router-review/)

Ncrdrg
Speed aside, the reliably of ethernet has long been established. Theres a reason why
businesses use ethernet and not wireless and speed is not the only reason. Reliability is.
You dont get weird disconnects 2-3 times a day sometimes when you use ethernet. You
just dont. When youre handling servers who have to stay online all the time, this isnt
acceptable for a business.
This is why wireless will not ever replace ethernet completely, regardless of speed.

Zergling
I used to say that about my desktop. Now I am typing from a phone. I dont see why
technology cannot advance to make wireless communication as reliable as wired.
Indeed, that is what the 5G network is expected to do.
Kogashuko
And like the phone companies are nding out there is only so much spectrum. 1gb is
great with one device. Trying running 2-10 all trying to do transfers at gigabit speeds.
Suddenly it will be more like using a fast network on a hub or token ring. Ethernet
will be around for a while as will wireless. They both have different functions and t
two different niches. You will not push 4k content over your wi network any more
than you will plug your phone into an Ethernet cable.
Tal Tamir
Wireless is not in any way shape or form more advanced, it is just different, it has
tradeoffs. It allows you to deploy without running cables, the tradeoff is that it is
massively slower and less reliable.
Also, I love how people always compare the latest wireless to wired tech that is
several generations old.
Why dont you compare it to 10gbps ethernet?
Jim
I dont see anywhere in the 5G technology plans that say that.
I also dont see how wireless can ever be as reliable as wired. You can improve the
reliability, to an extent, but radio waves are always going to have weird interactions
with their environment.

Wires are always going to win for reliability. Wireless can close the gap, but the
additional mobility requirement means there will always be compromises.

goblin072 .
Anyone that uses Megabits over MegaBytes is suspect for not knowing what they are
talking about.
Gordon Neal
I am a very naive person who is looking to buy equipment for my comcast 105 mbps cable
which is still going to cost me $100 a month and I assume their highest bandwidth would
be very expensive. I would like to know who is your isp and how much do you pay for this
kind of bandwidth? Obviously I am a home user that would really like to put multiple
roku tvs in my house.
Greg
What youre forgetting is the speed of a wireless connection is mono-directional and only
one-user-at-a-time. An Ethernet connection is 100Mbps or 1Gbps bi-directional
simultaneously for each user assuming a star conguration (each user has a home run to
the router, no branches with switches). Wireless wont be able to do that for many
generations to come.
Jonas Dandois
As I also stated previously. @5m away with a wall inbetween i get a stable 1 Gbps with my
asus router and asus pci e card. So, I believe you are a bit too pessimistic
goblin072 .
A 2Gbps wireless connection is not going to get 256MB/sec lol. Keep dreaming. You might
get 40MB/sec with the stars aligned.
Theory and reality are two different things.

Yeah
Thats true.
If you have a device sticking to one place, and not moving much (i.e desktop PCs), then stick
with Ethernet.

Zunalter
Welp, exciting to see speeds get faster and faster, but not really practical for my use case.
John
Thats a transfer rate of 900 megabytes per second, or 900Mbps. The b in Mbps needs to be
capitalized. It should be 900 MBps or 900 MB/sec
http://www.twitter.com/jlendino Jamie Lendino
Got itthanks. (Actually just nixed; I didnt need it, with the preceding sentence.)
Henry Massey
I dont expect to ever see anything over 1.73Gbps in the enterprise. That would be ideal
conditions (very good SNR) using 4 spatial streams, 80MHz channels and 256-QAM. Its unlikely
that any client devices will support over 44 MIMO, and there arent enough 160MHz channels
to use in the enterprise. The rational for 8 spatial streams is multi-user MIMO (which wasnt
mentioned in the article), which allows the AP to simultaneously communicate with multiple
clients over different spatial streams. At this point, I dont think any Wave 1 AP has more than 3

spatial streams, and none of the Wave 1 silicon supports multi-user MIMO. Ruckus just
announced a Wave 2 access point that supports MU-MIMO, but it is still just 4 spatial streams.
There are good reasons to consider using 802.11ac, but a lot of marketing hype as well.

FrankenPC .
There is so much freakin noise in the 2.4GHz spectrum where I live that 5GHz is unbelievably
fast simply because its a clean signal.
hover389
So basically if you pay for internet that gives you 300mbps or less like 99.9% of the population,
getting a 802.11ac router is completely pointless or am I missing something here?
Opinionated Cat Lover
You are missing something here intranet speeds. If the only thing you ever use your
connection for is internet, then sure, you dont need too much more than your ISP delivers to
you, but if you have, say, a home media server connected to a smartTV, you will benet from
11ac over 11n, simply for the extra throughput.
Goran Mihajlovi
Newer routers tend to have better range and reliability as well. If your current router meets
your current and expected future needs, then of course dont bother. I recently had to get a
dedicated router as the ISP(Rogers) provided combo is garbage and opted for an AC(TP-Link
Archer C7) because of a good sale and it happened to have extremely good range and high
performance at greater distances. I am now future proofed for several years at least barring
8k streaming becoming a common reality.
goblin072 .
future proofed This is the language of noobs.
Goran Mihajlovi
Or a gure of speech used to mean its good for the newest thing that just came out or
is still to come, or will still be excellent despite the next generation of tech coming out. I
even plainly said at least until 8k streaming becomes common reality.
Jonas Dandois
I believe the expected real world speeds in the article are a little too low. Often laptops have
bad wi adapters compared to full scale wi adapters I happen to have a stable 1Gbps over my
wi- with my asus router rt87u and asus pcie card with external antena. Sitting about 5m away
and through a wall.
Hectic Charmander
What adapter are you using?
How can you achieve those speeds when four spatial stream adapters arent out yet (that I
know of)?
If you really are getting legit Gbps speed, you should be able to transfer les at a solid
100MB/s across your network. Is this the case for you?
The fastest people are getting atm (short of bridging two routers) are about 500Mbps.
http://www.cnet.com/au/products/asus-ac2400-rt-ac87u-dual-band-wireless-gigabit-router/
(http://www.cnet.com/au/products/asus-ac2400-rt-ac87u-dual-band-wireless-gigabit-router/)

Jonas Dandois
Hi, as I stated already, the router is rt87u and the pci e card with exteral antenna is ac68
from asus. My task manager stated I have a connection of 1Gbps over my wi (seen it go
up as high as 1.1Gbps and sometimes drops to 866Mbps). There is actually no way of
testing this speed as I only have this 1 pc and a macbook pro from work that I cant
connect wired as I dont have the adapter for it (macbook pro antenna will be a lot slower
than the desktop so wireless would make it a bottleneck).
But tbh, I believe the speed in the taskmanager is rather acurate, because when I switch
to 2.4ghz n, I get only 180Mbps. And immediately after the switch I notice the drop in
download speed (I have 200Mbps internet), if I run an internet speedtest then, it says its
only 180 instead of 195 that I would get if am wired or on my 5ghz AC 1gbps network.
But yes, there is actually no way for me to real life test it at the moment unless you know
one, then I would happily test it, as I am as curious as you are!

Hectic Charmander
No, youre right, there is no way to test it properly with the equipment you possess.
The only way you could condently test it would be to use a friends PC (or Mac) that
has ethernet and an SSD from which to receive les.
When you say Task Manager, are you speaking about the performance tab in Task
Manager in Windows 8? If so, I would consider the send/receive gures to be quite
accurate.
This can not be confused with the listed connection speed in the status of your
network adapter (Control PanelNetwork and InternetNetwork Connections > Right click
network adapter and choose Status). This can be very misleading. For instance, I have
an AC modem/router and a USB AC adapter. My listed connection speed is 867Mbps
but my real world speeds are more like 300Mbps.
But even if you are speaking about the send/receive values in the Win 8 task manager,
how are you receiving information at a rate of 1Gbps without another computer on the
network that can transmit data at such a speed? The only thing I can think of is having a
true gigabit bre internet connection.
And if you do have such a connection, and you can download les from the net at a
steady 100MB/s over your wireless network, congratulations. That would be legit
gigabit speeds, as indicated by the Task Manager.

DCLXVI
You made a teensy error there.
Even if everything else remained the same (and it doesnt), this means 802.11n has 8x160MHz
of spectral bandwidth to play with, <- supposed to be 802.11ac

http://www.twitter.com/jlendino Jamie Lendino

Gotthanks.
kiran Sauden
is there USB interface available?
Frank Schrader
Yes, I have a Linksy WUSB6300 which is a dual band USB 3.0 adapter

BtotheT
#Cancer #Radiation #GreyhairDontcare #PolicyMakers
Frank Schrader
FWIW, using a Linksys EA9200 Router and an Intel AC7260.HMWG.R PCI mini card in my laptop
I get a fairly steady 866.7 Mbs connection about 7 feet from the router and a connection speed
of between 866 and 700 about 25 feet and one wall away from the router. I dont have any
fancy test equipment and those numbers come from the Status in Windows 8.1 Network
Connections in Control Panel. The Intel card in the laptop is a replacement for the original which
was an N6235.
edimerka
Hallo, it is most interesting for me.I am keen on.This is very helping me:
https://youtu.be/WfUJqm4PycE (https://youtu.be/WfUJqm4PycE)
:-)

goblin072 .
Lol, I will believe this when I see it.
Simple test for anyone with Wi. Take a 500 megaByte le from a NAS or shared computer and
copy that le to your windows desktop via WiFi.
No matter what the router says 600Mbits it wont be a fraction of that.
It will be a puny 2-5 MB/sec (Not bits Bytes) for a 54Mbit connection
It might be 20 MB/sec for a 600Mbit connection.
This is if the laptop is 5 feet from the router.
Beating Gigabit WIRED connection is not going to happen anytime soon.

Andraxxus
One thing you all have been forgetting is all 802.11 standards are half duplex. And as far as I
know, only supported duplexing for Wireless networks is frequency-division duplexing, in which
router spends half time listening and half time transmitting within the same bandwidth.
You have 54 Mbps from g.With frequency-division duplexing, you will get 27Mbps tranfer. That
is 3,4 MB/s. With ~15% overhead, error correction etc, net tranfer speed is ~2,8 MB/s. It doesnt
matter If windows shows 10 MB/s transfer rate from your 802.11g router, you have to understand
windows uses caching, and transfer doesnt start/end when it says so. Take a huge le and a
chronometer, start the counter when you click paste and stop it when recieving computer
stops its hard disk activity. That is your net time for transfer.
On a theoratical 600Mbps router, same math gives only 32MB/s, and 2Gbps will result in
106MB/s transfer speed.
Note that those are for 100% ideal conditions. No noise, no signal degradation. Put a wall
between router and computer, those numbers will easily be cut in half, at best.
Now how does this compare to ethernet?

1-Gigabit Ethernet is wired full duplex, so 128MB/s data transfer rate, and with 10% or less
overhead, it results in 115 MB/s or more NET transfer rate, irrelevant of distances.
2-Again due to full duplex, if you both send and recieve les at the same time (and assuming
both computers have SSDs or RAID arrays to deal with read/write speeds), Each of these
transfers will be done at 105-110 MB/s; at the same time (net 210+MB/s transfer speed). On
wireless since two computers both sending and recieving will ll out channels, its impossible
even for a 4Gbps router to achieve such speeds.
Those are theory. Practice? At my home, my two pcs reach router by exactly 22m ethernet
cable, and between them, I can transfer at 11,8 MB/s from 100Mbps Ethernet, around 116 MB/s in
Gigabit mode. Transfer speed to my laptop on 600Mbps 802.11n connection, gets around 10,5
MB/s, despite Line-of-sight distance is approximately 4,5 meters from the router.
Its laughable to compare performance of Gigabit Ethernet to whatever wireless device. Plain
laughable.
However can wireless replace ethernet in function? Perhaps. Imagine a leserver for lms,
software etc. On average, an 1080p lm with very high quality is 7 GB with H264 (and IF you
sucent time, patience and computing power to switch your archive to H265 codec, its around
4,5 GB per lm but lets ignore that for now). Playing? a 7GB 2 hour-long lm results in
(7*1024)/(2*60*60) = 0,99Mbps transfer rate for streaming. That is easily achievable even with
802,11g, and if you set players buffers high (speaking from experience), one g device can
easily stream two HD lms at the same time. Copy? Putting this lm into your leserver takes a
minute with gigabit ethernet, and 4 minutes @30MB/s in real life with ac wireless. The
question is; how often one has to add/copy/move a lm/software to his archive? Even for
moving a hundred lms, if you leave it for overnight, and it will be done by the morning. While
watching one lm from the archive, its possible to copy 20-25 lms in via (real-life) ac wireless.
So 802.11ac vs Ethernet offers an acceptable *trade-off*; (subjectively) unimportant degradation
in performance vs clear improvement in utility. When 4k lms see widespread use, performance
will again be an important factor, and 10 Gigabit ethernet will shine.

Fark Googol
In my house, Im getting 55-60 MegaBYTES/s transfer speeds to my NAS on a good day. Some
days, its around 35-45MB/s though. Im using an Asus 3 antenna PCI-E card and a 3 antenna
Asus AC router. Distance is about 15 yards through 2-3 walls. I also have a Dell Ultrabook with
AC and a single antenna USB AC adapter and they are lucky to get 25-30MB/s even right next
to the router.
Tal Tamir
I just upgraded to wireless ac, its less than half the speed of wireless N, probably because I
get 5 bars on the 2.4ghz band and only 2 bars on the 5ghz band due to lack of penetration. my
PC is about 30 feet away from the router, but it has to penetrate 2 walls and a oor. where 5ghz
demonstrates how much it sucks
Anupam Dutta
Nice post regarding the future of 802.11ac but recently by NASA and University of California a
new Wi-Fi microchip has been developed that will transmit data three times faster than existing
one. (http://theandroid-blog.blogspot.com/2015/07/new-Wi-Fi-technology-uses-less-battery.html)
Jim
Instead of cluttering up your living room by running an Ethernet cable to the home theater PC
under your TV, 802.11ac now has enough bandwidth to wirelessly stream the highest-denition
content to your HTPC. For all but the most demanding use cases, 802.11ac is a very viable

alternative to Ethernet.
Unless Im mistaken, current (and earlier) versions of 802.11 had enough bandwidth to stream
HD video, too. The problem wasnt the bandwidth. The problem was the reliability.
Will 802.11ac solve the problem that my apartment has walls? Or that hundreds of my neighbors
have wi base stations competing for signal? Will it be easier to debug when the signal just
randomly drops from time to time?
It seems theres no end of wireless advocates who think that just a little more bandwidth will
solve all our problems. Reminds me of when the rst 64-bit x86 chips came out, and some guy
on TV actually said This is the last PC you will ever need to buy, as if the word size of my
processor was the limiting factor.

George
Anybody know what router that is in the picture? I like the handprint. The model written on it
dosent match up.

ExtremeTech Newsletter
Subscribe Today to get the latest
ExtremeTech news delivered right to your
inbox.
Email Address...

Sign Up

Subscribing to a newsletter indicates your consent to

our Terms of Use (http://www.ziffdavis.com/terms-ofuse) and Privacy Policy
(http://www.ziffdavis.com/privacy-policy).

More Articles

(http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/234201nvidia-quietly-launches-new-gtx-1060-3gbwith-fewer-cores-200-price-point)
Nvidia quietly launches new GTX 1060 3GB with
fewer cores, $200 price point
(http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/234201nvidia-quietly-launches-new-gtx-1060-3gb-withfewer-cores-200-price-point) Aug22

(http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/234186t-mobiles-new-unlimited-plan-is-a-blatantviolation-of-net-neutrality)
T-Mobiles new unlimited plan is a blatant violation
of net neutrality
(http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/234186-t-

mobiles-new-unlimited-plan-is-a-blatant-violation-ofnet-neutrality) Aug22

(http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/234175sony-may-announce-two-new-ps4-consolesnew-slim-design-leaks-on-auction-site)
Sony may announce two new PS4 consoles, new
slim design leaks on auction site
(http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/234175-sonymay-announce-two-new-ps4-consoles-new-slimdesign-leaks-on-auction-site) Aug22

(http://www.extremetech.com/computing/234158netgear-orbi-aims-to-kill-your-wireless-deadzones-with-mesh-networking)
Netgear Orbi aims to kill your wireless dead zones with
mesh networking
(http://www.extremetech.com/computing/234158netgear-orbi-aims-to-kill-your-wireless-dead-zones-withmesh-networking) Aug22

(http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/234025these-three-fungi-could-one-day-recycle-yourphone-battery)
These three fungi could one day help recycle your
phone battery
(http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/234025-thesethree-fungi-could-one-day-recycle-your-phonebattery) Aug22

About ExtremeTech (http://www.extremetech.com/about)

Advertising (http://www.extremetech.com/about#advertising)
Contact ExtremeTech (http://www.extremetech.com/contact)
Terms of Use (http://www.ziffdavis.com/about/terms)
Privacy Policy (http://www.ziffdavis.com/about/privacy)
Ziff Davis (http://www.ziffdavis.com)
AdChoices (http://preferences-mgr.truste.com/?type=ziffdavispop&pid=ziffdavis01&aid=ziffdavis01)
(//privacy.truste.com/privacy-seal/validation?rid=f216ea74-e272-46f4-b2a1-0db430ecb6b4)

(https://www.facebook.com/extremetechdotcom)
(https://twitter.com/ExtremeTech)

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use (http://www.ziffdavis.com/about/terms)and Privacy Policy
(http://www.ziffdavis.com/about/privacy). Copyright 1996-2016 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved.
ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without
express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.