On 01/04/2016 06:34 PM, Jack Craig wrote:
how due you calculate throughput? i have a wireless config for 54
Mbit/sec
but never measured...
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:30 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht
<wolfgang.rupprecht(a)gmail.com <mailto:wolfgang.rupprecht@gmail.com>> wrote:
Does Fedora/Linux support the faster than 54 Mbit/sec 802.11n speeds?
My OpenWRT AP has a status page that claims that the 5 Ghz radio is
configured for a 150 Mbits/sec 40Mhz (double-wide) channel. I'm only
seeing a 54 Mbit/sec throughput over WIFI though. (Over ethernet to the
same router I'm seeing the expected 180 Mbits/sec to the internet.)
This is what lshw(1) has to say about the wifi card:
*-network
description: Wireless interface
product: RTL8821AE 802.11ac PCIe Wireless Network
Adapter
vendor: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd.
physical id: 0
bus info: pci@0000:03:00.0
logical name: wlp3s0
version: 00
width: 64 bits
clock: 33MHz
capabilities: pm msi pciexpress bus_master cap_list
ethernet physical wireless
configuration: broadcast=yes driver=rtl8821ae
driverversion=4.2.8-300.fc23.x86_64 firmware=N/A ip=192.168.75.107
latency=0 link=yes multicast=yes wireless=IEEE 802.11abgn
resources: irq:52 ioport:3000(size=256)
memory:b2000000-b2003fff
Does this ring any bells? I can easily believe that the faster speeds
are proprietary extensions but figured I'd check.
AFAIK, 802.11n has a theoretical limit of 160Mbps. However, that's over
that full, 40MHz double-wide channel with no channel contention and no
other radios active. The radio on your AP is shared among all users of
the AP so you have to take that into account. The theoretical limits
of the radio are probably only approached in a lab environment for any
wifi technology. The real world is, well, different. :-)
If you want higher speeds, then 802.11ac is a better route. Note that
it only works over the 5GHz radio (not the 2.4GHz that 802.11n can
use), so it doesn't have the range or "penetration power" (ability to
go through walls, etc.) that the 2.4GHz band has. None the less, it is
faster (theoretically over 8 times faster than 802.11n due to a number
of additional things done in the protocol, muxing, antenna handling and
session management).
As always, YMMV. I find 802.11n fine for what I need wifi for, although
I do have 802.11ac available as well. If I need higher speed, my house
is fully CAT6-ified with an Extreme Summit 400-48T 48-port switch in the
middle, so I can "go copper" if I need higher speed (sorta gilding the
lily since my Internet link is only 100Mbps upload (download is faster,
but I do a lot of uploading due to my job).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital ricks(a)alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2 ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 -
- -
- Blessed are the peacekeepers...for they shall be shot at -
- from both sides. --A.M. Greeley -
----------------------------------------------------------------------