Suggested 802.11n/ac minimum data rates

Good evening,
We presently have some minimum data rates setup for our 802.11 deployment (.11b/g disabled below 9Mbps, required at 11Mbps and supported at 12Mbps+ and for .11a/n/ac below 12Mbps disabled, 12Mbps required 12+Mbps supported). Currently in the high throughput section all MCS indices are supported. Are there are recommendations on the .11n/ac minimum supported MCS index?
We are supporting both 1142 and 2702 access points.
Thanks!

You should disable upto 11 Mbps (including 11 Mbps) & make 12 Mbps mandatory in 2.4GHz band. This will stop performance degradation due to protection mechanism enable when 802.11b client present in the network. (if you still have to support 802.11b legacy clinets then you cannot do this)
Are there are recommendations on the .11n/ac minimum supported MCS index?
leave all MCS indexes enabled. Depend on the RSSI & SNR, it will dynamically set a suitable rate. Refer this for detail
http://www.revolutionwifi.net/2014/09/wi-fi-snr-to-mcs-data-rate-mapping.html
HTH
Rasika
**** Pls rate all useful responses ****

Similar Messages

Late 2007 Macbook Pro 802.11n slow transmit rate

I have a Netgear Rangemax N router. But when I connect to the network and option+click on the wifi, my PHY Mode says "802.11n" but my transmit rate is only 54. When my Macbook air connects to the same router, the PHY Mode is still 802.11n, but my transmit is 170. What is happening that my Macbook Pro is connecting slower than the Macbook Air when on the same network?

When I read "crash," "distorted line across my screen," "it gets really hot," and "2007 17" MacBook Pro," the first thing that comes to mind is logic/graphics board. Visit your local Apple Store, and see if they can validate this suspicion or not. The SMART utility reading usually precedes a drive failure, but it's hard to conclude what's happening here.
In the meantime, make sure you're completely backed up. If you don't back up, purchase an external HD, and back up with SuperDuper. Preserve your machine by running things at lower temperatures (under 160•F), and keep an eye on iStat.
Oh, and tell us the problem when you know.

Incorrect data rates reported by Vimeo

I am getting this reported by Vimeo:
"This video's data rate is only 4236 kbit/s, which is lower than what we recommend and means your video might not look as nice as it should. For HD video, we suggest you use a higher data rate, typically 5000 kbit/s."
after uploading from Adobe's Media Encoder via Premiere Pro 2014.1 using the Vimeo 720 encoding preset.
I have always used this preset over the last couple of years but have started noticing this warning message appear in the last say six months.
Perhaps these presets beed looking at, or am I doing something wrong.
James
Model Name: Mac Pro
Model Identifier: MacPro6,1
Processor Name: 8-Core Intel Xeon E5
Processor Speed: 3 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 8
L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB
L3 Cache: 25 MB
Memory: 16 GB
Boot ROM Version: MP61.0116.B04
SMC Version (system): 2.20f18
Illumination Version: 1.4a6
Hardware UUID: 610B8801-5C80-5CEF-8892-EE0D95066882

Vimeo may have upped the allowable bit rate. Increase the bit rate and make sure it's 2 pass and see if the quality is better.

Question: why the 802.11n doesn't work on my brand new MacBook?

dear sirs,
I've just found out that the 802.11n upgrade doesn't work for my MacBook 2 GHz Intel Core Duo. How come? Is it possible? What should I do to have it talk to my also new AirPort Extreme 802.11n at the same rate?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Tomaso

Also on http://www.apple.com/airportextreme/performance.html it states:Most currently shipping Mac systems support the next-generation 802.11n technology in the new AirPort Extreme Base Station.2
2. All Mac computers with Intel Core 2 Duo and Intel Xeon processors except the 17-inch iMac with 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor support the 802.11n technology in AirPort Extreme. These 802.11n-compatible Mac systems require enabler software that is included on the AirPort Extreme CD.

How is the Cell Boundary Recommendations for 2.4Ghz Data survey in 802.11N

How is the Cell Boundary Recommendations for 2.4Ghz Data survey in 802.11N?

bYou can use N on 2.4GHz. You will have to use AES encryption or open SSID, 5.0 GHz channel bonding is to give 40MHz wide channels and double the data rate, plus a little as it can reuse the edge frequecies.
Basically you have upto MCS15 144Mbps at the top end per channel, don't bond 2.4GHz as there are not enogh non overlapping channels.
As for the low end it all depends. I would certainly disable the 802.11b data rates as a minimum but that means you still have very large cells and potential for interference. generally I would look at 24Mbps and switch everything off below that especially if you have very few 802.11b clients.

WLC with 2 WLANs, 1 voice @ 2.4GHz and 1 data @ 5GHz 802.11n

I have a WLC 4400 series and am using 1142n APs. Am planning on adding Wireless IP Phones such as 7921/7925 as well as a couple 9971's. Is it possible to have 2 WLANs, one to connect the voice endpoints to running @ 2.4GHz and another WLAN with a different SSID for data clients @ 5GHz? All data clients have 802.11n NICs and can operate @ 5GHz. I have enough APs so that the lessened range of 5GHz won't pose any issues. Ideally I'd like to see connection rates in the 240mbps-300mbps range on the data clients with data throughput rates of 100mbps+ (I don't think this ought to be an issue, I'm aware that wireless is half-duplex and that connection rates do not necessarily indicate actual throughput rates). I am also NOT a wireless expert. I'm still fairly new to working with the WLC and the managed APs as such.
The reason for 2.4GHz and 5GHz simultaneously is that the voice endpoints are all 2.4GHz radios, I believe 802.11b/g. I also want to keep voice clients separate. This way, I believe I can optimize one WLAN for data clients without having them "suffer" so to speak by having to operate at a lower level as the voice clients. Also, I want the voice separate for quality there (separate voice VLAN). If I am correct, 802.11n data rates can also be achieved @ 2.4GHz, but only using the 20MHz as opposed to 40MHz width. So I'd like one WLAN to be 2.4GHz, 20MHz (voice) and the other WLAN 5GHz, 40MHz (data).
I'd like to hav both WLANs broadcasted from all the APs simultaneously. Am I correct that such a configuration is possible with the WLC 4400 series and Aironet 1142n APs? WLC is running 7.0.240 btw, current stable. I'm also starting with a clean config on the WLC. All DHCP will be handled by an external DHCP server also. Thank you very much for any suggestions/guidance on this. Your thoughts are greatly appreciated!
I'll be happ to supply any config information to assist with this, just let me know what is desired/useful.

Thank you for your prompt response. I only have 1 WLC, it is a 4402-50. I believe that 7.0.240 is the most current release for that model. I think anything higher I need to go to the WLC5508 (or vWLC?)
Also, I wasn't aware that the 7921/25 were 5GHz, since they are both 802.11g. Thank you for the information.
If I understand you correctly, I'm best creating 2 WLANs, but both at 5.0GHz for both data and voice?
Also, sorry to confuse the issue further, but I was thinking about this after writing the original post, I'd like to also have a "guest" WLAN that supports both 2.4GHz and 5.0GHz for maximum client compatibility (as I have no way of knowing what tpye of WLAN NIC would be in guest devices). Am I correct in assuming that I would create a separate WLAN for all these, including a separate SSID.
The part that is confusing me some now is the "AP Groups". Do I leave a single "Default-group" and create multiple WLANs with that. If I'm correct, this way I can push the WLANs and SSIDs out through all the WAPs in that group. I want these WLANs to be available from any AP in the organization, not have some APs for one WLAN, other APs for another WLAN, etc.

Data and Voice separation with 802.11n

Hi there
I'm interessting in some design guides. I would deploy data in 2.4 GHz band and the voice in 5 GHz band. But aren't there problems with the 802.11n deployment, I thought that this works better in 5 GHz.
What recommendations would you make and did you have some issues with this design?
Thanks in advance.
Dominic

Hi Dominic,
You can find all kinds of documentation on Cisco's 802.11n homepage: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/netsol/ns767/networking_solutions_package.html
To answer your questions, there is no "problem" with running 802.11n in the 2.4GHz space, but there are limitations. You cannot use channel-bonding, which is the primary source of the added bandwidth that 802.11n offers. If you want to see 150Mbps data rates, you'll need to deploy it in a 5GHz implementation.
Another advantage to running in 5GHz is that you can isolate your 802.11n traffic from your 802.11b/g traffic on the 2.4GHz radio. This will prevent slowdown that can occur when legacy clients coexist with 802.11n clients.
So yes, you're correct to say that it does work better in 5GHz. The nice thing is that most 802.11n chips in laptops support this band.
That said, it would be best if voice and data can both exist in the 5GHz space. You can accomplish this by creating different SSIDs for your voice and data networks. There is nothing wrong with deploying both in 5GHz.
Let me know if you have anymore questions. Thanks!
Jeff

Reduced transmit rate on new dual band AEBS vs older AEBS 802.11N, gigabit

Hi,
I recently upgrade my AEBS from the older 802.11N Gigabit version to the dual band version. The new 2.4ghz part works fine for my iphone, however the 5ghz signal has much slower throughput. previously I could routinely get 270Mbps, now I am lucky to get 160Mbps. the new 5ghz signal is on the same frequency (48), the same multicast rate, and has wide channels selected. When I plugged the older model back in and tested it the throughput was the same 270Mbps so it is not some new interference.
Anybody else see anything like this? Do the two radios on the AEBS interfere with each other somewhat?
any ideas? Did I just get a dud unit or is this common (fixable?)?
Thanks

Hi Bob,
Thanks for your reply. My situation is a bit different as I have various wifi units from different locations (some US, some European, some Japanese, etc, etc). As such I need to pick a frequency that works for everything, and on my previous non dual band AEBS channel 48 worked fine. I have tried channel 161 just for curriosity and it made no difference. The transmit rate is listed at between 216Mbps and 27Mpbs but as soon as you attempt to transfer anything it drops significantly. I have also tried to time the difference between my new dual band AEBS and the older one and, regardless of what the connection speed is saying, the new one is definitely slower.
It isn't unusable by any means, I just thought it was odd and I have never seen it mentioned on any of the reviews of the new dual band units.

Lose Network Connection w/AEBS 802.11n when transferring large data amounts

Hi,
I have a LaCie 500GB external hard drive that is connected to my AEBS 802.11n via a USB hub. Lately, when I am backing up my MacBook Pro to that drive, transferring 5GB or so of data, I notice that my MacBook Pro loses connection with the AEBS (i.e. the network goes down) right smack in the middle of the data transfer. I either have to reboot the MacBook Pro -- or -- unplug and replug the AEBS to reestablish connection.
I was just wondering if this sort of network connectivity loss is being experienced by other people doing large data transfers over the AEBS to an external drive?
Thanks.
Message was edited by: jmFightSpam

I hate to be the one adding a "me too" post, but, me too!
When I try to open iPhoto (library stored on a USB drive attached to AEBSn) the AEBSn crashes, flashes orange once or twice and then restarts. Currently running firmware 7.2 because 7.2.1 wasn't allowing me to reconnect to AirDisks after MacBook went to sleep. If the drive is connected directly to my MacBook there is no problem.
If anyone, anywhere has any idea, I'd be very grateful!

Slow data transfer with Time Capsule on 802.11n ?

Hi,
Actually, I don't know where to start. But let's explain my setup first:
My iMac (wired) and AppleTV (wireless) are connected to the Time Capsule (802.11n, 5Ghz)
My girlfriend's MacBook and 2 x iPhone 2G's (wireless) are connected to an Airport Extreme Base station (802.11b/g compatible).
The Time Capsule and AEBS are connected and show two different networks.
Now the problem:
When I copy files from e.g. the iMac to the MacBook or to the Apple TV, it's very slow. I've used scp to copy a 200 mb file and it took about 1.20 minutes (at 2.5MB/s). I've did the same when the iMac was connected over wireless and it took about 3.45 to 4.30 minutes (at 1.0MB/s).
I'm not sure if this IS slow, but it certainly feels like it. 802.11n should be around 100 Mb/s in practice and 802.11b/g around 20-25 Mb/s.
By the way: downloading from the Internet is excellent, I get the full download/upload speed my provider offers for my subscription.
Second, I added the signal strength/noise levels for the Time Capsule attached devices. They vary around -68Db signal, -90Db noise.
The question is: are these levels normal ? What should be higher or lower ?
Thanks in advance !
Rutger

The new Airport Extremes and Time Capsules suffers from terrible performance over the 5GHz band and it's a problem that not only affects me and you, but hundreds of thousands of other owners.
Nobody knows if it's a firmware problem or the Marvell chips inside that's the problem, and Apple hasn't said or done anything for months.
I'm still hoping for a firmware update to solve this, but if it doesn't get fixed soon enough, I'm gonna return it and go back to backing up to wired disk and my rock solid Airport Express.
Not the happiest answer, but at least you have a clue now.
Cheers,
Koski

WRT330N and DELL 1505 Draft 802.11n WLAN Mini-Card Rev 2.0

Well it was time to upgrade the house with two new DELL Inspiron 530s.
Each with their own "DELL 1505 Draft 802.11n WLAN Mini-Card Rev 2.0"
Now the (problem) we are having is we are lucky to get 13.0 Mbps & that's if we stay online. Our World of Warcraft gets booted a lot. Which makes gaming hard when I purchased the WRT330N for gaming.
We have the latest drivers for the Wirelss adapters, Firmware is up to date.
Setup is as follows.
Wireless Setting:
Network: Wirelss-N Mixed
Wireless Name (SSID): My own thing there
Radio Band: Wide - 40 MHz channel
Wide Channel: 9
Standard Channel: 2.462 GHz - cH 11
SSID Broadcast: Disabled
Advanced Wireless Setting:
Trasmission Rate: Auto
CTS Protection Mode: Disabled
Beacon Period: 50
DTIM Interval: 3
Fragmentation Threshold: 2346
RTS Threshhold: 2347
Network Density: Low
Wireless Security: Disabled. We currently use Wireless MAC Address Filtering.
Any suggestions?

I am having the same issues. I have the same router but a different laptop. Mine is a Inspiron 1545 with an Intel 5100 AGN card. So the solution is to ditch the Linksys router and get a D-Link? what say you Linksys

First time working with 802.11n, not working properly?

Hello,
This is the first time I use 802.11n in my network there is only one AP1141 but the clients don't connect at 802.11n rates, instead they connect at data rates as low as 11 Mbps. At the begining they connect at 144 Mbps but immidiatly it decreases to 11 or 12.
Many of our wireless clients in the company are Intel(R) WiFi Link 5100 AGN.
Any comments?
AIR-AP1141N-A-K9
AIR-WLC2106-K9
6.0.182.0
Let me know if more info needed?
Thanks

Hi George,
So you suggest to keep only WPA2/AES?
Regarding the coverage area keep in mind this is a really small 4 floor building with an AP floor floor, I installed only one AP1141 in my floor and kept the AP1131 in the other 3 floors, I might reduce the power to half since I don't need them working at full power unless I need coverage in the stairs in order to enforce roaming to IPPhones. Also, I don't want to bond channels on 2.4 because I read that as a recomendation in a Cisco's document (anyways I did not find how to do it in 2.4, wuld be a nice tip if you tell me how just in case) so 144 Mbps would be great as long as it works properly. I did not experienced these rate hoping until I enabled this AP1141.
And yes most of the clients that reported issues are Intel (engineering team, haven't checked the rest yet).
Regards!

Airport Drives Me CRAZY! New 802.11n Network Slower Than Old 802.11g/b

I've been using Macs since 1988 and consider myself an advanced user. However, every time I setup a new Airport wireless network or re-configure an existing one, I feel like a helpless newbie trying to figure out how to open a folder on my desktop. No matter how many times I read the manual or the help files or these forums, I can never grasp what seems like it should be a simple path from A to B to C.
Anyway, here's my current situation: I've been successfully (I think) running a 6 year old AP Extreme Base Station [AE] (in my home office addition) and 2 Airport Expresses [AX] (one AX roughly 15 feet from the base station--through sheetrock, and the second AX roughly 30 feet from the first AX--through sheetrock and some wooden stairs. (so roughly 45 feet from AE to 2nd AX). It wasn't the speediest thing going but it did the trick with older Macs.
I recently bought a MacBook Pro which supports 802.11n. I most often use this laptop at the point in the house furthest away from the AE (Base Station) The AE (Base Station) is in my home office connected to my MacPro desktop (see #1 below). In addition, the family iMac is also in that room furthest from the AE. Using the new MacBook Pro with the old 802.11/g/b network turned out to be painfully slow. I was experiencing the same slow network connection my family has complained about for years with their older Macs and 802.11g/b.
I decided it was time to upgrade the whole network, if only to speed up my MacBook Pro connection. Bought new 802.11n Airport Extreme (MC340LL/A) and 2 new 802.11n Airport Expresses (MB321LL/A). Setup did not go smoothly. Again, my normally competent Mac persona was reduced to a babbling three-year-old. Had three different Apple techs on the phone trying to help me through it. Got different, contradictory instructions from the last two. Finally got all three units working, only to find that not only does my MacBook Pro seem even more sluggish than when connected to the old 802.11g/b network, but my wife tells me web pages are taking at least twice as long to load as with the old network.
As concisely as I can lay this out:
*1. Airport Extreme (Base Station)*
Connected via Ethernet from its WAN port to my Comcast cable modem. One Ethernet (LAN) port on that AE is then connected via Ethernet to my Netgear 8-port Ethernet switch. Ethernet from switch to Ethernet port 1 on my MacPro. (MacPro does NOT have an Airport card because I forgot to order one. Also I confirmed that this setup was functional by connecting to the AE wirelessly with my MacBook Pro showing the name I'd given the new network prior to adding the two AX's to the mix).
Some Airport Extreme settings of note (all accessed via "Manual Setup" button):
Airport Tab > Summary
Version 7.5.1
Wireless Mode: Create a wireless network
Channel: 149 (Automatic), 1 (Automatic)
Wireless Clients: 3
Airport Tab > Base Station:
Allow Setup over WAN: Unchecked
Airport Tab > Wireless:
Allow this network to be extended: Checked
Airport Tab > Guest Network:
Nothing checked
Airport Tab > Access Control:
MAC Address Access Control: Not Enabled
Internet Tab > Internet Connection:
Connect Using: Ethernet
Ethernet WAN Port: Automatic (Default)
Connection Sharing: Share a public IP address [Think this one is probably wrong]
Internet Tab > TCP/IP:
Configure IPv4: Using DHCP
Internet Tab > DHCP:
Shows Beginning & Ending Address
Internet Tab > NAT:
Enable default host at: Unchecked and blank field
Enable NAT Port Mapping Protocol: Checked
Internet Tab > Advanced
Didn't touch anything here, so all at defaults
*2. Airport Express #1: Living Room Express (Closest to AE (Base Station)*
Airport Tab > Summary
Version 7.4.2
Wireless Mode: Extend a wireless network
Connect using: Wireless Network
Channel: 1 (Automatic)
Wireless Clients: 1
Airport Tab > Base Station:
Allow Setup over the Internet using Bonjour: Unchecked
Airport Tab > Wireless:
Wireless Mode: Extend a wireless network
Allow wireless clients: checked
Airport Tab > Access Control:
MAC Address Access Control: Not Enabled
Internet Tab > Internet Connection:
Connect using: Greyed-out, not selectable
Connection sharing: Greyed-out, not selectable
Internet Tab > TCP/IP:
Configure IPv4: Using DHCP
Shows IP Address
Internet Tab > Advanced
Didn't touch anything here, so all at defaults
*3. Airport Express #2: Dining Room Express (Furthest from AE (Base Station)*
Airport Tab > Summary
Version 7.4.2
Wireless Mode: Extend a wireless network
Connect using: Wireless Network
Channel: 1 (Automatic)
Wireless Clients: 2
Airport Tab > Base Station:
Allow Setup over the Internet using Bonjour: Unchecked
Airport Tab > Wireless:
Wireless Mode: Extend a wireless network
Allow wireless clients: checked
Airport Tab > Access Control:
MAC Address Access Control: Not Enabled
Internet Tab > Internet Connection:
Connect using: Greyed-out, not selectable
Connection sharing: Greyed-out, not selectable
Internet Tab > TCP/IP:
Configure IPv4: Using DHCP
Shows IP Address
Internet Tab > Advanced
Didn't touch anything here, so all at defaults
SETUP/GOALS:
With Airport Extreme (Base Station) as the starting point, have the two Airport Express units with the strongest, fastest signal possible, provide Internet access (and file sharing, iTunes speakers capability) to three Macs (one older iMac, one older PowerBook and my new MacBookPro). Again, I believe my new MacBook Pro is the only one with 802.11n support, so I don't expect the other Macs to take advantage of the speed boost offered by the three new 802.11n devices.
+Any and all help with this will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!+

{quote}With the AirPort Extreme, in the AirPort panel, Wireless tab, click on the button for "Wireless Network Options", check the box for "5 GHz Network Name", and enter a different network name. (That can be trivially different, such as the name of the main network suffixed with an underscore and the digit 5.) Once configured that way, connect your "N" gear to each network in turn to see if one is any better than the other. (If you're wondering what effect this would have, it allows segregating your "N" gear from the older gear to prevent the older gear from slowing down your network. However, distance and interference from things like walls may negate any advantage.){quote}
William: I was gone most of yesterday, but had a chance to implement your recommendations today. I added the 5 GHz network as you suggested, but in order to connect to that at all with my 802.n11 MacBokk Pro, I need to be within a few feet of the AE (base station). If I try to access that network even from the next room (well within reach of both the AE and the livingroom AX, I get one bar and "failure to connect" messages just trying to logon to that network.
However, I did some experimenting that (as of right now, anyway) resulted in much faster network access, not only from my MacBook, but also from the older iMac which is the furthest Mac from the AE. According to my wife, that iMac is "loading web pages faster than I've ever seen them!"
Here's what I did:
1. Moved all three units to places where it seemed they would have the least amount of interference with the clearest path from unit to unit, also raising the height of both AXs from about 2-3 feet from the floor to about 5-6 feet from the floor.
2. Changed one setting on the AE (base station): Wireless Tab > Wireless Network Options > Multicast Rate ---> Changed this from Low to High.
I have a feeling the location shifts made the real difference, but I will try changing the multicast rate back to "Low" just to see what happens.
Paul

Does 802.11n give a speed boost on the iPad?

I did some testing to see if I'd get a speed boost by enabling 802.11n on my Belkin F5D8233-4 router, which supports 802.11n draft specification. I have Verizon FIOS with 25Mbps download/upload. I also have the Verizon router, which only supports 802.11b/g, and I can switch which router I'm connected to in order to compare speeds of 802.11n and 802.11g. All tests were done less than 3 feet from either router.
Bottom line is that the iPad doesn't get any speed boost by using 802.11n, at least by using speedtest.net to do the testing.
The test I used was with the speedtest app for the iPhone. I made the Belkin a pure 11n router, and ran that app from the iPad. So the connection had to be 802.11n. Then I connected the iPad to my Verizon router, which had to be 802.11g, and saw virtually no difference.
I did the same test with a Windows laptop from my job that supports 802.11n. It connected locally to the Belkin router at 72Mbps according to the internal utility. Testing using speedtest.net indicated that using the 802.11n connection on the Belkin was 50% faster than the 802.11g connection on the Verizon router. (About 30Mbps for Belkin/802.11n compared to 20Mbps for Verizon/802.11g for downloads).
But with the iPad, doing the same test (switching from Belkin router to Verizon router), the speed didn't change. It actually seemed a little slower when I was on 802.11n, but repeated tests showed some variability, and the average was about 19Mbps.
I realize that the overall speed for the iPad when I'm in my house will get throttled by the FIOS connection max of 25Mbps (although it's interesting that with my MacMini, and the Windows laptop, when connected via 100baseT, I get 30Mbps from FIOS when they promise 25Mbps!). But I can't get the good results from the iPad using 802.11n that I see with the Windows laptop. I'd like to try a local speedtest using the local LAN. I installed Speedtest MINI on the MacMini, enabling the Mac as a server, and the Windows laptop did 72Mbps on the local LAN. But Speedtest MINI requires Flash in the browser, so I can't do that test on the iPad. And the Speedtest app for iPhone doesn't let you pick a local URL for the server.
So I'm now pretty sure that 802.11n isn't really working right on the iPad with my Belkin router, in terms of delivering increased performance. I've read other posts where people have looked at the transmit rate from the router side, but I really wish I could look at the transmit rate from the iPad (like I do in Mac OS X, or in Windows) to verify.
To be sure, I'd like to run a speedtest on my local LAN from the iPad. Has anyone been able to actually do some kind of test that verifies the speed of an iPad connection on a local LAN, and does that verification from the iPad, and not the router?
And finally, has anyone ever done a test that verifies that 802.11n from an iPad delivers a speed boost compared to 802.11g? Are there specific requirements on the router side that need to be satisfied so that the iPad gets a boost? I've read elsewhere where someone said that you only get the boost if using Apple's Airport Extreme as the router (so that you can't really get 802.11n on a non-Apple router), and I think I saw someone say that the router has to support communication over 5.0Ghz for the iPad to be fast on 802.11n. Has Apple ever said what are the real requirements for the iPad to be faster on 802.11n versus 802.11g?

To the contrary, my experience is that the "G" standard on WiFi provided MUCH faster speeds than the "N" standard on Wi-Fi. It makes no sense, I know, but it is true.
I was having horribly slow Wi-Fi speeds on my iPad2, despite a fast cable modem connection and a "N" generation Linksys wireless router (maybe 2-3 yrs old). Was achieving speeds of only 1.3Mbs -- slow enough that you couldn't watch YouTube videos. From hunting around on the web, I came across the suggestion to manually set the Wi-Fi router to the "G" standard (ie downgrade it from the faster "N" standard). Remarkably, I did it and it worked like a charm. I now get Wi-Fi speeds of about 12 or 13 Mbs, or 10x what I was getting before. It is an easy fix. And also I think the "G" standard is capable of 50Mbs so even though it is a slower and older standard, it is still way faster than anything you are likely to achieve as a home user. I think there is some glitch or oddity in the iPad and iPad2 which can cause it to perform very poorly with older "N" standard WiFi routers. New ones don't seem to have a problem.

1252 802.11n Throughput, no more than ~140Mbps?

Hello, I have read most of these ports regarding the speed of the 802.11n on the 1252 AP, and can't seem to figure this one out. I have a WISM with a light weight 1252 being powered by a power injector running 7.0.98.0 code. I have everything enabled for 802.11n, and connet with Windows 7 at 300Mbps. After doing many FTP speed tests I can never seem to break the ~140Mbps mark, even after enabling 802.11a 40mhz channel bonding and all the appropriate MCS rates and WMM/WPA2/AES settings. This is a mixed RF environment with clients running a/b/g/n all over. Am I missing something or is really the limit of our environment. I tested 2 different laptops with N cards. My card is an Intel 4965 ABG with latest drivers.
Thanks!

+5 to George. The maximum ever observed in very specific conditions (specific packet size, no one else connected) is around 170/180 "real" Mbps. In a typical real life scenario, reaching 140/150 is good and expected.
For the theoretical explanation, it's the data frame that is sent at 300Mbps. You must also count that EVERY single wireless frame has to be acked by the receiving side, that there are still the beacons and management frames sent at low data rates (1Mbps often, and not 300) and as george said it's half duplex, all in all 802.11a/g offer less than half the speed (20 instead of 54) and with a few protocol improvements 11n offers about really half the speed (150 with 300Mbps data rate).
It's actually the same concept with wired world. Gigabit ethernet means data frames are sent at 1Gbps speed but you have to count the protocol overhead (waiting for tcp ack, etc ...). The difference is that there is very little overhead on wired and it's full duplex so you get very close to 1Gbps.
Hope this clarifies.
Nicolas

Suggested 802.11n/ac minimum data rates

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for