If all my devices only have "n" adapters, is there a point to get "ac" router?
Some told me I will never realize the faster speeds because I dont have "ac" device BUT I will have way better range. Is that true?
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11
Get an N type
Your devices can only achieve max N speed
A new AC would have to fall back to delivering N type connections and is a waste of money unless you upgrade all units to AC.
You max range is N restricted and depends on obstructions in path of connections
What do you mean by restricted? I'm in a single-family house and typically with N router, I have a hard time getting connection in one of the rooms downstairs. Will find AC router give me greater range? I read somewhere that even with devices that are not AC, having an AC router will give more range. Trying to verify that.
Last edited by jyeh74; 5th Mar 2016 at 15:48.
I was about to say that getting a quality router was more important than the networking standard but after some research it appears that ac routers are better access points all around. That being said, stay away from the 50$ boxes.
Sounds like you don't need the router to anything crazy. For the average user I suggest this:
It's all the router most households will need. It costs only a little more than most "Good" N only routers and will give you the AC band for future use.
Most of 802.11ac devices use 5GHz band where most of 802.11n 2.4GHz so it means you need wireless cards capable to work in 5GHz - nowadays usually you have devices capable to work in 2.4 and 5GHz band, some of them simultaneously and usually they provide 802.11acng support.
Do you know if the 2.4Ghz on an AC router will give better range than an N router? Or is it the same?
Beware of the new firmware as they may reduce overall WiFi performance - due latest regulations overall performance may be reduced.
From my experience correct antenna placement is important and i would suggest before any new shopping exercise some search for better position of router or router antennas.
I always recommended to use software which allow to test link quality (indirectly trough reporting throughput) - Zap from Ruckus is available for free, 2 computers are required to run it (one is server, second station).
Don't be surprised if by proper configuration and proper router placement way better results can be reached.
It is deceiving because the AC1900 routers claim 600 Mbps speeds. But if my internet is only achieving less than that, like 120 Mbps, then I will never see the 600 Mbps speeds ever!
802.11n specify up to 4 spatial streams i.e. if one stream in 40MHz channel have up to 150Mbps (valid for index MCS=7 http://www.wlanpros.com/mcs-index-802-11n-802-11ac-chart-3/ in one direction (or transmit or receive) ).
One important remark - accordingly to new regulations 40MHz channel is not feasible in area where other networks are present.
Access Point can't use 40MHz (i.e. 2 WiFi channels bonded together) in a presence of other networks, some drivers explicitly disabling this functionality (for example FAT Channel intolerance=1).
Higher MCS index (like 7) is feasible only in good environment where overall amount of noise is low - in other words if you live on farm, and in radius over 1km from you there is no other WiFi than your own then all this marketing may be OK with remark to normal protocol overhead (remember most of network protocols assume bidirectional transmission - at least every T(x)ransmitted packet need to be ACKnowledge by R(x)eceiving side - this reduce visible/reported bitrate).
Btw most o my remarks is related to 2.4GHz, 5GHz is usually less congested and support not only 20 and 40Mhz channels but also 80MHz (in latest versions of standard extended to 160MHz i.e. up to 4 typical WiFi channels is used to deliver data in 1 network - similar technique is also in Docsis 3.x).