Pc wifi speeds half expected

Snookums

Snookums

Snookums

Soldato
Joined
27 Mar 2013
Posts
3,864
Location
Nottingham
I did post about this when I first moved into our new place back in August but had other more important things so put it on the backburner, but now I want to get my speeds sorted and make the most out of what I am paying for.

Supplier is VM with the superhub 3.0 I get 200mbps 8-12ms wired. My phone gets 200mbps 12ms over wifi anywhere in the house over 5ghz wifi. only place it drops from 5ghz to 2.4ghz is the garden which the speed then drops to 100-120mbps 20ms.

My pc however only get 90mbps 20ms max over wifi, the wifi card I am using which i think may be the issue is this; TP-LINK TL-WN881ND 300 Mbps Wireless N. My pc is around 12ft away and on the floor above.

Powerline adapters are not feasible, as already owned several 300mbps adapters and virgin gave me some 1200mbps adapters for free both of which get the exact same speed of around 80mbps max, less than my wifi which leads me to believe the circuits in the house are a mess (60's).

Running an Ethernet cable is a no go as; 1)I rent, 2) I already tried and its an eye sore crossing my hallway no matter where i route, 3) as I rent I'm not going around drilling holes especially outside so cant even go out and come back in.

So am I correct in thinking my issue is my wireless card in the pc? I don't know a great deal when it comes to wireless specs so completely unsure of what I need to get the best speeds and lowest ping, my goal is to get as close to 200mbps as possible with lowest ping possible on my pc. As I'm not clued up I've no idea what to set for a budget as if something for circa £50 gets my 180mbps with 12 ping I'd be happy but if something for £100 gets me my full 200mbps with 8 ping id also be happy.

Basically what would you guys in the know recommend?
 
You have a 2.4GHz only Wireless-N adapter.

You'll need an adapter that supports Wireless-AC. I haven't bought a wireless adapter recently enough to know what's worth buying at the moment.
 
bremen1874 said:
You have a 2.4GHz only Wireless-N adapter.

You'll need an adapter that supports Wireless-AC. I haven't bought a wireless adapter recently enough to know what's worth buying at the moment.
Click to expand...

Perfect, I wasn't sure on the lingo and exact formats but I knew it would be something along those lines of my current card being older and using a different format.

Hopefully someone has an idea of a decent AC one for my needs
 
Snookums said:
I did post about this when I first moved into our new place back in August but had other more important things so put it on the backburner, but now I want to get my speeds sorted and make the most out of what I am paying for.

Supplier is VM with the superhub 3.0 I get 200mbps 8-12ms wired. My phone gets 200mbps 12ms over wifi anywhere in the house over 5ghz wifi. only place it drops from 5ghz to 2.4ghz is the garden which the speed then drops to 100-120mbps 20ms.

My pc however only get 90mbps 20ms max over wifi, the wifi card I am using which i think may be the issue is this; TP-LINK TL-WN881ND 300 Mbps Wireless N. My pc is around 12ft away and on the floor above.

Powerline adapters are not feasible, as already owned several 300mbps adapters and virgin gave me some 1200mbps adapters for free both of which get the exact same speed of around 80mbps max, less than my wifi which leads me to believe the circuits in the house are a mess (60's).

Running an Ethernet cable is a no go as; 1)I rent, 2) I already tried and its an eye sore crossing my hallway no matter where i route, 3) as I rent I'm not going around drilling holes especially outside so cant even go out and come back in.

So am I correct in thinking my issue is my wireless card in the pc? I don't know a great deal when it comes to wireless specs so completely unsure of what I need to get the best speeds and lowest ping, my goal is to get as close to 200mbps as possible with lowest ping possible on my pc. As I'm not clued up I've no idea what to set for a budget as if something for circa £50 gets my 180mbps with 12 ping I'd be happy but if something for £100 gets me my full 200mbps with 8 ping id also be happy.

Basically what would you guys in the know recommend?
Click to expand...

I have been messing about the last few days with a wireless plug booster 2.4 ghz, i found out for it to work properly without buffering i had to go to the router settings and force it to use and set the wireless signal to only N, not the B,G,N setting it worked today great for the first time it had a 2 second buffer over 45 mins while twitch at 1080 p in the shed on the tv.

From what i read 2.4 ghz @ N can do speeds of up to 600meg depending on the surroundings

Might be worth a shot
 
2.4Ghz may do 600Mb if you can fully utilise 4 spatial streams. Even then that is theoretical burst rate not actual throughput.
WiFi is sold on smoke and mirrors.

If you can get a decent 50Mb over WiFi you are doing well.
 
Looks like the superhub is a 3x3 WiFi setup so any AC-1900 3x3 card will do. OcUK sell 2, one Asus and one TP-link, id probably go with the Asus as it has an antenna that is on a wire rather than just directly out the back of the card.

Both are £60.
 
Yeh... Not getting too hung up on theoretical max speeds, trying to get anywhere near sustained max is just chasing rainbows.

When I upgraded my PC from WiFi 'N' to 'AC' it gave a very notable improvement.
I'd just go the AC route..
 
As a general rule AC plus more antennas equals faster speed but it is limited by the Lowest common denominator.

200mb over wireless should be achievable in most environments. If not you need more access points.
 
Steveocee said:
2.4Ghz may do 600Mb if you can fully utilise 4 spatial streams. Even then that is theoretical burst rate not actual throughput.
WiFi is sold on smoke and mirrors.

If you can get a decent 50Mb over WiFi you are doing well.
Click to expand...

Que? When it's not connected by Ethernet - which is usually - even my 2012 MacBook (2x2 wireless N) gets a solid 200Mbps over WiFi, on the opposite side of the house to my AP. My AC devices get my full line speed of 380Mbps on 5GHz (channel 112, 80MHz width) with a sync rate of 1.3Gbps. You need better gear (or better settings). :p
 
Rainmaker said:
Que? When it's not connected by Ethernet - which is usually - even my 2012 MacBook (2x2 wireless N) gets a solid 200Mbps over WiFi, on the opposite side of the house to my AP. My AC devices get my full line speed of 380Mbps on 5GHz (channel 112, 80MHz width) with a sync rate of 1.3Gbps. You need better gear (or better settings). :p
Click to expand...

My gear is fine and my settings are exactly how I want them thank you. I'd rather not broadcast on a channel where I am prone to regulatory shutdowns at the slightest echo of radar and even more so exaggerating that by running at 80Mhz width. Granted you get some extra transmit power but we're not talking PtP links are we? We're talking device connectivity.

Channel 112 with 80Mhz width? I'll keep my Band A indoors, 20Mhz width and know its solid :)
 
Steveocee said:
My gear is fine and my settings are exactly how I want them thank you. I'd rather not broadcast on a channel where I am prone to regulatory shutdowns at the slightest echo of radar and even more so exaggerating that by running at 80Mhz width. Granted you get some extra transmit power but we're not talking PtP links are we? We're talking device connectivity.

Channel 112 with 80Mhz width? I'll keep my Band A indoors, 20Mhz width and know its solid :)
Click to expand...

I get the same results in non-DFS channels, but why not use them? 5GHz isn't exactly a paragon of distance. Heck even the Apple store and most shops in the city centre (next to the airport) use DFS just fine. You say your gear and settings are just fine and your wifi is solid, yet you say 50Mbps on wifi is doing well. Enjoy I guess lol. :p
 
Rainmaker said:
I get the same results in non-DFS channels, but why not use them? 5GHz isn't exactly a paragon of distance. Heck even the Apple store and most shops in the city centre (next to the airport) use DFS just fine. You say your gear and settings are just fine and your wifi is solid, yet you say 50Mbps on wifi is doing well. Enjoy I guess lol. :p
Click to expand...

I do. I also do it for a day job :cool:
 
Steveocee said:
I do. I also do it for a day job :cool:
Click to expand...

So does Theresa May, doesn't mean she's any good at it. :p LOL I'm pulling your leg of course, but it's still blatantly wrong to say getting 50Mbps on a wireless link is doing well - as all the multi-100 megabit connections show. If you live somewhere congested then there's an argument for narrower channel widths, especially on 2.4GHz. When you live somewhere more isolated and you're the only AP around... not so much. WiFi is for losers anyway. Ethernet and SPF+ with a self coded router ftw.

hdApIJJ.jpg
 
Rainmaker said:
WiFi is for losers anyway.
Click to expand...

:D That's probably the underlying point I was making. WiFi is a convenience, if everyone deployed in a "loosely responsible" manner then there would not be as many issues with channel saturation. Don't even get me started on router output powers! Full power?! Yes if you want your output to be messy and noisy, always wind back a few dB. <<Another conversation for another time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom