5G Interference on higher channels

[kmederos]

Hey guys,

I now have a couple of routers that are 5G capable (2 Cisco and one Asus) that can't carry any throughput on the higher 5G channels like 149+. Channel 161 seems to hold somewhat of a signal, but the throughput is only at about 80Mbps. The other channels either don't allow me to connect to the SSID or when they do connect are very slow (5Mbps). I do see it fluctuate up to 300Mbps for a bit and then it'll just nose dive back to something pathetic.

I can confirm the lower channels work fine, all channels from 36 to 48 work absolutely great, except I keep hearing that the higher channels could provide me with better range so I was hoping to get to use those.

My question is, I don't have any cordless phones in my house, nor do I have anything that I *think* is causing interference, so.......what the heck is going on?

Could it be my neighbors? (we live in a sub division in Idaho, so it's possible as the houses are not very far apart)

Aliens?

Should I wrap my house in tin foil?

Halp!

 

[theveterans]

Same here. I live in an apartment complex with around 40 routers in range. Most of their dual band routers defaults to upper 5 Ghz and I'm also in a location where 3 enterprise/government APs that use DFS channels are in range. Also, I can confirm that some of my neighbors use a 5.8 GHz phone instead of DECT 6.0 since my noise floor is a lot worse on those channels than lower channels. (-85 dbm on upper vs -92 dbm on lower)

Unlike you, I can use the upper 5 GHz fine but I just don't like my speeds going down from 866.5 to 702 or 585 Mbps while doing a high throughput transfer. On lower channels, my speed doesn't budge from 866.5 Mbps even if I'm doing 5 video file transfers uplink and downlink simultaneously. LAN Throughput in the upper channels is lowered by 4 MB/s but is indistinguishable compared to lower channels with Internet bandwidth. Latency is increased extremely slightly too on upper channels.

However, upper channels really gives higher power due to FCC regulation. 20 feet from router with 2 walls, my signal on upper channel is a solid 4 bars (702 Mbps idle then slowing down to 585 Mbps) while 3 - 4 bars is seen on lower channels but speed never slows down from 702 Mbps.

On my current setup, I'm using channel 40 as primary channel with 42 as the center channel.

Well, my primary concern is the latency and speed since I game wirelessly so I sacrifice the range by using a less noise channel.

 

[L&LD]

I vote for tin foil!


Just be happy you get any channels that work 'great'. Higher channels and what is supposed to happen is not what does all the time...

 

[azazel1024]

What is your house made out of? Where are you testing?

It could be really bad reflections. 5GHz range is more prone to bouncing the signal than 2.4GHz where it tends to penetrate better/less reflection. Now you can pick up a really nice signal on reflections sometimes, but depending on exact geometries, materials, etc it could just be that the frequencies those higher channels are at end up reflecting from surfaces in such a way as to setup destructive interference and thus why you are getting such crappy through put.

Moving the router some might be all it takes to change that.

Or it could have nothing to do with that at all.

On my router I notice no real difference in signal strength between the lower and upper 5GHz channels. That either means that the lower channels are being broadcast at too high a signal strength, or the upper channels are being neutered too on my router/AP.

 

[kmederos]

Thanks for the replies guys! I will be moving the router today to attempt it all again but I have 2 routers in different locations that do the same thing on the high channels. I'm thinking placement isn't the issue.

My house is standard drywall and wood. Nothing fancy there at all. It's single story and about 1800sq ft. The range on the 5g is good for most of the house. There are some weak areas that the 2.4 covers just fine though.

I've had several 5g routers now and the range is always underwhelming at best. Maybe better antennas would help? I'm still at the mercy of the clients range though as well aren't I?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[azazel1024]

Better antennas will help both the router and the client.

5GHz will always be underwhelming range compared to 2.4GHz, especially depending on the construction of the house.

It sounds like you have some kind of interference going on. That or its an issue with the client or the brand of router (or driver/firmware issue).

If both routers are doing it and if they are different brands, then most likely it is a client issue (if we are talking just one client, if it is different clients, then probably interference).

 

[jlake]

The basic troubleshooting steps are in link below. One of the steps is removing your old wireless profiles.

http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=12453

 

[sfx2000]

For WiFi.

Given the same signal strength at the antenna.

2.4GHz - 40 foot radius from the AP for good coverage
5 GHz - 20 foot radius from the AP for good coverage

Basic physics...

sfx

 

[stevech]

For WiFi.

Given the same signal strength at the antenna.

2.4GHz - 40 foot radius from the AP for good coverage
5 GHz - 20 foot radius from the AP for good coverage

Basic physics...

sfx

The good part is that a certain type of semi-directional antenna at 5GHz has more gain that the same-sized antenna at 2.4GHz.

 

[sm00thpapa]

I keep mine on CH 153 so it doesn't interfere with my 5.8 home phone. Plan on getting a 6.0 Dect when the time comes.

 

[kmederos]

I have very different clients suffering from the same issues. They range from phones to laptops. I'm definitely thinking it's interference, but I guess I'll never know for sure.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[Asmodian]

I wonder if the interference is from amateur radio users?

I notice, in the US at least, only the higher channels (>132) also allow "Amateur". It seems to allow "Amateur-satellite (space-to-Earth)" just above channel 165. Sounds fun to me.

edit: The same region (5Ghz channels >132) seems to be marked "GOVERNMENT EXCLUSIVE" unlike lower 5GHz channels, whatever that means in this context.

 

[kmederos]

I wonder if the interference is from amateur radio users?

I notice, in the US at least, only the higher channels (>132) also allow "Amateur". It seems to allow "Amateur-satellite (space-to-Earth)" just above channel 165. Sounds fun to me.

edit: The same region (5Ghz channels >132) seems to be marked "GOVERNMENT EXCLUSIVE" unlike lower 5GHz channels, whatever that means in this context.

There are A LOT of HAM radio operators out here, that could totally be it. I also have a sheriff right next door. I wonder if his radio broadcasts could be interfering with my WiFi.

You may be onto something

 

[stevech]

I'm a long term Ham.
Never seen a Ham use 5GHz band.

Interference can come from high powered FAA/DoD radars in the next band up that spill some power into the ISM band.

Cordless phones have all moved to DECT. Very uncommon to find someone with an old 5.8GHz cordless.

There is quite a bit of use of 5.8GHz for point to point links - rooftop to rooftop and so on. Sometimes these are not 802.11 signals so they wouldn't appear on a WiFi sniffer.

Sheriff radios don't use 5GHz. Law enforcement are all in 800MHz or 150MHz bands.

 

[kmederos]

I'm a long term Ham.
Never seen a Ham use 5GHz band.

Interference can come from high powered FAA/DoD radars in the next band up that spill some power into the ISM band.

Cordless phones have all moved to DECT. Very uncommon to find someone with an old 5.8GHz cordless.

There is quite a bit of use of 5.8GHz for point to point links - rooftop to rooftop and so on. Sometimes these are not 802.11 signals so they wouldn't appear on a WiFi sniffer.

Sheriff radios don't use 5GHz. Law enforcement are all in 800MHz or 150MHz bands.

Thank you for the info! I'm a noob at this so I had no idea. Just trying to figure out what could be affecting my signal and in such a consistent manner.

We have a very popular wireless internet provider here that does point to point to certain mountain tops, etc. I wonder if that couldn't be it?

 

[sfx2000]

Something I've started to notice is satellite/cable/FIOS TV - for the wireless TV set top extension boxes, they're running in 5GHz band with the SSID cloaked - so you won't see it in InSSIDer (or other tools that need a visible SSID) - however, if you run a passive scanner like Kismet, you'll see them out there...

This is fairly recent phenomenon - more common since 01/2014...

 

[kmederos]

Something I've started to notice is satellite/cable/FIOS TV - for the wireless TV set top extension boxes, they're running in 5GHz band with the SSID cloaked - so you won't see it in InSSIDer (or other tools that need a visible SSID) - however, if you run a passive scanner like Kismet, you'll see them out there...

This is fairly recent phenomenon - more common since 01/2014...

I do have a Direct TV Genie setup but had no idea whether this is the case. I feel like a conspiracy theorist lol

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[sfx2000]

I do have a Direct TV Genie setup but had no idea whether this is the case. I feel like a conspiracy theorist lol

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I think you have found your source - most of those media bridge things are point to point... and 5Ghz interference is usually very local and nearby.

Recalled that there was a review of a wireless HDMI bridge on the SNB site, and finally found it - and guess what - it's 5Ghz on ch 149 as a default

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/mult...stv-multi-room-wireless-hd-video-kit-reviewed

The DirectTV Genie box is the likely suspect here...

sfx

 

[kmederos]

Now this DirecTV genie is all hard wired with no advertised WiFi or bridge capabilities. Wonder where to start.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

[chadster766]

The speed difference on higher 5Ghz channels vs lower ones IMO would be minimal.

What does make huge difference is the channels widths. The wider the channel width you can connect with the higher the connection rate.

With large channels widths it's easy to have them overlap because they use so many channels per router.

Space the 5Ghz channels as far apart as possible and maybe don't put them directly on both ends of the spectrum