Smart TV Internet connection - WiFi or LAN (with WiFi bridge)?

[BlueOrbit]

Hello,

I recently got a new Samsung Q80T 65 inch TV. It has an 802.11 AC and a LAN port (10/100), disappointing that its not a 1 gig port. I don't have an Ethernet cable available at the location where the TV is placed. Tried running it over 5Ghz WiFi connection and noticed that sometimes it buffers streaming 4K content on YouTube. I am now trying to run it (as a test) connected to LAN port on a RT-AC86U configured as a media bridge and connected over 5Ghz to an RT-AX86U router (TV -> bridge -> router).

It appears that I am getting a stronger WiFi connection between the bridge and the router then when I have the TV connected directly, but the LAN port is limited to 100 Mbps vs. WiFi, which is faster when connected directly (TV -> router) vs. (TV -> bridge -> router).

Is there any benefit when using a WiFi bridge or should I just connect the TV over WiFi directly?

Thanks for any input on this.

 

[eibgrad]

In my experience, the built-in wifi on smart TVs is notoriously bad. I never bother. I either use a wireless ethernet bridge, or even better, powerline/MoCA. These days good wireless will probably out perform powerline/MOCA, but why anyone would need more than 100Mbps w/ a smart TV I don't understand. Seems like more than enough.

But that aside, if you insist on wireless, wireless is wireless, whichever gives you the better experience is the one to use. There's no particular benefit from using the bridge unless perhaps you want to support multiple wired devices from that bridge.

 

[CaptainSTX]

Hello,

I recently got a new Samsung Q80T 65 inch TV. It has an 802.11 AC and a LAN port (10/100), disappointing that its not a 1 gig port. I don't have an Ethernet cable available at the location where the TV is placed. Tried running it over 5Ghz WiFi connection and noticed that sometimes it buffers streaming 4K content on YouTube. I am now trying to run it (as a test) connected to LAN port on a RT-AC86U configured as a media bridge and connected over 5Ghz to an RT-AX86U router (TV -> bridge -> router).

It appears that I am getting a stronger WiFi connection between the bridge and the router then when I have the TV connected directly, but the LAN port is limited to 100 Mbps vs. WiFi, which is faster when connected directly (TV -> router) vs. (TV -> bridge -> router).

Is there any benefit when using a WiFi bridge or should I just connect the TV over WiFi directly?

Thanks for any input on this.

First at the current time there is no need/ benefit of having gig ports on a smart TV because 4K streams don't need much more than 20 Mbps. Even if you were streaming uncompressed blue ray rips they aren't going to need more than100 Mbps.

As you found out a media bridge utilizing your AC86 will work better. Better radios, bigger antennas and more important you can locate it away from the TV which might be interfering with the reception for the TVs built in radio. Stick with the bridge though you probably could get by with a less powerful (cheaper) router.

 

[BlueOrbit]

Agreed, even for 4K content I won't need more than 100 Mbps. I have a couple of extra routers, so will stick with the bridge setup for now. I should be getting a better wireless connection with better radios and antennas on the bridge and router.

Appreciate the input!

 

[dscline]

I have two Samsung TVs, one wired because I have ethernet at that location, one not, because I don't (using TV's built-in WiFi). I don't have buffering on either one. Their network performance is seemingly identical.

 

[Zetto]

Even if you were streaming uncompressed blue ray rips they aren't going to need more than100 Mbps.

Not entirely correct. While it's true that average bitrate will not exceed 100mbps, there are plenty of peaks (fast action sequences and such) when it does. In my experience, I found wifi a lot better for streaming any kind of media to TV compared to wired, and I did try both.