Strange Wi-Fi Speeds - Should I Replace My Router?

[EmilyD]

Hi,

I just found this website and I'm loving it so far. I got an Asus RT N12C1 router and have a cable internet subscription with TekSavvy 60 Mbps unlimited. However, when using SpeedTest it shows my wifi speed is at it's best 15 mbps and below 1 mbps at it's worst when I'm one floor above the router. The router itself is placed at the center of the home and I do get full speed using an ethernet cable. Multiple people use the internet, but even when I'm only using it the speed is still the same.

Using inSSIDer it shows my signal is around -50 dBM while I'm on channel 6. According to Wifi Analyzer channel 1,2 or 11 would be best, but when I try to change my channel to 1 or 11 I get this pop-up:

"Due to local regulator limitation, Channel 1 can’t provide the best wireless coverage. If you insist to access Channel 1, please click 'OK'. If not, it will set to channel 2. Please click 'Cancel'"

Basically all channels below 6 causes my laptop to be unable to detect the network consistently, while channels above 6 give similar results to channel 6.

When I contacted TekSavvy tech support I was told that the problem probably lies with the router and that I should be getting wifi speeds close to ethernet speeds. I'm thinking of getting a new router, but I'm not sure which one to get (in Canada). It seems to me that getting an AC1750 router like the Archer c7 or Netgear R6300 should give me better speeds, even though most of our devices still only support up to N.

Advise would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance,

Emily

 

[wirelessEngineer]

I think 15Mbps wifi speed is way too low for 11N router. You may want to try the app discussed in the following thread, and see if your wifi is a problem or broadband is a problem because I have seen that my cable internet speed fluctuates a lot. If you confirm that wifi is a bottleneck, you may want to reset the router or review other settings (power, channel, bandwidth, security, mode, etc.)

http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=21626

 

[stevech]

Hi,

I just found this website and I'm loving it so far. I got an Asus RT N12C1 router and have a cable internet subscription with TekSavvy 60 Mbps unlimited. However, when using SpeedTest it shows my wifi speed is at it's best 15 mbps and below 1 mbps at it's worst when I'm one floor above the router. The router itself is placed at the center of the home and I do get full speed using an ethernet cable. Multiple people use the internet, but even when I'm only using it the speed is still the same.

Using inSSIDer it shows my signal is around -50 dBM while I'm on channel 6. According to Wifi Analyzer channel 1,2 or 11 would be best, but when I try to change my channel to 1 or 11 I get this pop-up: Basically all channels below 6 causes my laptop to be unable to detect the network consistently, while channels above 6 give similar results to channel 6.

When I contacted TekSavvy tech support I was told that the problem probably lies with the router and that I should be getting wifi speeds close to ethernet speeds. I'm thinking of getting a new router, but I'm not sure which one to get (in Canada). It seems to me that getting an AC1750 router like the Archer c7 or Netgear R6300 should give me better speeds, even though most of our devices still only support up to N.

Advise would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance,

Emily

Perhaps your router is configured for use in some other country (regulatory domain), where the regulations require lower power in the lowest channels. I've not heard of such, but it might be Japan or France. Channels above 11 are prohibited in the US and some others.

-50dBm at the client is good.

The most prudent channels to use in No. America are 1, 6 or 11, in 2.4GHz.
No sense going to 11AC if clients don't support the same.

Resetting to factory defaults might revert to the correct country. Better yet, download and install the latest firmware to replace what's suspect.

 

[heyyahblah]

Hey Emily,

I subscribe to TSI Internet as well. I was trying to figure out the same thing myself. I was originally on a 15/1 ADSL2+ connection using a WRT54GL router and hard-wired my computers were always 15/1 and wireless anywhere between 10~12mbps down and 800k up depending on location inside the home. The further away I got from the router the worse it got.

When I upgraded to the 50/10 VDSL2 plan (because I now have power users) I had to upgrade my router as well since it would not support those speeds anymore. Bonding is supposed to come around to TSI within a few years so soon they will be able to hopefully provide a 100/20 connection so I future proofed the router.

I bought a WRT1900AC Linksys router. Its a $250 CDN piece of hardware. Top of the notch speeds, network transfers and everything. Thing is I posted tons of threads and talked to many people about network speeds and so forth that I will explain to you theoretically it depends on what kind of network card you have (wireless) and what location you are in and interference as to what speeds you can achieve.

For instance since the upgrade, my gaming PC that is hardwired gets 50/10 all the time with 6-7ms ping times constantly. No problems. Now I have an old laptop that has an intel wireless g 54mbps card in it. Now from what I was told by the TSI guys was that the limitation on the wireless g card is about 18~19 mbps download because of the limitations of the wireless card. I always manage to get the almost full upload and since the coverage of the WRT1900AC is so strong in my house compared to the WRT54GL I get about 16~19 mbps down and 9mbps up wireless on the laptop. Thats the fastest I can get.

I was posting that I had a desktop with a wireless n card 150mbps that was not achieving that much more speed only about 25mbps downloads on wireless, same floor and 35ft away in another room. It was recommended that my best bet would be to try a WirelessAC network card if I wanted better speeds or go for a powerline adapter kit.

I replaced the pci-e card in the desktop in the other room and even though its a 802.11AC card with maximum theoretical speeds of 867mbps it does usually connect that high. Around 550, or more (as shown in Windows), now I connect this on the 5GHz band which is more speed but less coverage I can tell you on that computer the signal is pretty amazing from what I have been told.

On the 2.4 GHz range I get -25dBm
On the 5 GHz range I get -45dBm

From what I have been told, anything less then -50dbm is roughly 99% signal strength from your router. The rest of the signal on inSSIDer kinda roughly looks like this (this is a rough calculation on signal strength)

From -51 to -55dB= 90%
From -56 to -62dB=80%
From -63 to -65dB=75%
From -66 to 68dB=70%
From -69 to 74dB= 60%
From -75 to 79dB= 50%
From -80 to -83dB=30%

So your -50dB is actually really amazing signal strength. But before I vere off, so I replaced with a wireless AC card and I kid you not, versus the wireless g on the laptop and wireless n, I get the same ping times as being connected hardwired 7,8,9,10 ms ping ... but the download speeds never seem to go over 39mbps. I get almost full upload at 9.5mb.

So this is a wireless AC router on a wireless AC card on a computer that is 2 rooms away roughly 35 ft on the same floor as the modem and router. My hardwired gaming desktop will get (50/10) no problem, that other wireless ac desktop maxes out at (36~39/9.5). So I am losing about 15 on the download and I'm only 35 ft away.

I have been told this could be anything, interference, neighbors, radio signals, water pipes in the wall (thanks to jegesg), electronics, anything. Wireless is really sketchy and no one can give you a real answer.

I've had my friend come over with a newer laptop and his wireless card says it connects at 300MBPS to my router on Windows 8.1. We walked all over my house with this laptop doing speedtests and we couldn't get past 32mbps on the download, we have no idea why. Upload always gives almost a full solid 10, usually 9mb but yea, I seem to loose 15 megs in the air and no clue. Tried everything, nothing can do like most people will tell you wireless is unpredictable technology and who knows how it works. I have yet too see 50/10 on my wirelessAC desktop thats 35ft away. But hasn't happened yet. It is what it is.

The only options I was told was if I wanted the full speed was to run an ethernet cable dedicated and make it hardwired, or use a powerline adapter kit, that usually gives you full speeds, again depeding on power line interference. This is just something we will never figure out.

Why your upload is so low I have no idea, because wirelessly I always get 8-9mbps out of the full 10. You should see the same. But your download speeds will depend on the type of wireless network card in the computer downstairs.

Getting an AC router won't do you just unless you have a wireless N 300mbps card or wireless AC card thats even faster and you can get on the 5GHz band and connect at a higher rate. If you solve this please post. I wish you all the best.

Here is a screenshot of me posting you my inSSIDer from my laptop so you can see the signal strength I get in that other room 35ft away. Pretty amazing no? So why no 50/10 on a wirelessAC card? Only god knows, lol

 

[stevech]

geek talk

signal strength can be measured in dBm (decibels relative to 1milliwatt, so 0dBm = 1mW).
dB by itself has only a relative meaning. It's not tied to any value. So you'd say + or - dB but 10dB by itself isn't like 10dBm.
Kind of like saying "50% more!" as ads do. But 50% more relative to WHAT?

decibels are on a log scale. So converting dBm to percent is not real math, but it's something people can relate to.!

Each vendor is free to come up with a table like
From -51 to -55dBm= 90%
From -56 to -62dBm=80%
From -63 to -65dBm=75%
From -66 to 68dBm =70%
From -69 to 74dBm = 60%
From -75 to 79dBm = 50%
From -80 to -83dBm =30%

or a table like this can convert to displayed "bars" not percent.

Apple got nabbed for fudging such tables, in cahoots with AT&T.

-40dBm is a quite strong signal - like 10 ft. range line of sight.
-43 is weaker 3dB less, weaker, and about 1/2 of 40dBm in received power
and so on

Attenuation with distance follows the laws of physics. Good thing- since it lets us communicate billions of miles to satellites out of our solar system.

And this inverse square law means a cell phone's signal has already hit many double-the-distance iterations when held to your ear.

 

[azazel1024]

I really don't know what the best way to display signal strength is. Probably using percentages so most people can understand I guess.

As pointed out, it is a log scale. So -51 to -55dBm isn't 90% and -56 to -60dBm is 80%. -51 to -55dBm relative to the signal strength at the antenna is actually probably more like .3% and -56 to -60 is more like .05%.

Fortunately electronics and signal processing are amazing things that a signal that weak can be used.

Because look at what -80dBm is compared to signal strength at the antenna...that would be around .0005% of the original signal strength.

Heyyahblah, not sure what is going on with your setup. With my wired and wireless setup, I get around 82Mbps down and 91Mbps up on my 75/75 connection over the wire. Wireless I hit basically the same using my Archer C8 or WDR3600. At least if I am reasonably close to my router or access point. I see a negligble difference in wired versus wireless bandwidth for LAN/WLAN to WAN and WAN to LAN/WLAN. My ping times do increase, but it is marginal, about a 1-2ms increase depending on where I am in my house.

 

[stevech]

here, an ISP providing 75/75Mbps would cost me hundreds of dollars / month!

 

[azazel1024]

here, an ISP providing 75/75Mbps would cost me hundreds of dollars / month!

Just the raw connection, with taxes is roughly $100 a month. Not hundreds and hundreds...but not exactly super cheap either. My cheapest plan is Verizon FIOS 25/25 at $49.99 a month, plus taxes. Or Comcast for a 6/1 cable connection, at the same $49.99 a month.

Increase from there. I'd certainly like to pay less, but my complaint on service is less that my package is what I would consider a bit pricey, it is the fact that in my area the most basic internet connection costs $50+ a month, the equivelent to about 1.5% of the median US income, before tax. Post tax it is closer to 2% of the US median income, let alone someone who might be in a low income position, where it might be 5+% of their income.

 

[heyyahblah]

azazel1024

I feel your pain with income & internet prices.

I don't know what to tell you. Everyone tells me the same thing, that they have no idea and they think I'm probably suffering from some sort of interference. That's all they can say. I'm not on a cable connection I am on a VDSL2 connection (so that's through a traditional copper land line). The distance from my house to the DSLAM/remote is not that far 450m or so and the phone line & connection are good. Not to mention the price. The 50/10 VDSL tier is $55+tax and the cable provider 60/10 tier is upwards $70+tax. So to me, economically its not worth paying $15 for an extra 10mb download speed, since I have the same upload speeds on a cable saturated node that everyone shares vs DSL which is semi-dedicated and I see no congestion at all. I typically never see ping times above 10ms throughout the day.

I was going to say with the wireless, yes it is a mystery. On my previous ADSL2+ 15mb/1mb connection I saw marginal losses depending on the distance from the router. Usually no less then 11mb/0.7mb on the wireless depending on location.

Since the upgrade to 50/10 the wireless I see as you marginal differences in ping time on wired vs wireless, maybe by at most +5ms depending on location but I seem to loose a lot of wireless DL speed. As I mentioned in another room 35ft away I have a desktop on Windows 7 with wirelessAC pci-e card and the WRT1900AC router, connecting on the 5GHz band, no interference. I posted a SS of my inSSIDer report.

http://i58.tinypic.com/r2rcas.jpg

There is no noise, yet no one can help me seem to figure out the realworld internet speeds don't go above 39mb on that machine. It uploads almost at full 10mb around 9mb which is great, but there is a loss of about 11mb and up on the download when going wirelessly. If I connect to the 2.4GHz band, I get even slower speeds. No one was able to help me solve this.

The only thing they said was run ethernet through the gipboard into the room or get a powerline kit and try that and do ethernet over powerline. I know its not the VDSL2 modem because when the modem is configured in routed pppoe mode I get 50/10 and when i run it in bridged mode through the router i still get 50/10 hardwired. So it can't be the modem or the router or the phone line or the internet cable because 50/10 is reaching the home from the remote. I just seem to loose those speeds on the wireless. I wish I knew why ...

 

[stevech]

High speed Internet service (high means more than 2Mbps), over old copper twisted pair wires intended for 4KHz voice - make no sense. AT&T U-Verse's copper wire customers (few have fiber to the home), suffer as the fools at AT&T try to get 30Mbps down that old wire.

Here, the curbside AT&T VRAD is about 100m from this street. But the fools at AT&T don't realize that the underground phone wires don't run as the crows fly. The wire route is about 300m. And guess what? U-Verse sucks or doesn't work at all.

That happened to my neighbor. AT&T (sub-contractors) rewired the house for a full day, then checked the signal on the copper wires. Too weak. CUL they said and abandoned the job, left neighbor with no service for phone or internet. She had to beg TimeWarner cable to reinstate service, and she paid for that.

I have no love for TimeWarner, but at least it works, and I pay "only" $48/mo for 30/5.

 

[azazel1024]

I just wish there was a way to get cheap, even slow service. In part I want a second WAN connection, but there is absolutely no way I can pay $50+ a month for it. Heck, as slow as it might be, I'd be more than willing to take T1 speeds if it only cost $10-20 a month. I just want a nice backup for my FIOS connection. Rare it is that it fails, but it HAS happened a handful of times.

USB modem is not an option for me due to very limited data allocation and cost (because of course, Verizon isn't going to let me use a USB modem for free, even if it is the same pot of data).

If/maybe Verizon changes and allows data roll-over like TMobile and AT&T are doing now...it might be a thing. The wife and I only have 4GB a month shared, but we typically only use 2-2.5GB...so if it rolled over month after month, that would build up a fairly nice cushion and I might be willing to pay a few bucks a month for the privellage of a USB modem to use the data I am already paying for (in part because I could use the USB modem for my laptop/tablet sometimes instead of trying to tether, or get a travel router that can take it). Of course if the rollover is only that you get to use the extra from last month, and it doesn't carry in perpetuity...that sucks and doesn't really do anything for me.

I think part of what irks me is looking at a lot of areas of the country, the starting price for an internet connection might not be much cheaper, seems to fluctuate from $40-60 a month + taxes, but in a lot of cases you have two options, you live somewhere where there is NO fast internet, so you are paying $40-60 for a 3-8Mbps DSL connection with no better option (and I feel for those people, as they are in a much worse situation than I am) or else you have a DSL and/or Cable option, with the same kind of starting price, but the starting package is in the 10-30Mbps range.

Considering where I am, I feel like it is criminal that Comcast offers a 6/1 as the starting package...at $50 a month. If that was a 15-25Mbps starting package, sure fine. That or drop the price of the 6/1 as a true "internet basics" package or something.

Looking in my area where AT&T or Verizon offer DSL, it is actually fairly inexpensive for a basic connection. Seems to run in the $20-30 a month range for a 3/764 to around 5/1 connection (with sometimes the ability to get it slightly faster at somewhat more cost). No DSL for me, way to far from any DSLAMs or offices (my local office is, IIRC, about 2 miles from me).

 

[stevech]

I just wish there was a way to get cheap, even slow service. In part I want a second WAN connection, but there is absolutely no way I can pay $50+ a month for it. Heck, as slow as it might be, I'd be more than willing to take T1 speeds if it only cost $10-20 a month. I just want a nice backup for my FIOS connection. Rare it is that it fails, but it HAS happened a handful of times.

USB modem is not an option for me due to very limited data allocation and cost (because of course, Verizon isn't going to let me use a USB modem for free, even if it is the same pot of data).

If/maybe Verizon changes and allows data roll-over like TMobile and AT&T are doing now...it might be a thing. The wife and I only have 4GB a month shared, but we typically only use 2-2.5GB...so if it rolled over month after month, that would build up a fairly nice cushion and I might be willing to pay a few bucks a month for the privellage of a USB modem to use the data I am already paying for (in part because I could use the USB modem for my laptop/tablet sometimes instead of trying to tether, or get a travel router that can take it). Of course if the rollover is only that you get to use the extra from last month, and it doesn't carry in perpetuity...that sucks and doesn't really do anything for me.

I think part of what irks me is looking at a lot of areas of the country, the starting price for an internet connection might not be much cheaper, seems to fluctuate from $40-60 a month + taxes, but in a lot of cases you have two options, you live somewhere where there is NO fast internet, so you are paying $40-60 for a 3-8Mbps DSL connection with no better option (and I feel for those people, as they are in a much worse situation than I am) or else you have a DSL and/or Cable option, with the same kind of starting price, but the starting package is in the 10-30Mbps range.

Considering where I am, I feel like it is criminal that Comcast offers a 6/1 as the starting package...at $50 a month. If that was a 15-25Mbps starting package, sure fine. That or drop the price of the 6/1 as a true "internet basics" package or something.

Looking in my area where AT&T or Verizon offer DSL, it is actually fairly inexpensive for a basic connection. Seems to run in the $20-30 a month range for a 3/764 to around 5/1 connection (with sometimes the ability to get it slightly faster at somewhat more cost). No DSL for me, way to far from any DSLAMs or offices (my local office is, IIRC, about 2 miles from me).

DSL Extreme - resells AT&T, Verizon, others. Sometimes cheaper. Seems like you can get basic DSL with 1.3/0.3 Mbps for $20 or so.

 

[azazel1024]

Sadly not where I am.

Zero DSL providers

 

[heyyahblah]

Hey azazel

did you get a chance to check out my reply to you on pg 1 about the wireless info i posted?

In response to your reply here. Wow, I would never have thought that your Fios 75/75 connection fails from time to time. Figured it would be more stable then mine. I've been with my ISP since 2008 and it's only gone down 6-7 times. Roughly once per yer for no more then a day or two if that. I started with them on a ADSL 6/800k profile, upgraded to 15/1 ADSL2 (when became avail) and then again to 50/10 VDSL2 (when became avail Oct 2014). It's been a rock solid steady connection. Sucks to hear you have no DSLAMS or remotes near you.

2 miles is definitely too far for you to catch a good signal (if any). The attenuation would be to high for the line to be stable, thats probably why they won't sell it or offer it to you. At 2 miles distance I would think best DSL you could get is a SDSL connection of 512/512k or 768/768k on an interleaved profile, so high pings. 30ms and up range ....

For your wireless you are in the same boat as me, I only get 3GB of data a month, no roll over .... I barely use 1gb but its nice to have in case of a real emergency that I would need to tether. So thats my only backup option.

And lastly I feel you on Comcast, they are as criminal as our incumbent cable provider that dominates most of the country. Their name is ROGERS, or how we like to call them ROBBERS!

Their "BASIC TIER" is a 10/1 plan for $51.99/month + tax (wifi modem rental included) but here's the catch. Capped at 25GB/month. You believe that s**t? Capped at 25GB per month no roll over? That is sheer robbery. Not only are they offering a "basic" plan for people they cap them at 25GB because they know if it was unlimited everyone would grab that service and say screw cable. I'll just stream, download and netflix and use my HD antenna to catch locals ... good enough. Nope they don't want that so they cap you at 25GB for $52+tax. Insanity and our corrupt regulators allow it.

Your next best option is 30/5 UNLIMITED GB for $87 or 150/15 - 350GB CAP for $86 ... pick your poison.

This cable company dominates almost every area that is why I stay away from their services. For me it was cheaper to buy a VSDL2 modem from my DSL ISP for $100 and get 50/10 service for $55/month, and I don't have to monitor my (usage) GB's. Good enough for me. Unless they drop prices or run FTTH or if I ever move, I am going to check if where I ever do move to this service is available as I am not paying that ROBBERS cable company for botched services and prices on internet. They can suck it.

 

[stevech]

I used to use Verizon Wireless as the fail-over when my cable modem was out. Which was very often. Not so now as *I* fixed what was wrong with evil TimeWarner's drop to my home (they had maybe 20 trouble call visits over 2 years).

Anyway, I have a USB modem for Verizon LTE. I used to use it on travel in my laptop. I used a Cradlepoint MBR900 (get one on eBay, used). It did auto-fail-over/fail-back with the Verizon modem and a WAN port to my cable modem.

Now, I could do the same without the cost of the USB modem service. My HTC smart phone on Verizon has no-extra-cost tethering of WiFi. So it becomes a WiFi access point for the iPad etc. With the Cradlepoint router family, and others, there is a WiFi as WAN mode. The router becomes a client to the smart phone's Access Point (same as does the iPad). Then the router uses that as the WAN instead of the RJ45 to the cable modem.

The MBR900 is too old for all of this. The used CBR's can do it.

I've seen a few mass-marketed WiFi routers with WiFi-as-WAN mode. Don't know if they have auto-failover/failback as does Cradlepoint. But changing manually if you're there is doable.

 

[jegesq]

Same here as Steve. I'm in LA and have Verizon and with my smartphone, I can tether for free, or use it as a standalone hotspot for free. I used to have unlimited data, but actually found that it was less expensive for our entire family to switch over to 10GB data shared per month for 4 smartphones. We hardly ever go over 3GB, and even if we were to exceed the 10GB's we get with our plan, it's cheap enough for any excess that paying for separate WAN backup just doesn't make any sense. And besides, since our TWC area was re-provisioned this summer for 300/20 speeds, things have been excellent with TWC, and I've had no outages, so no need for fail-over WAN......of course, that's like saying "Piece of cake" (if you've seen "Forget Paris" then you know what that means).