Using 5GHz only

[tarassippo]

My flat is not really big, about 100 sqm, but at the far end (opposite side) of where the router is located my Netgear R7800 struggles to cover as the signal is pretty weak - if I stream videos it keeps buffering annoyingly (if I enable 2.4GHz I have no such an issue, but I would like stick with 5GHz only).

I was thinking to use either the RT-AC68U or the RT-AC86U, if any difference at all: any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Tia.

 

[CrystalLattice]

Implement QOS and use extender for now.

 

[OzarkEdge]

My flat is not really big, about 100 sqm, but at the far end (opposite side) of where the router is located my Netgear R7800 struggles to cover as the signal is pretty weak - if I stream videos it keeps buffering annoyingly (if I enable 2.4GHz I have no such an issue, but I would like stick with 5GHz only).

I was thinking to use either the RT-AC68U or the RT-AC86U, if any difference at all: any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Tia.

10mx10m is not a big area to cover for any healthy router.

OE

 

[Keith Gorham]

My flat is not really big, about 100 sqm, but at the far end (opposite side) of where the router is located my Netgear R7800 struggles to cover as the signal is pretty weak - if I stream videos it keeps buffering annoyingly (if I enable 2.4GHz I have no such an issue, but I would like stick with 5GHz only).

I was thinking to use either the RT-AC68U or the RT-AC86U, if any difference at all: any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Tia.

Why 5 GHz only?

 

[L&LD]

@OzarkEdge, construction materials may be impacting the range, even if the SqFt is small(er).

I don't believe the RT-AC68U or the RT-AC86U will be any more effective than your R7800 either. Unless you're willing to do some location adjustments for the main router (and in that case, it would work for your current router too).

I agree with @Keith Gorham, why not use the 2.4GHz band for that far end of the coverage area?

If you're using the higher channels on the 5GHz band, you may want to try using the lower ones instead (36-48), or, vice versa.

You are using manual control channels, correct (not Auto)?

Have you tried (or are you already running) the Voxel firmware for your model? Many found the reach even better with that firmware fork.

These are the things I would look at before you go buying new hardware.

• Optimize the location, orientation, and the height of the router. Sometimes, even a few inches are enough to make a difference. Only testing will tell. (Ignore any 'app' and just use your normal network loads to test with).
• Optimize the antennae position.
• Ensure you are using manual control channels and test each channel available (make sure to reboot the router for the most valid testing after changing any wireless settings).
• Test for Channel Bandwidth sensitivity for your environment and your client devices (40MHz, 80MHz, 160MHz, if available on your router).
• Ensure your client devices have the latest drivers and are using the appropriate options available.

If you do decide to go with newer hardware (the RT-AX88U is the only real 'upgrade' I see for you), make sure to repeat the steps above for the new router. The location, antennae positions, and control channels/channel widths will not be the same as with any other router.

HTH.

 

[tarassippo]

10mx10m is not a big area to cover for any healthy router.

OE

I also thought that... and if it's kinda faulty then it would mean that lasted just 4 years, what a shame...

Why 5 GHz only?

All my neighbors are on 2.4GHz apart from two (that are on channel 36), so the 5Ghz is still kinda band interference free... (I'm using channel 108)

 

[tarassippo]

And yes, I'm running the latest Voxel's firmware...

Unfortunately I can't move the router (which is actually running in AP mode) as it's connected to the router/firewall + NAS + PS4

Thanks for the suggestions.

 

[L&LD]

You can surely move it 6"-12" around in two/three planes (at least to test with)? Have you already tested with antennae positions?

I would also suggest testing the lower channels (many routers and customers find those channels stronger with a greater reach, even if other AP's are in use on those channels).

And do Channel Width adjustments help/hurt?

 

[coxhaus]

I don't think 30 feet of open air space to be very far for 5 GHz. My living room is 27 feet across and I sit at a diagonal to my Cisco WAP581 wireless AP on 5 GHz across my living room. I maintain a link rate of 867 using my i9 laptop with no issues. i use a wire for my AppleTV not wireless for streaming video. I may try changing over to wireless for a test to see if I see a difference. I have never run my AppleTV 4K off wireless.

 

[tarassippo]

The reason why I'm using a higher channel (although I don't like the idea of using a DFS channel) is because I read a few articles stating that channels between 36-64 have a max output power of 200mW whilst channels between 100-140 have a max output power of 1000mW: I used an Android app to measure (same room with the router) the difference and in fact, with channel 36 or 44 I read -49db whilst on channel 108 I read -35db, so much better...

I can't use the band so called 'C' (149-161) as one laptop and one smartphone won't connect.

I will play around with settings and worse case scenario, I will probably re-enable the 2.4GHz...

Thanks all.

 

[L&LD]

Don't believe everything you read on the 'net.

Those power settings have changed for a few years now.

What channel width are you using?

 

[coxhaus]

I am streaming Hulu off my AppleTV 4K using 5 GHz and it seems the same as wire. I will run it for a while to make sure. It is only 20 something feet so a little closer than my laptop.

I have run my whole house network using DFS channels with no issue for a couple of weeks. I posted a little over a year ago.

 

[tarassippo]

What channel width are you using?

80 MHz... as I want my laptops to connect at their maximum speed which is 866 Mbps (Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7260) and with 40 MHz I get about 400 Mbps...

 

[coxhaus]

My old laptop has a AC-7260 in it and I needed 80 MHz wide to achieve a link rate of 866.

 

[L&LD]

What does the connection speed matter?

What are your ISP speeds? More importantly, what is your throughput requirements for your devices (individually and consecutively)?

The 40MHz link rate may be enough for your far range clients to connect and have enough throughput too.

 

[tarassippo]

40MHz channel width means halving the speed --> while I transfer to/from my NAS I see a huge difference...

Ultimately, if I have to re-enable the 2.4GHz band, not a big deal...

 

[zackattack784]

I also thought that... and if it's kinda faulty then it would mean that lasted just 4 years, what a shame...


All my neighbors are on 2.4GHz apart from two (that are on channel 36), so the 5Ghz is still kinda band interference free... (I'm using channel 108)

Channel 108 is a DFS channel. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but I believe the power output is limited on DFS channels. Have you tried a non DFS channel?

 

[tarassippo]

Channel 108 is a DFS channel. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but I believe the power output is limited on DFS channels. Have you tried a non DFS channel?

1) band A (channels 36-64) --> max output power = 200mW

2) band B (channels 100-140) --> max output power = 1000mW

3) band C (channels 149-161) --> max output power = 4000mW

P.S.
DFS channels = 52 - 140

 

[MarkyPancake]

Aren't they just the legally allowed maximum outputs for the channel ranges though. I wouldn't be surprised after the FCC thing a few years ago, that Asus run the higher powered channels lower than their legal max limit.

 

[L&LD]

@tarassippo, that is not correct anymore. The lower channels have the same power as the higher ones for a few years now, but I don't think any router is allowed to transmit at 4W legally for any consumer router.