AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Say Hello to 802.11ac
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Say Hello to 802.11ac

post #1 of 61
2/18/13 at 4:38am
Thread Starter 



A new wireless protocol you say? But what does this have to do with Home Theater? The answer is simple; a LOT.

Now that High Definition video has become quite the norm, there are many wireless consumers looking to expand their home network and share more information over that network than ever before. Ask yourself this question; How many wireless devices do you currently own or have in your household? I personally have four different devices that I use on a regular basis and all of them have the capability to accept, decode and display high definition video. That's just me. There are several other devices in my house that others use that have the same capability. I also happen to have a home media server with just over 20TB of TV Shows and Blu-rays I've been collecting for many years. The other members of my household, who are much less technologically inclined are constantly bugging me to watch a certain TV Show or movie. My particular house, like many others, wasn't pre-wired for a home network. Streaming HD files over our current 802.11n wireless network has it's problems. Almost always there are cutouts and buffering issues to deal with. Without the option of running CAT6 cable through our houses, many of us are stuck to flash drives, memory cards, or portable harddrives to share media with our friends or loved ones.

This is where 802.11ac steps in. This new protocol, slated to be so popular, will have over a billion devices using it by 2015. This new protocol ditches the 2.4Ghz wireless frequency and steps up to the 5Ghz frequency. What this does is effectively give the router 8x as many channels to send information over. This means the capable speed could potentially be 8x higher than many of us currently have with our home wireless routers. With this technology we are effectively looking at up to ~7Gbps. Now, there is one drawback with using this higher frequency. The 2.4Ghz range is a lower frequency (obviously) so it's able to travel farther, effectively covering a larger area than a 5Ghz frequency signal can. This is much like bass from a subwoofer can be heard in the next room much louder than the high frequencies coming from a tweeter. This hasn't been overlooked. The solution is something called beamforming. What this technology does is focus the wireless signal towards the receiving device, whether it be the router or wirelss device (depending on which is sending the signal). Think of it like a laser pointer or flashlight in the dark. This technology will help enlarge the effective wireless area even with the constraints of using a higher frequency.

My hope is that the next A/V receiver or pre-amp I purchase has this wireless protocol built in and decodes all my media. This will cut out the middle man. There won't be the need to use a media player or game console with wired connections to send large, high bitrate, high definition videos and everyone in my house can stream their own damn media themselves and let me live my life in peace! biggrin.gif

If you're like me and have been waiting for something like to come along please share your thoughts with us. I know this will make sharing all that media on my server a lot easier and will save me many hassles down the road. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there like me who have a home media server that will greatly benefit from this technology.

For a more technical description of this new technology please check out my source here.
Edited by Seegs108 - 2/18/13 at 4:51am
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 61
2/18/13 at 8:09am
I overspent when I bought this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=33-122-466&ParentOnly=1

Just to maybe have some hope at future proofing with the AC technology...seems useless for now as now devices have it. I hope when it gets more popular it will actually handle HD movies well.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 61
2/18/13 at 9:46am
Forget WiFi and just buy a Powerline adapter, one of the new ones with 500mbps rating. Unlike the old ones, this is a new IEEE standard and works WAY better than the original Powerline adapters. Replaced my WiFi streaming with 3 Zyxel plugin devices and I could not be happier. No need to wire the home with CAT6. You wouldn't need more than CAT 5e anyway. And unless you're trying to stream 4K, even a solid, stable 100mpbs is more than enough. Keep in mind the max bandwith of Fast Ethernet is 100mbps, fast enough to stream BluRay with no loss or compression.

The main problem with current WiFi is not the speed, but stability and loss of signal strength. I just mapped my wireless N stability using the Media Center Network tuner chart. Yes, I was getting max HD green bars, but the chart showed another story. Extremely unstable, erratic, with huge dips, and this was for a 90% signal strength coming from a floor below. Switched to the 500mps Zyxel powerline adapter, and not only did I get the max speed the Media Center tool can detect, but it was a perfectly solid and smooth line, no dips or stability issues.
Edited by Flavius - 2/18/13 at 9:52am
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 61
2/18/13 at 10:00am
Quote:
This new protocol [...] steps up to the 5Ghz frequency. [...] With this technology we are effectively looking at up to ~7Gbps.

7Gbps on 5GHz band? Interesting. I guess marketing people are redefining frequency and bandwidth terms. cool.gif
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 61
2/18/13 at 10:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius View Post

Forget WiFi and just buy a Powerline adapter, one of the new ones with 500mbps rating. Unlike the old ones, this is a new IEEE standard and works WAY better than the original Powerline adapters. Replaced my WiFi streaming with 3 Zyxel plugin devices and I could not be happier. No need to wire the home with CAT6. You wouldn't need more than CAT 5e anyway. And unless you're trying to stream 4K, even a solid, stable 100mpbs is more than enough. Keep in mind the max bandwith of Fast Ethernet is 100mbps, fast enough to stream BluRay with no loss or compression.

The main problem with current WiFi is not the speed, but stability and loss of signal strength. I just mapped my wireless N stability using the Media Center Network tuner chart. Yes, I was getting max HD green bars, but the chart showed another story. Extremely unstable, erratic, with huge dips, and this was for a 90% signal strength coming from a floor below. Switched to the 500mps Zyxel powerline adapter, and not only did I get the max speed the Media Center tool can detect, but it was a perfectly solid and smooth line, no dips or stability issues.

Yea I'd say powerline is underrated because of bad reputation. But the technology has gotten better.

I do use them myself. Works good. Not great. And results vary per household. Newer houses I would think work great.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 61
2/18/13 at 10:32am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by esdwa View Post

7Gbps on 5GHz band? Interesting. I guess marketing people are redefining frequency and bandwidth terms. cool.gif

If you check out the source article, it says you need to have an 802.11ac router with 8 antennas to get speeds this high. These will probably be costly and with current BD bitrates/file sizes most people won't need an 802.11ac router with this many antennas to transfer that data fast enough. Plus these are "ideal" numbers created in the lab under perfect conditions. Real world results will vary depending on many many things.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 61
2/18/13 at 10:33am
So you get a wireless transfer ff 7gbps, but the ethernet wires behind it are lucky to transfer at 500mbps.

I went from G to N. N was supposed to be something like 5x faster. In reality, it's maybe 2x faster on a good day.

Wireless claims always far exceed reality.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 61
2/18/13 at 11:05am
Small net builder has done tests with the draft AC stuff and it is currently about even with top of the line N stuff according to their charts.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 61
2/18/13 at 2:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seegs108 View Post

I also happen to have a home media server with just over 20TB of TV Shows and Blu-rays I've been collecting for many years.

Many here are in your same boat but we are not supposed to have this at home. (TV yes I think, blurays, a no no)

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1436730/new-ruling-confirms-copying-dvds-is-illegal

So do we really need enough BW inside the home to stream Blurays when we are not supposed to be doing that anyway?wink.gif
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 61
2/18/13 at 4:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

So you get a wireless transfer ff 7gbps, but the ethernet wires behind it are lucky to transfer at 500mbps.

I went from G to N. N was supposed to be something like 5x faster. In reality, it's maybe 2x faster on a good day.

Wireless claims always far exceed reality.
No Gigabyte ethernet is capable of 1GB/s if the router controller is able to transfer that fast which most these days are. Ethernet 10GB/s is what these routers will use.

Here's what most people don't understand; No 1. The fastest ISP provider (for the average American) is 100 MBPS down, 50 MBPS up, so Gigabyte ethernet is all that is needed. No 2. Let's say you have a home server that stores all your movies, shows, etc. you want to have gigabyte ethernet and a fast wireless router BUT there's a catch! The hard drive in your server, if your lucky, will transfer data at 100mbps (excluding RAID 0, SSD) so even if you have 7gbps coming from the router your hdd isn't going to get you anymore than 100mbps.

"In reality, it's maybe 2x faster on a good day." There are a number of reasons why this happens that's why I always shake my head when people use wireless for game consoles. Wireless n CAN (this is very important) get up to 300mbps IF you're using an adapter that can accept those speeds, which very few can, and if you have no one else in your area using wireless, and the biggest factor of all; distance and what I call connection stability, distance usually will slow the speed when your let's say in the living room when your router is upstairs. Stability is how often the wireless signal gets weak and/or the processor in the router can't keep up with the load.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 61
2/18/13 at 5:06pm
Powerline doesnt work to well in my mind since it sends pulses in your power to communicate it effectively dirties your power so you want line cleaners or UPS on your more important hardware.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 61
2/18/13 at 6:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbeam418 View Post


No Gigabyte ethernet is capable of 1GB/s if the router controller is able to transfer that fast which most these days are. Ethernet 10GB/s is what these routers will use.

Here's what most people don't understand; No 1. The fastest ISP provider (for the average American) is 100 MBPS down, 50 MBPS up, so Gigabyte ethernet is all that is needed. No 2. Let's say you have a home server that stores all your movies, shows, etc. you want to have gigabyte ethernet and a fast wireless router BUT there's a catch! The hard drive in your server, if your lucky, will transfer data at 100mbps (excluding RAID 0, SSD) so even if you have 7gbps coming from the router your hdd isn't going to get you anymore than 100mbps.

"In reality, it's maybe 2x faster on a good day." There are a number of reasons why this happens that's why I always shake my head when people use wireless for game consoles. Wireless n CAN (this is very important) get up to 300mbps IF you're using an adapter that can accept those speeds, which very few can, and if you have no one else in your area using wireless, and the biggest factor of all; distance and what I call connection stability, distance usually will slow the speed when your let's say in the living room when your router is upstairs. Stability is how often the wireless signal gets weak and/or the processor in the router can't keep up with the load.

As far as I know, Ethernet speeds are measured in megabits or gigabits per second, not megabytes or gigabytes, a difference of nearly an order of magnitude. So I think you're talking about gigabit Ethernet here, aren't you? Also, in terms of abbreviations, mega is abbreviated "M" and giga is "G" (both capital letters), while byte is "B" and bit is "b." The capital "M" for mega is especially important, since lower-case "m" is the abbreviation for "milli," or one-thousandth, as in millisecond (ms).

 

I know, I know, who cares, right? Well, I do. I'm a stickler for getting technical details correct in order to avoid confusion. Yes, the meaning is often discernible in context, but I prefer to make it crystal clear and technically correct. 

 

Regarding the substance of your comments, you make some good points. However, according to Wikipedia (not the best source of info, I know, but quick and dirty), as of 2010, the sustained disk-to-buffer speed of 7200 RPM HDDs was up to about 1 Gbps (it must be faster by now), while the buffer-to-computer speed of SATA is about 3 Gbps. Granted, it's still not 7 Gbps, but faster than you state by an order of magnitude. If this is incorrect and you have better sources for info about these speeds, I'd love to know what they are. Thanks!

Reply
Reply
post #13 of 61
2/18/13 at 6:18pm
If your home phone lines are run with Cat 3 cables you can use them for networking. It's not ideal but it works. I am getting gigabit speeds in my bedroom through Cat 3 cable. If you have 4 pair you can try for max speed. If you have 2 pair you can get 100 speed.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 61
2/18/13 at 6:36pm
Can your next door neighbor (or anyone on the same transformer as your house) connect to your powerline network? I presume they include security similar to wireless networks?
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 61
2/18/13 at 6:41pm
I do not think you are getting 1gbps over cat3. Cat3 could barely get 100mbps. Most likely you have cat5 since many homes built in the last 10 years have been wired with cat5.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 61
2/18/13 at 8:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flavius View Post

Forget WiFi and just buy a Powerline adapter, one of the new ones with 500mbps rating. Unlike the old ones, this is a new IEEE standard and works WAY better than the original Powerline adapters. Replaced my WiFi streaming with 3 Zyxel plugin devices and I could not be happier. No need to wire the home with CAT6. You wouldn't need more than CAT 5e anyway. And unless you're trying to stream 4K, even a solid, stable 100mpbs is more than enough. Keep in mind the max bandwith of Fast Ethernet is 100mbps, fast enough to stream BluRay with no loss or compression.

The main problem with current WiFi is not the speed, but stability and loss of signal strength. I just mapped my wireless N stability using the Media Center Network tuner chart. Yes, I was getting max HD green bars, but the chart showed another story. Extremely unstable, erratic, with huge dips, and this was for a 90% signal strength coming from a floor below. Switched to the 500mps Zyxel powerline adapter, and not only did I get the max speed the Media Center tool can detect, but it was a perfectly solid and smooth line, no dips or stability issues.

I agree, they do an outstanding job. Will never use wireless to stream.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 61
2/18/13 at 8:46pm
"The main problem with current WiFi is not the speed, but stability and loss of signal strength"

thats the problem of powerline as well, which in my appt runs worse than wifi.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 61
2/18/13 at 8:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulls View Post

"

thats the problem of powerline as well, which in my appt runs worse than wifi.

"Touchwood" never had a problem yet with mine.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 61
2/18/13 at 10:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post

As far as I know, Ethernet speeds are measured in megabits or gigabits per second, not megabytes or gigabytes, a difference of nearly an order of magnitude. So I think you're talking about gigabit Ethernet here, aren't you? Also, in terms of abbreviations, mega is abbreviated "M" and giga is "G" (both capital letters), while byte is "B" and bit is "b." The capital "M" for mega is especially important, since lower-case "m" is the abbreviation for "milli," or one-thousandth, as in millisecond (ms).

I know, I know, who cares, right? Well, I do. I'm a stickler for getting technical details correct in order to avoid confusion. Yes, the meaning is often discernible in context, but I prefer to make it crystal clear and technically correct. 

Regarding the substance of your comments, you make some good points. However, according to Wikipedia (not the best source of info, I know, but quick and dirty), as of 2010, the sustained disk-to-buffer speed of 7200 RPM HDDs was up to about 1 Gbps (it must be faster by now), while the buffer-to-computer speed of SATA is about 3 Gbps. Granted, it's still not 7 Gbps, but faster than you state by an order of magnitude. If this is incorrect and you have better sources for info about these speeds, I'd love to know what they are. Thanks!

I don't think you'll find that the buffer to computer speed is also sustainable from practical experience. If I remember correctly they are usually quoted in instantaneous speeds which can be a bit disingenuous when used in context of the op's suggested applications.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 61
2/19/13 at 6:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by m1abrams View Post

I do not think you are getting 1gbps over cat3. Cat3 could barely get 100mbps. Most likely you have cat5 since many homes built in the last 10 years have been wired with cat5.

I have a 4 pair Cat 3 phone line to my bedroom. It's transferring the same speed as my cat 5. If you don't think it's possible I suggest you make a cable with 4 pair cat 3 and test it on a gigabit network. Before I decided to use the phone line I was using wireless n. Wish I would have converted that line a year ago and saved myself all the problems of wireless networking to that pc. The cable says Cat 3. My house was built in 1997.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 61
2/19/13 at 7:04am
With all the talk about powerline networking, it's interesting that phoneline (HomePNA) networking hasn't made a come back. Even if homes aren't wired for ethernet, the phonelines are wired using some type of cat standard. Newer homes use cat5, cat5e, and maybe cat6 cables now. Even older homes' phone lines can carry data and people don't have to worry about re-wiring for ethernet. Landlines may be going the way of the DoDo, but homes still have phone jacks that are not being used. I used HomePNA and was satisfied with it, but when WiFi grew, the standard died and manufactures quit making products for it. Wired is always better than wireless. Just as cord-cutters are re-purposing the coax in the house for the antenna signals, phonelines could be used for wired ethernet. HomePNA could be revived and give people the stability of a wired network.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 61
2/19/13 at 8:00am
I also use powerline adapters with no problems. However, I would much rather get my entire house wired for an even more secure connection.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 61
2/19/13 at 9:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbeam418 View Post

No Gigabyte ethernet is capable of 1GB/s if the router controller is able to transfer that fast which most these days are. Ethernet 10GB/s is what these routers will use.

Here's what most people don't understand; No 1. The fastest ISP provider (for the average American) is 100 MBPS down, 50 MBPS up, so Gigabyte ethernet is all that is needed. No 2. Let's say you have a home server that stores all your movies, shows, etc. you want to have gigabyte ethernet and a fast wireless router BUT there's a catch! The hard drive in your server, if your lucky, will transfer data at 100mbps (excluding RAID 0, SSD) so even if you have 7gbps coming from the router your hdd isn't going to get you anymore than 100mbps.

"In reality, it's maybe 2x faster on a good day." There are a number of reasons why this happens that's why I always shake my head when people use wireless for game consoles. Wireless n CAN (this is very important) get up to 300mbps IF you're using an adapter that can accept those speeds, which very few can, and if you have no one else in your area using wireless, and the biggest factor of all; distance and what I call connection stability, distance usually will slow the speed when your let's say in the living room when your router is upstairs. Stability is how often the wireless signal gets weak and/or the processor in the router can't keep up with the load.

You need to stop reading marketing material and take some real world measurements. On a gigabit ethernet, you will never get 1 Gbps. That only exists in theory. Wireless N will never get anywhere near 300 Mbps in practice. Mine will get above 200 Mbps for only a few seconds at a time. What ISP provider can transfer at 100 Mbps?

You do realize that in order to get 10 Gbps, your entire network, including ethernet cables will need to be replaced. And even then, you'll never get close to 10 Gbps. Who's going to do that for the new wireless protocol? Plus when I see the new routers have a built in 10 Gbps switch, i'll believe you. Chances are they won't because they'll never approach a wireless tranfer rate to need it. Same reason why most N routers have a 100 mbps switch built in.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 61
2/19/13 at 10:06am
I spent the time rewiring my house with CAT6, running 4 cables to each location where I think I might need them.. But in someplaces, still wasn't enough.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 61
2/19/13 at 10:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbeam418 View Post

No Gigabyte ethernet is capable of 1GB/s if the router controller is able to transfer that fast which most these days are. Ethernet 10GB/s is what these routers will use.
its 1Gb/s not 1GB/s same with the 10.

my home network get about 110-115 MB/s transfers, witch 1Gb/s = about 128MB/s so you get about 90% because of overhead and the equipment you use if it can handle it (witch most can but note they can not handle 2 at the same time like a cisco switch can because most 4 port switches only have a 1Gb/s back bone and most high end have 20Gb-1Tb back bones) so bissness class say it 24 port will have 12Gb back bones, they don't count all ports being used to 100% all the time.
Quote:

Here's what most people don't understand; No 1. The fastest ISP provider (for the average American) is 100 MBPS down, 50 MBPS up, so Gigabyte ethernet is all that is needed. No 2. Let's say you have a home server that stores all your movies, shows, etc. you want to have gigabyte ethernet and a fast wireless router BUT there's a catch! The hard drive in your server, if your lucky, will transfer data at 100mbps (excluding RAID 0, SSD) so even if you have 7gbps coming from the router your hdd isn't going to get you anymore than 100mbps.

again MB vs Mb. I know charter here in STL has 100Mb down service for some customers

my 6 drive raid10 server can EASILY DO 650MB/s (not typo) read with large sectors and still in the 300-400 range with more common ranges. My SSD drive in my pc can do 250MB/s easy if i transfer from the SSD to the server I easily max about the 1Gb Connection.

this is my SSD ( are the are some that are much faster than mine these days
notice in MB/s


and my server again in MB/s (dont mind the drop in the middle since corrected) the main ares is the 32/64 size



Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post

As far as I know, Ethernet speeds are measured in megabits or gigabits per second, not megabytes or gigabytes, a difference of nearly an order of magnitude. So I think you're talking about gigabit Ethernet here, aren't you? Also, in terms of abbreviations, mega is abbreviated "M" and giga is "G" (both capital letters), while byte is "B" and bit is "b." The capital "M" for mega is especially important, since lower-case "m" is the abbreviation for "milli," or one-thousandth, as in millisecond (ms).

yes thank you for this lol

Quote:
Regarding the substance of your comments, you make some good points. However, according to Wikipedia (not the best source of info, I know, but quick and dirty), as of 2010, the sustained disk-to-buffer speed of 7200 RPM HDDs was up to about 1 Gbps (it must be faster by now), while the buffer-to-computer speed of SATA is about 3 Gbps. Granted, it's still not 7 Gbps, but faster than you state by an order of magnitude. If this is incorrect and you have better sources for info about these speeds, I'd love to know what they are. Thanks!
the new Sata 3 is2x faster ( 6 Gbit/s - 600 MB/s) and you can use raptor or 10k-15k rpm drive, but SSD rules the speed world now, did you see the SSD that connects to the pci slot? they are 1GB/s eek.gif (if you have about $3,000) lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by mo949 View Post

I don't think you'll find that the buffer to computer speed is also sustainable from practical experience. If I remember correctly they are usually quoted in instantaneous speeds which can be a bit disingenuous when used in context of the op's suggested applications.
it is not but in my server since 6 drive are working i get no drop off, and in the SSD world no buffer needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

You need to stop reading marketing material and take some real world measurements. On a gigabit ethernet, you will never get 1 Gbps. That only exists in theory. Wireless N will never get anywhere near 300 Mbps in practice. Mine will get above 200 Mbps for only a few seconds at a time. What ISP provider can transfer at 100 Mbps?

You do realize that in order to get 10 Gbps, your entire network, including ethernet cables will need to be replaced. And even then, you'll never get close to 10 Gbps. Who's going to do that for the new wireless protocol? Plus when I see the new routers have a built in 10 Gbps switch, i'll believe you. Chances are they won't because they'll never approach a wireless tranfer rate to need it. Same reason why most N routers have a 100 mbps switch built in.
10gps works on cat6 but we always use fiber....

again at home i get 90% of the 1Gb/s that is mostly due to overhead, I'm lose 5-7% because of the cheap 4 ports home switches. i transfer from 110-115MB/s where a 1Gb/s is about 128MB/s (1024/8 = 128) (8 bits in a byte) add the zeros if you want math is still the same.

Ethernet is about 97% because of the overhead. so in a perfect world you should be able to get about 124MB/s out of it.
Edited by turbov6camaro - 2/19/13 at 10:57am
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 61
2/19/13 at 10:58am

When will Apple get on it!

Reply
Reply
post #27 of 61
2/19/13 at 11:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post

You need to stop reading marketing material and take some real world measurements. On a gigabit ethernet, you will never get 1 Gbps. That only exists in theory. Wireless N will never get anywhere near 300 Mbps in practice. Mine will get above 200 Mbps for only a few seconds at a time. What ISP provider can transfer at 100 Mbps?

You do realize that in order to get 10 Gbps, your entire network, including ethernet cables will need to be replaced. And even then, you'll never get close to 10 Gbps. Who's going to do that for the new wireless protocol? Plus when I see the new routers have a built in 10 Gbps switch, i'll believe you. Chances are they won't because they'll never approach a wireless tranfer rate to need it. Same reason why most N routers have a 100 mbps switch built in.

Maybe when hes talking about the 10Gbps he's referring to the switching fabric INSIDE the router. A 1Gbps router with built in switch does no good with 4 ports if it has to split that 1Gbps between the four. I didnt know that until I started researching switches and learned to look for that detail. Routers not only route traffic from the ISP but also between devices. I mention that as ISP is thrown around in almost every post. As said before the biggest limitation when going between devices is the speed of the storage controller which isnt close to 1Gbps for consumers yet. Y'all are right though you will never download from the internet faster than what the speed your ISP gives you is.

The hope is that we can get faster speeds from these newer protocols. The hope is that even the lower end of 802.11ac will be faster than the practical max of 802.11n. 100Mbps on 802.11ac WILL NOT translate to 100Mbps on 802.11n.

I still prefer wired connections myself.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 61
2/19/13 at 11:42am
My initial experience with Powerline adapters dates back to about two years ago. My house was built before the days of home networking so I was looking for an inexpensive way of getting strong signals to various A/V gear in my house. I therefore purchased a set of Powerline adapters at the recommendation of a couple of posters on AVS but they just did not work for me. I could never get my BluRay player or Roku box to be recognized by my home network. I finally got tired of trying to get the adapters to work and hired a company to hardwire about half a dozen drop points around the house. But I now wish that I had stable signal access at a couple of additional locations around the house that are too far from my Wi-Fi emitter to get a strong signal. I'm therefore willing to give Powerline adapters another try if the technology has improved in the past couple of years.

What brands of Powerline adapters have you guys used successfully. I'm hoping that maybe one of them will also work for me. Your help will be much appreciated. Thanks.

Cal68
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 61
2/19/13 at 11:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoogerBomb View Post

I mention that as ISP is thrown around in almost every post. As said before the biggest limitation when going between devices is the speed of the storage controller which isnt close to 1Gbps for consumers yet.

Thats out dated a bit, SSD can easy do 3Gb/s and that is limited to the Sata II, the Sata III SSD drives are already getting near the Sata III limit (6Gbps or 600Mbyte/s). and Raid servers like Raid 0, raid 10 ect can easily do that with 3+ drives ( 15K RPM drives you may only need 2 in raid 0 but risky lol)

my server can write/read 400MB/s (see my above post) (not Mb) witch is over 3Gbit/s (384MByte/s) with 6 (six) WD 1.5Tb Black drives in raid 10 set up witch is 3 pairs of raid 1 drives in raid 0




these are all consumer level products, most new mother boards support this, but I got a low end high point raid controller to manage my raid 10 (more reliable then mother board raid) i think it was $150. my server also has a 7th drive that is stand-by back up in case a drive fails it can rebuild (works great) i paid about $100 for each drive ( they are $150 now do to the floods in the area where the HD's are made last year)
Edited by turbov6camaro - 2/19/13 at 11:48am
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 61
2/19/13 at 11:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by turbov6camaro View Post

Thats out dated a bit, SSD can easy do 3Gb/s and that is limited to the Sata II, the Sata III SSD drives are already getting near the Sata III limit (6Gbps or 600Mbyte/s). and Raid servers like Raid 0, raid 10 ect can easily do that with 3+ drives ( 15K RPM drives you may only need 2 in raid 0 but risky lol)

my server can write/read 400MB/s (see my above post) (not Mb) witch is over 3Gbit/s (384MByte/s) with 6 (six) WD 1.5Tb Black drives in raid 10 set up witch is 3 pairs of raid 1 drives in raid 0


People with that kind of setup are in such the small minority that I usually forget about them. Most people do transfers from single mechanical hard drives in their home PC's I would think. But your post will have me thinking as I have started digitally storing my media and will need to set up a media server soon.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Latest Industry News

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › Say Hello to 802.11ac