WiFi Help

[KarenF]

This is a pretty common occurrence; I have the same "problem" in my house and I am a network expert. His router is simply not designed to handle 1Gbit speeds. The only way to actually get 1Gbit is to upgrade to a very expensive data center quality router. His modem is designed to handle 1Gbit network connections, but that doesn't mean that the CPU inside can actually move that much data. This is a common misconception.

Also wired will be faster than Wi-Fi. But his laptop may be too slow to handle 1Gbit - even wired. A better test is to run speed tests on 5 or more devices at once and add the aggregate together.

Why does he NEED 1Gbit I don't and I guarantee you that I am moving more data than most anyone reading this. Just because my car can go 120 MPH doesn't mean I ever do - and the same applies to networking. Is there a less expensive plan that only provides 200Mbit? He'd save money and likely never notice the difference.

I agree. We were paying for 1 Gbit and then i moved to another service that is much slower. We have a Smart Home with over 50 clients on our wifi and did not notice any difference with a slower internet service.

 

[ERD50]

1 full HD stream requires a minimum 5 Mbps according to Internet Speed Requirements for Streaming 2025 and a family would require 50-100 Mbps.

This. I have no idea why the average person thinks they need anything more than 100 Mbps. Unless you are running multiple 4k streams at once (those need > 25 Mpbs), plus some for the usual variations.

 

[Murph]

I'm trying to help my neighbor and I can't figure out why his wifi speed is not good. He's paying for 1Gig. On WiFi we're not getting much over 200Mbps and usually, much less. If I take my phone and stand right next to a wireless base unit, I can maybe get high 200's but it's definitely not consistent.

I plugged his laptop into the router using an ethernet cable and I can get about 500 and at the same time, standing next to the wifi gateway, I'm only getting a few hundred.

The picture below is from his phone. It's a picture of the eero app and, if I'm reading it correctly, the app is showing that the gateway is getting 908Mbps. It certainly doesn't appear to be putting that much through the wifi.

His modem is a Arris TG4352 which is rated at 1Gig. It also supplies wifi. I had him buy an eero mesh system and I shut off the wifi on the Arris and while this improved his situation, you can see from the above numbers, we're still not getting anywhere near what I think we should be. FWIW, I have an ORBI system and I pay for 300Mbps and when I do a speed test on my phone, I get in the high 200's and have even seen 300Mbps. So, it's hard to believe that standing right next to the new eero unit plugged directly into his modem, we can't even get up to half of what he's paying for.

Any help would be appreciated. I feel like I must be missing something.

View attachment 59933

I had a similar problem. I eventually discovered that I got great speeds on my iPhone, iPad, Mac and TV by switching them all to the 5GHz and left all my security cameras, etc on the 2.4 GHz channel.

 

[thefist]

Just now seeing this question. I was a Wi-Fi engineer for 11yrs before retiring.

None of the responses here explain what's going on.

What you are measuring is the capability of the client device, not the router. If the wireless access point is 802.11ac or newer, has 3 antenna, it should support a maximum of about 1Gbps. This requires a client device to support that also. A access point can't communicate faster than a client can accept. Very few laptops, phones or tablets have that capability.
To get maximum throughput on your device, you should connect on 5GHz band. 2.4 should be limited to things like thermostats and other smart things. The range is good with 2.4, but not the speed.

The full answer to your question is very technical. Getting 1Gbps throughout requires 3 or 4 antenna on both sides, 5GHz band, 80MHz wide channels, and a very strong signal.
You won't find these on most consumer devices.

If you are getting upper 200's with a phone or tablet, congratulations. That's as good as it will typically do under ideal environments. So check to see what your client devices will support and that's what you can expect over-the-air from a test. If any of you have a MacBook, that should do close to 1Gbps if you want to test the full link.

1Gbps is overkill for almost anybody. But, having extra available bandwidth really helps when multiple devices require simultaneous use. Streaming video is easy. Gaming households probably benefit the most from higher speeds.

If you want to geek out, read this table:

MCS Table and How To Use it – Wireless LAN Professionals

wlanprofessionals.com

 

[Perryinva]

Don’t forget that actual WIFI throughput depends on the distance between devices (& the number of them) and the source transmitter. No one NEEDS 1Gig, but if the weakest signal to the farthest devices is 50mb, dropping to 500 service may drop the farthest devices down to 25mb. Some plans only have a $5-10 difference between 500mb & 1Gig so
that may make it worthwhile. I have 500mb (Comcast) and its more than fast enough for all the devices used but my residence is internally wired, so I can shed a lot of wifi load, especially for those fixed farthest devices thst are hard wired, (4kTV & Roku Ultra) and I’m running an owned Netgear 1250 modem and an old (2017) Linksys EA9300 tri-band AC4000 router and it has served perfectly for 8 years in our 3 level home. Wifi with iphone15 at router is 435mb and at farthest point 175.

 

[ERD50]

... No one NEEDS 1Gig, but if the weakest signal to the farthest devices is 50mb, dropping to 500 service may drop the farthest devices down to 25mb. ...

Maybe the real experts will chime in here, but I don't think it works that way. You'll get 50 mbps either way.

If the weakest signal to the farthest wi-fi device is limited to 50 mbs (which is still fast enough for practically anything on a single device), I really think it makes no difference if the source can supply 1Gbps, 500 mbps, or 100 mbps. Weakest link in the chain applies. If the weakest link is 50 mbps, nothing else needs to be much higher, and won't make much difference if it is faster.

Another way to say that, is that link does not degrade the speed by a percentage of the source, it's a hard bandwidth limit due to signal-noise ratios. To dig a bit deeper, OK, you will need a somewhat > 50 mbps source, since wi-fi has overhead, and a weak signal will probably also be getting data drops, and I think it requests a repeat of the data if it detects an error, but I don't believe you need 20x for that. [UPDATE: After checking with AI, yes, the sender repeats the data if it didn't get an ACK from the device, but this all happens locally, and would be part if that 50 Mbps slow-down. It does not go back to the source to have the data re-transmitted, so the 500 vs 1G is not an issue here). And again, 50mbps is already way overkill for a single device - that's about double what's required for a 4K stream.

 

[thefist]

Don’t forget that actual WIFI throughput depends on the distance between devices (& the number of them) and the source transmitter. No one NEEDS 1Gig, but if the weakest signal to the farthest devices is 50mb, dropping to 500 service may drop the farthest devices down to 25mb.

No, that's not how it works. The primary factor for wireless performance is signal strength. While distance will have an effect on signal strength, there's more to it. 100ft in open air between a device and AP is no big deal. 25ft through a concrete wall or an old house with plaster/metal lath, can be significantly worse.
If a device is capable of 50mbps in a given location, and the internet link is higher than that, that's what you'll get.
A device like that can really degrade a wireless network if it is heavily used. Implementing a mesh is a great solution to it. A properly placed mesh unit will connect to the distant device with higher signal strength. The result is higher throughput in the entire network.