Buffalo Shipping 802.11ac Router, Wireless Bridge

[exfileme]

Buffalo actually beat Netgear to the market with two 802.11ac products.

Buffalo Shipping 802.11ac Router, Wireless Bridge : Read more

 

[wasabiman321]

Hopefully once more of these ac routers come out toms can do some testing, really curious to see if it'll be worth it eventually to upgrade my still new wireless N gear. Hopefully some overheating shenanigans will be fixed in this generation Get on it Chris!!

 

[lahawzel]

Up to 1300 Mbps if you're half a meter from the router, that is.

 

[ihavenoid4u]

when AD coming out?

 

[Guest]

"This should be ideal for family members who typically fight over bandwidth for streaming seamless video from Netflix or Hulu."

Oh boy, I cannot wait for a 1750Mbps wireless router to fix all my streaming internet video problems. This will make my 3Mbps DSL connection fly!

To the uninitiated, to fully utilize your 5, 10, 20Mbps internet connection, a 54Mbps 802.11g is more than sufficient. The weak point isn't the local wireless speed, it's the overpriced bandwidth from cable and telephone providers who refuse to reinvest in truly high speed networks.

 

[willard]

[citation][nom]1jadedattcustomer[/nom]To the uninitiated, to fully utilize your 5, 10, 20Mbps internet connection, a 54Mbps 802.11g is more than sufficient.[/citation]
To the uninitiated, wireless networking has very large overhead, around 30% even with a very good connection. If your connection is poor, you can easily lose the majority of your bandwidth to retransmits and other WiFi overhead. Long story short, your 54 Mbps router is not providing anywhere near 54 Mbps unless you are inches from the router, and even then you'll lose some bandwidth.

Multiple people sharing the network will further reduce your bandwidth, as will increasing your distance from the router, putting obstacles in the path and interference from other sources of 2.4 GHz radiation. Bandwidth overhead is sky high in most home wireless networks.

A decent 802.11n router is plenty for most applications, but 54 Mbps is not usually enough for smooth streaming of HD video over the internet. 802.11ac is of questionable value to people who already have an 802.11n network, though there are still great applications for it, like local streaming (rapidly rising in popularity with the proliferation of set top boxes), network attached storage and local file transfers.

 

[ttcboy]

Is it IPv6 compatible ??

 

[SVoyager]

+1 @ willard. Working at an ISP, I have to say these 3 paragraphs quite a few times to ppl who ain't sure what type of router they need to buy. Very good explanation!

 

[razor512]

hopefully this gets benchmarked.

On my dual band N600 router, and my 450mbit dual band (intel ultimate n) wifi card, 1 foot away = a little over 120mbit/s transfer speeds, (not very close to N450 or N600 speeds)

I would like to know if this new wireless technology will repeat the fail that is demonstrated in the small net builder wifi charts

 

[TeraMedia]

Sticking with my full-duplex jumbo-frame CAT6 GbE network, and wishing CAT6a had been out when I built my house. I do use WiFi, but not for streaming video. And not for connecting file/media servers or HTPCs. If anything, I'll get an -11ac AP when I want less interference from neighbors impacting my BW.

 

[mayne92]

Had nothing but problems from 3 different manufacturers with their routers when 802.11n first came out still in draft. Not jumping on the bandwagon this time around.

 

[Guest]

TeraMedia: You could have just used Cat 7 like we do for the IP based video distribution systems we install into jets for Lufthansa..