wired and wireless devices on same router?

[luthierwnc]

Hi All,

Need to absorb a little more knowledge.

In setting up a home media network I'm looking at the possibility of replacing the modem/router. We've had a Motorola SBG901 combination modem/wireless router for a few years and it has worked fine. It has a single ethernet port.

In inventorying the gizmos, more of them would benefit from being wired than not. This include two desktops, a new NAS, a media center and a network extender for cell phone service. The wireless devices are two tablets, an Apple TV3 and a shared printer. The house is fairly long so keeping the wireless router centrally located may prove an issue.

At any rate, I've fiddled with adding a gigabyte switch but don't know if the current router is supplying the system with enough speed to justify that. I also don't know if splitting the signal from the lone RG-45 port compromises that rate as well. Charter is the cable provider and it is also dependent on what they deliver but those technologies will keep improving while the existing hardware won't.

So, does it make sense to add a switch to the current router for the wired needs or should I look at a new modem plus wired and unwired routers or is there a good router on the market that can handle four of each?

Thanks for looking and if any particular brands come to mind, I'd love to hear about them. sh

 

[eibgrad]

Adding a Gigabit switch will always help transfers between local devices, assuming of course those devices have Gigabit adapters, and irrespective of any limitations on the router. So even if the router is only 10/100Mbps, the fact it’s patched to the Gigabit switch won't negatively affect the speed between those local Gigabit devices.

Now whether you benefit from Gigabit is another story. Even for streaming media, 10/100Mbps will do fine. But if you’re say, routinely ripping Blu-ray or DVD content on your PC/Mac and transferring it to your media server or NAS for further distribution, perhaps that justifies the Gigabit switch. But that’s purely a cost/benefit calculation, not a technical hurdle.

As far as “new modem plus wired and unwired routers”, I assume by “unwired router” you mean wireless router. You don’t need more than one router, and certainly not for the purposes of separating wired and wireless users. That only complicates network configuration, with little if any benefit. If you need a new wireless router for better wireless performance reasons (e.g., moving from G to N, or N to AC), get one. And ideally it should have a Gigabit switch. But if it doesn’t, you can always (as now) patch a standalone Gigabit switch to the router.

 

[luthierwnc]

Thanks eibgrad,

My needs are pretty modest. We don't do anything routinely and usually download movies well before watching. Getting content from the NAS to the media player should happen fast so it sounds like a good switch makes sense. Part of the question was also economic. If I did need a new modem, can I keep it to two devices? Now it seems most wireless routers have four ethernet ports too which answers that question. Somewhere, maybe here, I read that the combination modem/routers have drawbacks. This one seems to be fine but the signal strength is quite a bit slower through the air than through copper. The house is a big old brick rancher with double sheetrock and even with a centrally-located modem, the TV area is far enough away for the iPad to lag.

I suppose I should see if I'm getting internet service as fast as I could too. Charter has gone from dismal to pretty good but they don't always mention if the service you carry could be upgraded. One more thing to study.

Cheers, sh

 

[eibgrad]

http://slickdeals.net/f/6000202-Which-is-better-modem-router-or-combined-as-one

 

[Beachnative]

Since the Motorola SBG901 supports only b/g, the theoretical best is 54M throughput not taking into account interference, obstructive signal loss, overhead for security, etc. Getting a Gigabit switch will only help in wired connections. Block walls, metal studs, any obstructions, especially real mirrors are going to block your wireless throughput. Also the angle to the router can be a big issue. Have a block wall? looking directly through it its 8 inches thick and signaling is great yet when moving 20 feet to the side makes transmitting look as though its a 20 foot thick wall. Thinking of putting a repeater in? Think again, by putting in a repeater the bridge process cuts data rates in half....My $.02 is buy a new router with the N throughput but if your devices don't support it then you are stuck with the technology you have.

 

[luthierwnc]

My plan is adaptable.

In the wee hours I tested the network speed on my computer. Wireless it was 21/3.15 mbps. Wired it was 23/3.2 -- so much for my wireless loss theory. If a 10/100/1000 switch can let the devices talk to themselves at that speed, I should be OK. The RG-59 cable comes in on one end of the house into a splitter. A run of about 30' goes to the cable box. Another run of maybe 60' goes to the modem/router. The exterior walls of the house are two layers of sheetrock, 2X4s, 4/4 red oak and then full-sized bricks. The signal has to go through two of those and some interior walls to reach where the iPad and Apple TV are and they usually work fine. Sometimes they don't which is why it would be nice to have the NAS, Mac Mini and TV all hardwired. Then it doesn't matter much what the wireless LAN is up to. My wife uses her iPad in an outbuilding too and the signal strength is much weaker. I do have a network extender for my old Blackberry. I got an S3 lately which is just good enough to not need it while the media project is in beta testing. Maybe it can be persuaded to help the LAN. People are fond of crashing into telephone poles on my road which also affects signal quality

Thanks again for your advice and good luck with your projects, sh

 

[Beachnative]

I had to go back as reread this closer...

There are actually two tests concerning bandwidth, one coming into your home (WAN), the other is your internal network (LAN).You have little control over the WAN because that is controlled by your ISP and what service you pay for.



The LAN however, is completely up to you and how you have set it up.



My apologies for not looking closer and I should have caught this right away. When I see a test including the upload test then it usually means you are testing using a website like Speakeasy and not measuring LAN speed, my blunder was assuming it was your WLAN speed. From the looks of it if both wired and wireless get about the same speed then it's good for both types of connections.


Wireless and wired in your internal network (LAN) is much faster and that is where you take advantage of the 1000M throughput meaning transfering data through your home, not to the internet....Also remember data is measured in bytes not like throughput that is measured in bits.

Also always use your ISP's test site because it's usually at the edge of their network then gets handed off to the internet and they have no control( OK a little control).

For example I live in central Florida and use Speakeasy's Atlanta location at our office our performance is 63.57 down/ 5.63 up yet if I use our ISP's test site we get 74.42 down/ 5.69 up.

 

[luthierwnc]

I just called Charter and got some interesting answers. We have been on their 15mb program. Turns out they will upgrade that to 30mb and throw in a Motorola Docsis 3.0 modem and drop the bill by $3 a month. I called because they tend to leave old programs in place without telling you about upgrades. Of course, those would be annoying sales calls and I don't mind a little personal responsibility. I'll have a new modem on the way home but will need the router to match before I plug it in. The rep (who was very good, btw) said that to get the 21-23 down test meant the signal was excellent. Twice that will be plenty. It also makes wiring vs. wired device decisions easier in terms of wrapping RG-45 around waste pipes in the basement

I'll start shopping for a quality router with enough ethernet ports for the stationary gizmos.

Thanks again for all of your help, sh