Hmmm... Both the DIR-885L AC3100 and DIR-895L AC5300 routers appear to not actually support 160 MHz channels. 2167 Mbit/s would be the PHY rate for 4 spatial streams, 80 MHz channels, with (proprietary) 1024-QAM, 5/6 coding rate, and 400 ns guard intervals. With conventional 256-QAM, it would be 1733 Mbit/s. Is this due to D-Link's implementation, or does BCM4366 not really do 160 MHz the way Broadcom might lead you to believe in their press release? The info they have provided thus far is pretty sketchy.
And has any 4x4:4 client silicon announced yet? With either 80 MHz channels and 1024-QAM or 160 MHz channels and 256-QAM we might be looking at peak TCP throughput in the range of 1 - 1.5 Gbit/s. That would be pretty righteous.
I covered that aspect in the Wi-Fi silicon (Quantenna Maintains Technology Lead..) article.
It does support 160 MHz channels, just like the Marvell chipset.
However, having 4 spatial streams doesn't mean that they need to be able to talk to another client with 4 spatial streams at the same time. For a better explanation, look at the Marvell datasheet here: http://www.marvell.com/wireless/assets/Marvell_Ava...
"The 88W8964 supports three 1x1 or a mix of 2x2 and 1x1 connections at the same time." Broadcom must be doing something similar - the PR is indeed sketchy about the supported combinations. However, they did confirm that they support contiguous as well as discontiguous 80MHz + 80MHz channels.
Right, but that's so not how these guys roll when it comes to the advertising numbers for APs. They generally just add the maximum PHY rate that each of the radios support together to get the biggest possible number. There are no clients that support 600 or 1000 Mbit/s on 2.4 GHz besides other APs when configured as STAs or for WDS, but they happily add those numbers to whatever the 5 GHz radio(s) can muster to get the highest possible AC[large integer] number that they can print on the box. I have to imagine that the 4 / 8 antennae aren't there just for show, so these really are utilizing 4 spatial streams per radio, which means that true 160 MHz channels probably aren't happening. Perhaps the XStream configuration "enables 160MHz aggregation" and supports "contiguous as well as discontiguous 80MHz + 80MHz channels" by using 80 MHz channels on both 5 GHz radios simultaneously.
Sorry, if I was paying attention I would have noticed that there *is* AC1900 client hardware available now. But my point stands on the 1000 Mbit/s, 2.4 GHz business.
As for 4x4:4 client silicon - none as of now. We are basically looking at something implemented in mini-PCs or a USB 3.0 WLAN adapter - for mobile / notebook, I would assume the power demands are just too high. Will definitely keep a lookout and report when there is any progress in this area from the silicon / product vendors.
So I hear Google Fiber is interested in those Ultra Series routers from D-Link. (I know a couple individuals from the Fiber division) D-Link would be crazy to not take that opportunity.
Definitely interested--- I work in D-Link product management but can get the BD team to follow up with Google Fiber Division. Let me know the best way to communicate outside the forum.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
8 Comments
Back to Article
repoman27 - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
Hmmm... Both the DIR-885L AC3100 and DIR-895L AC5300 routers appear to not actually support 160 MHz channels. 2167 Mbit/s would be the PHY rate for 4 spatial streams, 80 MHz channels, with (proprietary) 1024-QAM, 5/6 coding rate, and 400 ns guard intervals. With conventional 256-QAM, it would be 1733 Mbit/s. Is this due to D-Link's implementation, or does BCM4366 not really do 160 MHz the way Broadcom might lead you to believe in their press release? The info they have provided thus far is pretty sketchy.And has any 4x4:4 client silicon announced yet? With either 80 MHz channels and 1024-QAM or 160 MHz channels and 256-QAM we might be looking at peak TCP throughput in the range of 1 - 1.5 Gbit/s. That would be pretty righteous.
ganeshts - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
I covered that aspect in the Wi-Fi silicon (Quantenna Maintains Technology Lead..) article.It does support 160 MHz channels, just like the Marvell chipset.
However, having 4 spatial streams doesn't mean that they need to be able to talk to another client with 4 spatial streams at the same time. For a better explanation, look at the Marvell datasheet here: http://www.marvell.com/wireless/assets/Marvell_Ava...
"The 88W8964 supports three 1x1 or a mix of 2x2 and 1x1 connections at the same time." Broadcom must be doing something similar - the PR is indeed sketchy about the supported combinations. However, they did confirm that they support contiguous as well as discontiguous 80MHz + 80MHz channels.
repoman27 - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
Right, but that's so not how these guys roll when it comes to the advertising numbers for APs. They generally just add the maximum PHY rate that each of the radios support together to get the biggest possible number. There are no clients that support 600 or 1000 Mbit/s on 2.4 GHz besides other APs when configured as STAs or for WDS, but they happily add those numbers to whatever the 5 GHz radio(s) can muster to get the highest possible AC[large integer] number that they can print on the box. I have to imagine that the 4 / 8 antennae aren't there just for show, so these really are utilizing 4 spatial streams per radio, which means that true 160 MHz channels probably aren't happening. Perhaps the XStream configuration "enables 160MHz aggregation" and supports "contiguous as well as discontiguous 80MHz + 80MHz channels" by using 80 MHz channels on both 5 GHz radios simultaneously.Any input, gurkha1?
repoman27 - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
Sorry, if I was paying attention I would have noticed that there *is* AC1900 client hardware available now. But my point stands on the 1000 Mbit/s, 2.4 GHz business.zodiacfml - Wednesday, January 14, 2015 - link
They probably did not add the DFS feature, making 80MHz the widest possibleganeshts - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
As for 4x4:4 client silicon - none as of now. We are basically looking at something implemented in mini-PCs or a USB 3.0 WLAN adapter - for mobile / notebook, I would assume the power demands are just too high. Will definitely keep a lookout and report when there is any progress in this area from the silicon / product vendors.Mr_Nomad - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
So I hear Google Fiber is interested in those Ultra Series routers from D-Link. (I know a couple individuals from the Fiber division) D-Link would be crazy to not take that opportunity.gurkha1 - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
Definitely interested--- I work in D-Link product management but can get the BD team to follow up with Google Fiber Division. Let me know the best way to communicate outside the forum.