Well also, remember for 10 gigabit to be fully realized both the client and the server need to be able to internally read/write at the required speeds to saturate the total wifi bandwidth, which isn't going to happen on mechanical storage, or even sata3 SSD's (except for raid array).
I seem to recall getting similar ~300mb/s when copying from my server to my workstation DAS on an 802.11AC connection, still below gigabit but definitely sufficient enough for most applications, and 3x faster than 1gb hardwired
Most people look at the speed on the box and expect to see that from a single device/connection, when it's actually spread over 4 streams. Add to that the real-world efficiency and you have a recipe for disappointment with people expecting to get 120MBps to their device and only getting 50MBps.
But finally, with this thing some of Anandtech's readers might actually be able to stream a video to their TV... o_O
I think they will need to start advertising those as capacity. You have a total 10Gbps between all devices OR an super unrealistic single devices with 8 antenna. ( 10Gbps was using 8x8 MIMO ).
802.11ax bumps the 1x speed from 433Mbps in AC to 600Mbps. So you can see the difference is pretty small. But it the way it handles multiple devices, and spectral efficiency, taking all the lessons learned in 4G and 4.5G, means in real world you are likely to see much faster speed.
802.11ax is going to have 8x8 antenna as part of the standard, ( compared to 802.11ac as wave 2 ) and working on 16x16.
If we assume the smartphones to stay with 2x2 Antenna design, this would mean 1.2Gbps speed, and i expect with all the improvement and non spectral efficiency environment we could get 800Mbps+ in realworld.
What sort of connection are you going to need to budget for an access point based on this chipset for example or an 802.11ad capable AP? Assuming a worst case scenario in a heavily traffic'd business environment, will we be seeing commercial AP with a 10Gbit uplink (looks like Edimax have the WAP2600X 10GbE)?
That ends up being a hell of alot of bandwidth feeding into your wireless environment, what do people budget in terms of infastructure for updates or new rollouts for APs nowadays?
We're deploying multi-gig switches for current AC wave2 clients. The cost isn't that much more for the switch. It'll supply up to 5Gbps over ethernet, which is more than plenty for the real world AC wireless APs.
Having ton of bandwidth at the AP is more about being able to share the air time and put more clients on it. At the uplink our wireless bandwidth usage is fairly low.
There is Nbase-T offering 2.5/ 5 Gbps uplink. While it doesn't fit 10Gbps, it is still plenty in 90% of the situation. Of coz i do hope 10GBase-T will drop in price.
Feeding it will be an issue, but for massive wireless networks (WISP and such) the extra capacity will actually make it easier to feed proper speeds to the clients. We can get an 866Mbps connection to the client with AC now but once you have 20+ clients on there just the general traffic due to being connected starts to impact performance.
given that they are now in effect using many of the existing capabilities of DOCSIS 3.1 over wireless see http://www.incognito.com/blog/a-technical-guide-to... "...the OFDM subcarriers can be bonded inside a block spectrum that could be as large as 192MHz which theoretically support 1.99Gbps. This has the added benefit of being able to leverage up to 10% efficiencies at the band edge on digital channel. Combining OFDM and multiple modulation profiles, channel bandwidths can be assigned to match exact real-time subscriber demand and/or channel conditions. Beyond the spectral efficiencies of OFDM with an LDPC FEC (COFDM) rather than mapping 6 or 8 bits to a symbol, the 4096-QAM maps 12 bits to each data subcarrier in the OFDM symbol...."
then we could be looking at the next standard to incorporate the benefits of both and so bring the costs down for real Gb+ consumer premises equipment 1024<>2048 QAM ranges.
I really hope both 802.11ah and af becomes mainstream along with 10GBase-T...
for those who hate those techy names... 802.11ah : a new sub-1GHz wifi ( 900MHz ) to have more range and penetration with lower power designed to extend the range of connected devices ( and keep them connected also) and helps IoT devices also save power...
802.11af : a high bandwidth based on 60GHz band, it will give much needed bandwidth at the expense of range and penetration, it's designed to offer enough bandwidth for demanded applications like multiple video streams ( specially 4K streams ), because it uses 60GHz so it has very low penetration and range.. so it's well suited inside a home theatre room or the living room, maybe hard for even two room penetration...
802.11ah would be sweet in Puerto Rico... Concrete homes means even a modest 4 bedroom & 2 bath house needs two routers to cover the property due to poor wall penetration
You're not alone dude, we too have concrete homes, and as you said there's no single router solution... I need fast speed in the first floor but I only need internet access in the ground floor but I've already put a repeater in the ground floor and already planning on a second access point too in the ground floor.
Gigabit ethernet equipment has been more or less stagnant in price since the early 2000's. I bought a 16-port unmanaged gigabit switch back then for ~$100. Now it's ~$70. Why hasn't 10GbE been "mainstreamed" to push gigabit down to where 10/100 was 15 years ago?
:sigh: Perhaps I'll just use 40Gb IB instead. It's <1/3rd the price of 10GbE these days.
This article slightly misses the point. Ax is known as high efficiency wireless. It's designed for uses like providing wifi to sports stadiums, where there might be tens of thousands of devices connecting to hundreds of APs. It also has better range or propogation, and allows client devices to use slightly less power.
After 802.11ag (~54Mbit/s) I stopped paying attention to this. That was and still is fast enough for most of the things I do over wifi. 802.11n brought 5GHz to masses which helps in congested. After that, MEHH, I'm old old-fashioned and cheap, I like copper and with good gear it delivers without hickups.
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
20 Comments
Back to Article
tipoo - Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - link
"also to increase maximum theoretical bandwidth of Wi-Fi networks to around 10 Gbit/s."'gigabit' wifi aka AC got me to 250-350Mbits real world, so a theoretical 10Gbits...Well, we finally have actual gigabit wifi I guess?
dsumanik - Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - link
Well also, remember for 10 gigabit to be fully realized both the client and the server need to be able to internally read/write at the required speeds to saturate the total wifi bandwidth, which isn't going to happen on mechanical storage, or even sata3 SSD's (except for raid array).I seem to recall getting similar ~300mb/s when copying from my server to my workstation DAS on an 802.11AC connection, still below gigabit but definitely sufficient enough for most applications, and 3x faster than 1gb hardwired
dsumanik - Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - link
woops meant 3x faster than 10mbs hardwireddoggface - Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - link
Try again?close - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
Most people look at the speed on the box and expect to see that from a single device/connection, when it's actually spread over 4 streams. Add to that the real-world efficiency and you have a recipe for disappointment with people expecting to get 120MBps to their device and only getting 50MBps.But finally, with this thing some of Anandtech's readers might actually be able to stream a video to their TV... o_O
jsntech - Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - link
What sort of hardware and distances are you running? AC usually gets me 600-800 Mbit/sec actual speed, albeit at pretty short distances.iwod - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
I think they will need to start advertising those as capacity. You have a total 10Gbps between all devices OR an super unrealistic single devices with 8 antenna. ( 10Gbps was using 8x8 MIMO ).802.11ax bumps the 1x speed from 433Mbps in AC to 600Mbps. So you can see the difference is pretty small. But it the way it handles multiple devices, and spectral efficiency, taking all the lessons learned in 4G and 4.5G, means in real world you are likely to see much faster speed.
802.11ax is going to have 8x8 antenna as part of the standard, ( compared to 802.11ac as wave 2 ) and working on 16x16.
If we assume the smartphones to stay with 2x2 Antenna design, this would mean 1.2Gbps speed, and i expect with all the improvement and non spectral efficiency environment we could get 800Mbps+ in realworld.
WatcherCK - Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - link
What sort of connection are you going to need to budget for an access point based on this chipset for example or an 802.11ad capable AP? Assuming a worst case scenario in a heavily traffic'd business environment, will we be seeing commercial AP with a 10Gbit uplink (looks like Edimax have the WAP2600X 10GbE)?That ends up being a hell of alot of bandwidth feeding into your wireless environment, what do people budget in terms of infastructure for updates or new rollouts for APs nowadays?
hechacker1 - Wednesday, October 19, 2016 - link
We're deploying multi-gig switches for current AC wave2 clients. The cost isn't that much more for the switch. It'll supply up to 5Gbps over ethernet, which is more than plenty for the real world AC wireless APs.Having ton of bandwidth at the AP is more about being able to share the air time and put more clients on it. At the uplink our wireless bandwidth usage is fairly low.
iwod - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
There is Nbase-T offering 2.5/ 5 Gbps uplink. While it doesn't fit 10Gbps, it is still plenty in 90% of the situation. Of coz i do hope 10GBase-T will drop in price.0ldman79 - Tuesday, October 25, 2016 - link
Feeding it will be an issue, but for massive wireless networks (WISP and such) the extra capacity will actually make it easier to feed proper speeds to the clients. We can get an 866Mbps connection to the client with AC now but once you have 20+ clients on there just the general traffic due to being connected starts to impact performance.BMNify - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
given that they are now in effect using many of the existing capabilities of DOCSIS 3.1 over wirelesssee http://www.incognito.com/blog/a-technical-guide-to...
"...the OFDM subcarriers can be bonded inside a block spectrum that could be as large as 192MHz which theoretically support 1.99Gbps. This has the added benefit of being able to leverage up to 10% efficiencies at the band edge on digital channel. Combining OFDM and multiple modulation profiles, channel bandwidths can be assigned to match exact real-time subscriber demand and/or channel conditions. Beyond the spectral efficiencies of OFDM with an LDPC FEC (COFDM) rather than mapping 6 or 8 bits to a symbol, the 4096-QAM maps 12 bits to each data subcarrier in the OFDM symbol...."
then we could be looking at the next standard to incorporate the benefits of both and so bring the costs down for real Gb+ consumer premises equipment 1024<>2048 QAM ranges.
Xajel - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
I really hope both 802.11ah and af becomes mainstream along with 10GBase-T...for those who hate those techy names...
802.11ah : a new sub-1GHz wifi ( 900MHz ) to have more range and penetration with lower power designed to extend the range of connected devices ( and keep them connected also) and helps IoT devices also save power...
802.11af : a high bandwidth based on 60GHz band, it will give much needed bandwidth at the expense of range and penetration, it's designed to offer enough bandwidth for demanded applications like multiple video streams ( specially 4K streams ), because it uses 60GHz so it has very low penetration and range.. so it's well suited inside a home theatre room or the living room, maybe hard for even two room penetration...
Impulses - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
802.11ah would be sweet in Puerto Rico... Concrete homes means even a modest 4 bedroom & 2 bath house needs two routers to cover the property due to poor wall penetrationCan't wait for all the af jokes tho...
Xajel - Monday, October 24, 2016 - link
You're not alone dude, we too have concrete homes, and as you said there's no single router solution... I need fast speed in the first floor but I only need internet access in the ground floor but I've already put a repeater in the ground floor and already planning on a second access point too in the ground floor.0ldman79 - Tuesday, October 25, 2016 - link
I've done WIFI for a hotel built like that. It is actually easier in some situations to have the AP outdoors and feeding the home through the windows.James5mith - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
Gigabit ethernet equipment has been more or less stagnant in price since the early 2000's. I bought a 16-port unmanaged gigabit switch back then for ~$100. Now it's ~$70. Why hasn't 10GbE been "mainstreamed" to push gigabit down to where 10/100 was 15 years ago?:sigh:
Perhaps I'll just use 40Gb IB instead. It's <1/3rd the price of 10GbE these days.
Pork@III - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
theoretically max 10gbps...practically 2-3gbpsMeteor2 - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
This article slightly misses the point. Ax is known as high efficiency wireless. It's designed for uses like providing wifi to sports stadiums, where there might be tens of thousands of devices connecting to hundreds of APs. It also has better range or propogation, and allows client devices to use slightly less power.Anato - Thursday, October 20, 2016 - link
After 802.11ag (~54Mbit/s) I stopped paying attention to this. That was and still is fast enough for most of the things I do over wifi. 802.11n brought 5GHz to masses which helps in congested. After that, MEHH, I'm old old-fashioned and cheap, I like copper and with good gear it delivers without hickups.