I need to buy a WiFi adapter for my PC
considering buying the Intel AC 7265 or 7260 with a PCI adapter
however it only has room for 1 antenna for WiFi? the second antenna is apparently for Bluetooth
is one antenna enough?
(wifi coverage is bad in my room 4/5 bars on 2.4ghz, worse on 5ghz)
4/5 bars is good. 80% cant really get higher than 95%. one antenna is plenty unless you have really fast internet.
Sorry,
4/5 is on my laptop on 2.4ghz and 3/5 on 5ghz
and my pc is shoved into the corner of my room
my PC and Router are in opposite corners of the house on different floors (worst case scenario)
I really want to use AC on 5ghz so thats what i meant to ask
i would use 2.4ghz since you can get better distance with it. how fast is your internet and what is your router?
I'm going to be upgrading to 60down 10up
Router is Netgear R7000
im also considering going with powerline... now that i thought about it
Normal 2.4GHz and 5GHz needs only 1 antenna; The more antennas are used for multistream connections... like those "1200Mbps" wlans that combine multiple streams of 2.5 and 5GHz for one connection.
If your PC has that "bad" of a position for wireless, I would suggest you use a USB wireless adapter, that way you can position it way better and higher which in return will improve reception.
Are the wall-plugs on the same circuit-breaker?
I agree with @Th3Z0ne
2.4ghz is what you want for a long distance connection. 802.11n is 600mbps. should be plenty fast enough for you wifi.
Not in all circumstances.
802.11b - 11 Mbps (2.4GHz)802.11a - 54 Mbps (5 GHz)802.11g - 54 Mbps (2.4GHz)802.11n - 600 Mbps (2.4GHz and 5 GHz) - 150Mbps typical for network adapters, 300Mbps, 450Mbps, and 600Mbps speeds when bonding channels with some routers802.11ac - 1300+Mbps (5 GHz) - newer standard that uses wider channels, QAM and spatial streams for higher throughput
but that are theoretic speeds, actual speeds are below that:
802.11b - 2-3 Mbps downstream, up to 5-6 Mbps with some vendor-specific extensions. 802.11g - ~20 Mbps downstream802.11n - 40-50 Mbps typical, varying greatly depending on configuration, whether it is mixed or N-only network, the number of bonded channels, etc. Specifying a channel, and using 40MHz channels can help achieve 70-80Mbps with some newer routers. Up to 100 Mbps achievable with more expensive commercial equipment with 8x8 arrays, gigabit ports, etc.802.11ac - 70-100+ Mbps typical, higher speeds (200+ Mbps) possible over short distances without many obstacles, with newer generation 802.11ac routers, and client adapters capable of multiple streams.
Same circuit-breaker as...? router?
Not sure, i'll have to ask/check tonight. Whats the better answer im looking for? yes or no?
you are looking for yes.
For power-line the endpoints need to be on the same circuit usually - so yes is the answer you'd want
My current Asus USB-N13 adapter (which is dying) runs on 2.4ghz and network connections shows 144mbps
(this is the adapter im trying to replace)
That adapter has two antennas because it needs to have 2x2 mimo. Yes it is relevant.
There is something in the wireless n and AC spec called wideband or channels greater than 20 mhz apart.
In 20 mhz (single channel mode) you get the best range but lowest throughput this is why its always prudent to set your 2.4 Ghz channel to 20 mhz wide mode and optimize it for range on a dual band router. then on your 5 ghz channel you will optimize it for throughput aka 40 or 80 or 160 mhz channel width. This helps increase the number of MIMO channels. Given that your adapter is only 2x2 then 40 mhz is enough. However as you increase the number of channels you broadcast on your TX power is divided between the two to keep your maximum EIRP down which in turn decreases range.
The way these channels are bonded is rather complicated. The modulation itself is quite complicated so i left this at laymans terms but you want to know more maybe if there is enough interest ill do a write up in the network section
Does this answer your question?
I would like one =) been away from RF tec for to long, but highly interresed. What is it some kind of FSK?
No its side band modulation with some OFDM and 256-QAM for the most part.. The side band modulation controls the bonded channels while you choose your central frequency or control channel... The modulation handles the rest of the sending of data through the air and I think 512 qam and 1024 qam is coming around with qamtenna technology
Not entirely true depending on the modulation of the router it could be anywhere from 300 to 600 even 867 now but yes this is the general gist however as I said before range goes down the more spatial. Streams you add
If you want to use AC, you'll probably need a repeater. AC's range is bullshit marketing, because 5 GHz doesn't have the penetration that 2.4 GHz does. It's great for open areas, but most households won't benefit from it. Does your home network need gigabit throughput? If you've centralized storage and have multiple clients, then you may benefit from AC. Barring this, your internet connection is always going to be the bottleneck (as long as the telecom oligopoly rules). An N router and adapter should satisfy your needs. Wait for something better to come along.
I'm assuming it's for a desktop since you're buying a card... so I'll just ask... what is the reason you can't hardwire?
Alternatively to getting a better wi-fi card... addressing the underlying problem might be a thing, and in that case you can buy wi-fi repeaters or if you already have a wireless N card that works...
I'll go ahead and say that if a Netgear R7000 isn't giving you full throughput then a repeater is the way to go... D-link makes a good one that's easy to use ~$20-25... Powerline is circumstantial but the best option...
Also, for 60 down/10up AC isn't going to help anything even if you can reach the signal...
My router and pc are in opposite corners of the house on different floors, cant run a cable across the house.
and yea im starting to realize wireless AC just wont work for me unless i can reduce the distance or the number of walls/obstacles
Wireless AC can be better than N even if the signal percentage shows as lower. I get higher data transfer rates on my laptop using the 5ghz band on my AP even though the 2.4Ghz reports as a stronger signal.