5 ms·
I have Gigabit connection but my WiFi doesn't allow me to fully leverage it. Thinking of getting a WiFi 6 router but not sure if it's necessary. Will my experie
by msoad 6y ago
I have Gigabit connection but my WiFi doesn't allow me to fully leverage it. Thinking of getting a WiFi 6 router but not sure if it's necessary. Will my experience be any different if my laptop can pull 1Gbps vs. 400Mbps?
Anyone has experienced upgrading to WiFi 6 and care to share?
- didibus 6y agoI have WiFi 6 router, but only Wifi 5 devices. I get 300Mbps speeds on my devices. I'd say Wifi 6 does seem to have a steadier and more reliable wifi connection even from my older Wifi 5 devices. The advantage for me is, I have multiple things using the internet, and if they all get 300Mbps it's pretty good. Haven't had a chance to try a WiFi 6 to Wifi 6 connection yet.
- IntelMiner 6y agoI upgraded my laptop to one with an Intel AX200 Wi-Fi chip Paired with a WRT32x router running OpenWRT, these are the speeds I get on my 1000/50* GPON fiber connection. They do tend to vary depending on what speedtest server I use and when. I have seen it max out at 950 megabits however https://www.speedtest.net/result/10403429271.png https://www.speedtest.net/result/10403429271.png *1000/50 due to political reasons, despite being symmetric capable
- msoad 6y agoYour ping is even more impressive! I have 2ms ping wired but nearly 15ms on WiFi! Maybe I need to upgrade to WiFi 6 after all
- Bayart 6y agoI don't think he's using a WiFi 6 router (those are still extremely expensive, at least the decent ones) but the AX200 (and I assume the brand new AX210) is just a great chip. I'm using one on my desktop (you can buy it with a PCIe adapter and an external antenna) since I just don't fill like drilling and routing wire all over than old house alongside a crappy Xiaomi router and it's been rock solid for a year and a half. I've got an average ping to the router of ~2ms. >PING 192.168.31.1 (192.168.31.1) 56(84) bytes of data. >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.69 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=2.16 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.54 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=1.88 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=4.79 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=2.10 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=2.04 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=1.76 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=1.91 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=1.84 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=1.64 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=1.71 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=2.54 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=1.60 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=1.62 ms >64 bytes from 192.168.31.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=1.56 ms AFAIK the spikes are due to Windows' network discovery.