Yeah, anyway...
A little update on the analysis. The above numbers are download/upload speeds through a quick speedtest (or three) and are a bit of an extreme example.
From locations
in front of the Superhub, the antenna modded Superhub gave out a 3-6dB stronger signal and was much faster (2.9 vs 0.2mbps). From locations
behind the Superhub, the unmodified SH gave out 3-6dB stronger signal and was much faster (16.5 vs 3.9mbps).
The antenna modded Hub also saw the biggest gains from changing antenna polarisation from horizontal to vertical in the client. The unmodded hub saw a small gain in one location and drops in the other two. I believe (yet to check) the SH by default has horizontally polarized antenna which are orientated ~30' off vertical for diversity. This is actually a good design aspect since most laptops don't have repositionable antenna like mine, and by default have horizontally polarized receivers - as do many smartphones and tablets.
Overall the signal strength and throughput come within spitting distance of the Netgear WNDR3700, which is still upper mid-range as far as standalone routers go. Unfortunately though, the BT Home Hub 3 beats both Superhubs on speed and signal strength in all but one location.
All preliminary tests were done on 2.4Ghz. 5Ghz results to follow...
---------- Post added at 11:47 ---------- Previous post was at 11:45 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb66
Nah Edinburgh is still stuck on 1.5 upload! Oh wait, he's on bt infinity now
|
Hrr hrr, that would also suggest I was lazy enough to conduct wireless tests over the internet instead of locally.
... Oh wait, I actually did
It was cold, what can I say?