Understanding Decrease in Bandwidth: Effects of 2.4 GHz WiFi Repeaters on 300Mbps Networks

Hello.

I would like to clarify a point. Well, I read that if the repeater only works in the 2.4 GHz band, its bandwidth / performance (I hope I put it right) drops by half, because on one band there is exchange in both directions.
But what does that actually mean? Let's assume that my home network (router, repeater and network card) has a bandwidth of 300Mbps, and my connection from the provider has a speed of 30Mbps. Where, then, I will notice this decrease by half - in the local network, between the router, repeater and PC (i.e. a decrease from 300Mbps to 150Mbps, but with 30Mbps transfer on the link) will I feel the difference already at the input, i.e. in the transfer speed (decrease from 30Mbps to 15Mbps)?

Sorry if the question seems trivial, but I'm rather a layman when it comes to networking ... Thanks in advance for your help.

If the router and card support 300mbs WIFI standard then under ideal conditions (antennas can see each other, no walls and no other WIFI networks present) you will reach 150mbs.

The repeater will catch this band to 75mbs.

So for a net of 30mbs, a speed of 75mbs _ under ideal conditions_ is enough.
You will only find out empirically how it will be in your case.

The point is, my wifi is very unstable at the moment. I only use a router and a USB network adapter that removes the signal. On PC, the signal strength is very variable, usually in the range of 60-100%, and thus, the rate also changes (usually 60-270Mbps depending on the signal strength). So I thought to put the repeater somewhere in between. I think that it would bring a satisfactory effect in the form of amplification or rather stabilization of the signal on the PC. A seed of doubt, however, was sown in me by the information that the repeater will reduce the bandwidth by half ... However, since Dear Forumowicz confirms that it will not affect the speed of the link itself, such an answer is honey to my ears Thank you for your help.

Set up an additional WIFI point connected by cable or PLC adapters to the main router.

Draw a diagram of the premises, router, laptop.

Unfortunately, pulling cables, and even less drilling in the walls, is eliminated. I only have to limit myself to wireless solutions.
A bit rough picture, but it reflects the room layout quite well:

There will be approximately 8 meters in a straight line between the router and the PC.

bogiebog wrote:

Place an additional WIFI point connected with PLC adapters

Added after 1 [minutes]:


Read the alphabet for increasing WIFI coverage

WIFI antenna - The dependence of the antenna beam angle on the gain

WIFI propagation in buildings

As I said, I don't require much. Only slight improvement. I've been using the net in its current configuration for over a year now and I'm still alive, but I wish it were a bit better. So I also don't want to go too far in costs. I can get a used TP-LINK repeater for PLN 60. I guess your proposed solution will be much more expensive (?)

So try a repeater and let us know how it went.

https://www.elektroda.pl/rtvforum/topic3208196.html#15708812

I will. Thank you very much for your help once again.
Regards.

Your router model on the schematic?

The modem is a noname from the provider, the router is TP-LINK TL-WR941ND, the wifi network card is TP-LINK TL-WN822N. For this system, I planned to buy the TP-LINK TL-WA854RE repeater.

I would have tried the WR841ND instead of WA854RE and connected the 841 + 941 WDS.

Have you tried to maneuver the router and check how the signal changes?
Or change the WIFI channel on the router?

Install inssider 2.x on computer, perform wifi network scan, show results.

What will be the advantage of such a solution?

- = Better antennas in the repeater (can be replaced with even stronger ones)
- as needed, you can upload gargoyle to WR * to improve performance.

Added after 2 [minutes]:

If the computer is a PC, I strongly recommend PLC adapters
e.g. 150pln PLC D-Link DHP-309AV 24H network adapter

on the allegro search
plc adapter
powerline adapter

bogiebog wrote:

Install inssider 2.x on computer, perform wifi network scan, show results.

bogiebog wrote:

If the computer is a PC, I strongly recommend PLC adapters
e.g. 150pln PLC D-Link DHP-309AV 24H network adapter

Nevertheless, it is a 2.5x more expensive solution. I think I'd rather stick with my original idea. If it doesn't work out, I can always return the repeater and try a more expensive solution.

PS. Maybe I will actually try this TL-WR841ND. This seems to be a better solution.

In the router, change the WIFI channel to 1 and width to 20Mhz. Test your bandwidth.

The signal strength jumps from 50 to 90%, and the rate with it (50-80Mbps). Colloquially speaking, the net is definitely "muddy".

WN822N - card plugged directly into the housing on the back? yes, try the USB cable moved away from the computer.

try to reposition the card.

Yes, hooked up at the back. Like a router, it also lies in the position where it picks up the best connection. Sometimes when the connection strength drops, you have to maneuver it a bit to be ok. But the card itself is located almost the entire length of the cable from the PC.

Added after 22 [minutes]:

Or maybe a solution like in the picture below?

So I give up the TL-WN822N completely, pull a piece of cable from the PC along two walls (I can release this much, as long as I do not drill anything and leave the room with it), put the TL-WR841ND closer to the router and connect both devices via WDS? Wouldn't that be a better solution?

If you don't test, you won't find out.

I come back to the topic. Well, I tested the above-mentioned solution with the Actina P6802 router (because I could have one for free). Everything seemed to be working fine, except that the router was obviously messing with the Battlenet application (I couldn't install / update games, or even reinstall Battlenet itself). Normally I would have suspected a port problem, but other applications, games etc. using the same ports worked normally ... I had no better ideas so I decided to test the TL-WA854RE. Seems like it looks ok, the signal strength shows me 100%, the maximum rate is 300 Mbps, and yet, they test the link with speedtest, I get 15-28 Mbps (my connection is 30 Mbps) ... What could be the cause of such discrepancies?

Jacko0o wrote:

What could be the cause of such discrepancies?

In nothing - these are the "advantages" of wifi in the collapsed 2.4 GHz band and indoors.
Nobody anywhere guarantees the speed on wifi.
Your network works on channel 4 - you thought that other networks can also work on this channel, it can be better / worse, because this person uses / does not use the network and the same channel at the same time - wifi network on 2.4 GHz is not made of rubber.

It's not about the channel ... It's clearly a matter of the repeater itself. Only the router and repeater work on channel 4 (at least that's what inSSIDer shows me). In addition, when connecting to a repeater, I get a poor bandwidth, and when I connect directly to the router, the signal strength and rate drop, but the link speed is close to the maximum (approx. 28 Mbps).

Added after 36 [minutes]:

Edit:
I experimented with changing the socket (repeater location) and in one of them I saw a speed higher than I had on the cable (almost 32 Mbps despite a 30 Mbps connection) Although it is not a constant value, it is still higher than before, but the rate (to 60-180 Mbps) and signal strength (to 96-99%) decrease. I will test it for a few more days. I have 2 weeks to return

Jacko0o wrote:

It's not about the channel ... It's clearly a matter of the repeater itself. Only router and repeater work on channel 4

Your equipment works on this channel - which does not exclude and does not prevent you from working on other networks on the same channel.

Jacko0o wrote:

I experimented with changing the socket (repeater location) and in one of them I saw a speed higher than I had on the cable (almost 32 Mbps despite a 30 Mbps connection)

The speed of wifi and internet speeds have nothing to do with each other - you can have a wifi connection of up to 500 MB, you have a 5 Mb net and that's it - only 5 Mb.

Like I said, I have a 30 Mb connection. I pull out 10-30 Mb on the repeater. On the router, despite the lower rate and weaker signal strength, I have almost max (although the connection was sometimes unreliable, that's why I started to play in extending the network coverage).

Jacko0o wrote:

Let's assume that my home network (router, repeater and network card) has a bandwidth of 300Mbps

Where did you meet such bandwidth? This is the theoretical maximum round trip bandwidth. If you divide it into two, you will subtract all the "auxiliary" bits and take into account the need for error correction and repetition of packets because of it, you will have practically 50 Mbps behind the first wall. The repeater will divide it into two, or even worse. Take a look at these tests, you can see what the difference can be in worse conditions (walls, distance). It's not even about specific numbers (the very fast ASRock G10 ac server is tested), only the differences:
http://pclab.pl/art66563-4.html
You have walls too, so beware of speed limits.

Echh ... please look at the previous posts ... As I said, without a repeater I get the maximum performance of the Internet connection, i.e. 30 Mb. I only had problems with the network stability, so I started playing repeaters. I didn't need a cosmic difference, just a slight gain to have a stable, constant strength and throughput signal. The repeater is located exactly halfway between the PC and the router. It receives the signal at full range, while the PC receives the signal from the repeater also at full range. When connecting to the repeater, the signal strength shows 100% all the time (previously it was from 60 to 100%), the rate is 270-300 Mbps (previously it was 60-300 Mbps) and yet the use of the link is clearly worse, because there are also larger lags in games (e.g. ping of 1500 ms) and the bandwidth itself drops from 30 Mb to 10 Mb ... Theoretically, I would expect an improvement, the software also indicates that it is better, and the practice shows something quite the opposite ... "frivolity" of wifi, because I know that it is influenced by many factors. My only point is that it should be better and it is worse, and I don't know why.

You made me laugh. In order to stabilize the signal, you used a repeater, you counted that the pings would not change. It is just the opposite. This mode reliably only works in manufacturers' descriptions. What did you expect from a device that one radio uses for reception and further transmission in two directions? The repeater is unreliable, not very stable. Susceptible to interference, cuts speed and increases ping. Overall, it means endless network problems. This is not a turn-and-forget solution. discerning users who know the topic will never use it to extend Wifi coverage. Here, the additional AP over the cable has no competition.

matek451 wrote:

Here, the additional AP over the cable has no competition.

Or APC (Access Point Client).
@ Jacko0o
So the rj45 cable is connected to the computer and the APC (APC must be located within the network of the main router) and delivers it to the computer via this cable.
Or a typical AP - we run the cable FROM the router! and put the AP close enough to your computer that the wifi card installed there receives the signal from this AP.

Since there is such a problem with routing the cable to the AP, you are also not sure about the range of the wifi network from the main router (other colleagues have already mentioned about the "advantages" of repeaters) for the APC option - all that is left for me is to buy a PLC and place these at one end devices of a switch and connecting to it, then the AP (for other devices on wifi) and the computer to the switch on the cable (if wifi is not desired there).
With your 30 Mb network - a PLC set up to PLN 200 can easily handle it.

I confirm what the previous speakers wrote. I will add one. The enemy of good radio communication are transmission errors that occur always albeit on a different scale. The devices have built-in correction mechanisms for these errors so that the user does not have these errors anymore. But it takes some time, causes delays and slows down transmission. So what if you have a strong signal from the repeater. If you put it next to the computer itself, it will be even stronger. The repeater has to take over some of the work that your card has been struggling with in the computer so far, that is, to correct all errors that have reached it. Sometimes this involves repetition of datagrams. Walls, adjacent networks and other disturbances have not gone away. Repeater is a kind of "ears-dragging" of a large Wi-Fi network. Will go on, but certainly with problems. This, theoretically, the two-fold capacity limitation introduced by a repeater could in practice be greater. You have equipment on which it says "300 Mbps", and in such a chain you will get, for example, 20.