View Full Version : Difference between 533mhz and 266mhz boards
kbealljr
02-11-2006, 08:34 PM
Since I was asking stupid and obvious questions I would throw in a couple more.
1. What is the thruput difference in the 533 and 266 boards?
2. Is the star os on a wrap with cm9 as a client compatable with starvx on the war as a ap?
Forgive these rediculous questions but I have been up quite a long time.
thanks
kenny Beall
Skaught
02-11-2006, 08:38 PM
I have not had a great deal of luck with it setup as in question 2.
And yes the 533 would be faster.
I am not deploying any WAR of any sort until V3 is out and known stable. VX has been a nightmare for me.
Just my own experience.
lonnie
02-11-2006, 10:00 PM
A 266 MHz will drive an Atheros to full speed, and a 533 will drive two of them. The CM9 should work in a WRAP board to a Vx AP. We don't do it. but I have heard it even gets faster than WRAP to WRAP.
simcor23
02-12-2006, 07:11 AM
So basically a WAR4 with 4 radios would power each atheros at half speed??
Would it make a huge difference to power 2 radios on a 533mhz and leave 2 slots open and put the other 2 radios on another 533hmz board as opposed to 4 in one board. Would it make a huge difference if I only had 25 clients per radio.
lonnie
02-12-2006, 08:58 AM
As usual it all depends on many factors and is not as simple as one would hope.
The top speed attained is in Turbo mode. It is not conceivable to me that anyone can run 4 radios in Turbo mode in a single box, so that means you revert to standard mode and the 533 will drive all of them to full. Also, it is not likely that they will all be max'ed at the same time, so it further aids in reaching the required speed on any of the 4 cards.
We see very little chance of Turbo achieving consistent throughput in an outdoor setting due to interference (let alone 4 of them), and also don't forget that you are using 2 channels for each radio. That is very wasteful and I seriously doubt that 99.99% of our users even have the Internet feed to support a stream of 30 mbps, let alone 70 to 80 mbps and then times 4. Let's bring this discussion back to the real world.
What I see as being important is the ability to drive 2 cards to full speed to create a repeater for building your backhaul. Then you need a couple of AP units for customers or maybe another feed to another site. It would be sweet to have enough processing power to handle routing and maybe some basic firewall or bandwidth control and still handle the repeater bandwidth.
The 533 can do that easily and the 266 can handle one card at full, so it is perfect for client use and also for micro cell use, where you beam in on 5.8 and have an AP on 2.4 to connect the local customers.
The final deciding factor on speed, though, is how much you can actually push to the Internet. If you have a 10 mbps feed then all this talk about about 533 and 266 is simply not relevant to you, until some point down the road when you get that 30 mbps or faster feed.
simcor23
02-12-2006, 10:01 AM
Basically all I am really trying to accomplish right now is having a WAR4 175ft up a 200ft tower all radios are AP's on 5.8ghz 4 90degree 17 dbi sectors each AP will hopefully have approx. 25 clients I have a shed directly below the tower where my servers are and 10Mbps fibre installed in the shed. I have never even played around or used turbo so I am not concerened about that. I have 2 more towers lined up and when I start to create a backhaul between towers I will use 2 radios on a 533mhz board (eventually would like to switch backhaul to licensed freq.) Then I will have fibre installed at those locations also as the company I get fibre with provides me with 10meg TLS service that is very cost effective and then connect the wireless link between them creating somewhat redundancy. I think it would be pretty sweet to have fiber installed at all my POPS and wireless linking them all together. I am staying far away from 2.4 I just dont think 2.4 cuts it for my venture.
tjohnson
04-11-2006, 02:15 PM
So, what is the maximum TCP speed with two 533 boards running in a point to point configuration using standard mode (not turbo)?
In 802.11a without turbo, you can get ~8,000KB/sec with compression, or ~3,500KB/sec without. (full atheros throughput).
This is assuming best possible signal, and operating conditions.
phendry
06-01-2006, 08:28 AM
Has anyone checked the PPS for both boards in ideal conditions? The majority of our traffic is around the 150Byte parket size mark so we rarely see the full Atheros throughput on our WAR2 backhaul links.
Hm.. That is strange. I have really clean airwaves here, great signal level (about -55dBm), and can see only 15-20 Mbit/sec throughput over 4 km link. This is ftp download of compressed file. What tuning should I check?
In 802.11a without turbo, you can get ~8,000KB/sec with compression, or ~3,500KB/sec without. (full atheros throughput).
This is assuming best possible signal, and operating conditions.
lonnie
06-02-2006, 12:00 PM
Set your rate to 54 on both ends.
It is set at 54 at both ends.
lonnie
06-02-2006, 07:10 PM
Is your distance set to actual plus 2 miles for comfort? Are you doing 5 GHz or 2.4 GHz?
Actual link distance is about 4.5 km and configuration setting is 5 miles. It is 5 Ghz.
lonnie
06-03-2006, 12:07 AM
Have you tried a variety of channels? Perhaps one end has some interference.
Sure I did. :) And as I said, airwaves here are very clean. I'm several km outside of city and we dont have serious microwave activity in this area.
lonnie
06-03-2006, 08:56 AM
Unless you have used a spectrum analyzer to truly survey the RF spectrum you simply cannot expect the airwaves are clear. We are NOT even with 100 miles of a city and there is ALL kinds of interference on 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz.
If you have the latest image and a signal of -55 dB there will be top throuhgput, unless you have some sort of interference. This driver has provided better than you are seeing since the very first release and we are using it in a repeater chain that spans 100 km. The new driver is getting me 25 mbps where the first versions could only achieve 20 mbps.
Are you sure of the FTP server and its ability to deliver files at a high rate? Are you sure on the local routing? Do a traceroute to see where the packets go on their way to the user.
cephlon
06-03-2006, 10:18 PM
Would a 533mhz War Board handle 3 CM9s doing ptp links, and one sr2 used for an AP?
lonnie
06-03-2006, 11:51 PM
We use 3 CM9 radios for backhaul and distribution with 1 WLM-54G for AP use. I have customers 5 miles out using the 15 dB WarTenna.
Why is everyone just assuming they NEED more power? The excess power people use is the PRECISE reason we have so much noise today. Please try the link at low power first and I bet you will discover you do not need any extra power. It is cheaper, draws less power and is better for the spectrum.
cephlon
06-04-2006, 12:27 AM
We have some links 15 miles out and some that are through a lot of trees. We love our SR2s and have been able to add many customers to our service that were out of reach before that.
So opinions aside, will the SR2 be too much power for the war board?
lonnie
06-04-2006, 09:29 AM
I cannot say for sure. The card is out of spec for the per card draw so you likely should only use 2 CM9 if you are using your SR2.
I do not do that sort of destructive testing since it could destroy a unit simply to see if it works. I am sure it would work in the short term, but I cannot guess what would happen in the long term.
please see private messages. I think we better continue there?
Unless you have used a spectrum analyzer to truly survey the RF spectrum you simply cannot expect the airwaves are clear. We are NOT even with 100 miles of a city and there is ALL kinds of interference on 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz.
skipped....