Realistic Expectations Of Wireless N

You’re probably aware of the next generation of wireless connectivity, that being the Wireless N specification, or if you want its technical name, that would be IEEE 802.11n.

The N standard is meant to improve throughput compared to G.

It is very important to note that at this point, N is not a recognized standard. At present it has not been officially approved by the IEEE. The closest thing we have to a standard right now is called “Draft N”. For example, the wireless card in my Dell Inspiron Mini 10v does do G and N, but is billed as “Draft N”. So when you see draft in reference to a description of a wireless card, now you know what it means.

What can Wireless N really do for you?

To be honest it’s tough to get a straight answer on this, but this I know:

It is faster than G, but only if you are in an environment that allows you to achieve maximum throughput.

In plain English terms, that means you must be operating on a “pure” 5GHz network. 5GHz has a very large capacity which allows for the throughput. For example, on your router there is most likely a setting for “G only network”. On an N network you’d have to do the same thing and allow N-only connections.

It does have a longer range than G – maybe.

The longest possible distance you can get with G is 100 meters (328 feet). And for most people this is pipe-dream-territory only, because you usually see signal fade in as little as 30 meters (about 100 feet).

N is supposed to be able to break the 100-meter barrier. How much farther is it supposed to go? The answer varies depending on whom you ask.

What most people want is something – anything – that can at least even do 100 meters let alone go beyond it.

Again this all boils down to the 5GHz band. Will it be able to magically get around obstacles that your G router couldn’t? Unknown. But were I to hazard a guess, probably not.

Example: You have a two-floor house with a basement. The router is in the basement and the second floor cannot get a signal no matter how hard you try.

Will the N band fix this problem?

I wouldn’t count on it.

The solution is to buy another router to use as an AP (access point) so you can use your network repeater-style.

The range of N is best expressed when you have little to no obstructions in the way. If you have a ton of obstructions such as with the above example, N won’t help you out very much – but use of an AP will because the AP will get around those obstructions.

A better example of N’s range:

You have a shed which is roughly 75 feet away from the house. You want to be able to set up a computer in the shed. Your wireless G network, even with a clear signal with almost no obstruction, absolutely cannot reach it.

In this instance, N will solve the problem. It should easily be in range at 75 feet away.

Final notes

You can consider the range of N (which is what most people are interested in) to be the same as with cordless phones. Yes, the good ol’ cordless phone. We’ve see a lot of variations on this. They started with the 700MHz band, then 900MHz (which many people still have), then 2.4GHz then 5.6GHz.

For anyone that’s tried, you probably realize that for most environments there is absolutely no advantage of 5.6GHz over 900MHz. The range did not increase. The quality of audio didn’t increase either. Many people who bought expensive 5.6GHz bases and handsets usually returned them shortly thereafter after realizing there was no improvements whatsoever.

Let your lesson be learned from that. When you’re shopping around for N in the future, as I’m sure you will, N will not be some magical super-duper thing that will have a range of five football fields.

What you should buy N for, if so inclined, is for better throughput (which yes it does do) and for 100 to 150 meter range, assuming no major obstructions. Those are realistic expectations.

This is assuming the standard is recognized by the IEEE of course. It could be a dead tech in less than a year for all I know.