Mediatek based routers have weak Wi-Fi? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: argintviu
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2024, 06:16:24 pm
content: I've always preferred wired networks at home, but for the mobile stuff like phones and laptops I've used a budget Wi-Fi router (light usage). The first router (retired but still working) was a small Netis unit, based on Realtek RTL8196C + RTL8188RE and its successor was a QCA9533 based 300 MB TP-Link which has recently gone bad (Wi-Fi dropping randomly). Both of these have been stable and best of all, they had enough range to cover the whole house.After the TP-Link died, I tried these:- TP-Link TL-WR840N (MediaTek MT7628N)- Xiaomi Mi 4C (MediaTek MT7628DAN)- Xiaomi Mi 4A Gbit (MediaTek MT7621AT)To my amazement, none of these are able to cover even half the area the others could. I have them set in the same place (upper floor, as high as possible), same settings, highest transmit power, etc.. No major obstacles, at most there's a a timber frame wall with plaster boards and a timber floor. The distance between the router and clients is at most 10-12 meters in any direction. With the old routers, I could get 3 bars signal and ~30 MB/s speeds even outside the house. With the new ones, half the time the devices don't even see the Wi-Fi network.Did anyone else observe lower radio performance in Mediatek-based routers compared to other brands?

author: Bryn
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2024, 07:39:14 am
content: Be fortunate that you didn't have the MT7921, as that's known for very poor performance in terms of WiFi stability and speed, but apparently some routers work well and some don't... and it's all down to inconsistent build quality across all their models. On the plus side though, MediaTek is currently undergoing workto improve its WiFi technologyfor future products.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2024, 08:15:41 am
content: I've replaced the filter caps in routers that developed erratic connectivity or speeds to fix them. Cheap consumer-grade routers seem to run the DC-DC-converters at their limits and I've found that increasing the capacitance at the output can improve stability.

author: argintviu
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2024, 07:36:07 pm
content: Quote from: Bryn on September 29, 2024, 07:39:14 amQuote from: lspciHaha got it in one of the laptops (Lenovo Ideapad 15ACH6). It was a pain a few years back because of bad support in Linux, but now it got better...Quote from: amyk on September 29, 2024, 08:15:41 amInteresting. The routers I mentioned were new so to be able to return them, I couldn't open / mod them. But I'll try this on the old Qualcomm, maybe it'll help with the disconnects.It's a shame that Mediatek stuff isn't all that reliable, because it's got good OpenWRT support. That's why I bought the Mi 4C and later the 4A, they had excellent price and being able to run an open source firmware on them was a big plus.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2024, 08:43:58 pm
content: I can recommend the TP-Link AX73 for good coverage from personal experience. We've had several ISP provided wifi routers since we moved to our current house. They each gave different but patchy coverage at the extremities of the house. Even two of the same Sagemcom model gave significantly different patchy coverage when in the same spot. I bought an AX-73, to site it in a different part of the house from the ISP's router, to improve coverage. That wasn't necessary. It provides every last corner of the house with fast stable wifi coverage on its own. I finally put it right next to the ISP's router and turned the ISP's wifi off. Its just a VDSL modem now.One thing to watch when changing wifi boxes is to look at the channels they are using. Some make weird choices when left to select on their own, and choose the area's most congested channels.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2024, 02:12:54 am
content: Quote from: argintviu on September 28, 2024, 06:16:24 pmI agree. My wired router is TOTOLINK (screenshot), it is on Realtek, it works great for many years. By the way, it came with such a good power supply that I changed it to the one that came with the oscilloscope and was terribly noisy. For a purpose similar to yours, I have PIXLINK (screenshot2), it also works for many years without any problems very well. However, no router covers the required space in the 2.4 GHz range, all work within 3..5 meters. TOTOLINK works far and reliably in the 5 GHz range. PIXLINK is assembled just on Mediatek, and everything is fine with WiFi, but it is switched to a simple AP, because it is connected to an ADSL router. Your mistake is that you load Mediatek with the router's work, if you disable this functionality - everything works without problems.

author: argintviu
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2024, 06:03:22 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on September 29, 2024, 08:43:58 pmThis is a valuable tip. Come to think of it, there is a huge list of networks around here and indeed, the channel settings have always been set to auto. I'll try to configure it manually, maybe this is why things didn't work.Quote from: Postal2 on September 30, 2024, 02:12:54 amInteresting observation. Gotta try this, thanks for the suggestion. I can use an older router to handle the PPPOE and LAN connections then have a separate router just for the Wi-Fi stuff.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2024, 06:19:05 pm
content: Another hint for the 2.4 GHz band: channels are 5 MHz apart but occupy 20 MHz.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 30, 2024, 11:57:22 pm
content: WiFi is one of those things where you get what you pay for. Consumer gear is built down to a price and performance varies significantly between products.A lot of factors influence WiFi speed and coverage, some are in your control, while others (like interfering networks) are not. If spending a bit more money on better gear is not an option, the best you can do is do a site survey and plan your channels/channel width carefully. For example, if you're in a highly congested area, you may want to drop down to 40 MHz or even 20 MHz wide channels (on 5 GHz), rather than letting the access point automatically choose the "best" settings.Avoid adjacent-channel interference, you're better off sharing a channel with another radio/network than sitting somewhere in between.Use the Ubiquiti WiFi Man application on your phone to help you select better channels:https://blog.ui.com/2018/12/11/introducing-wifiman/

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 02:06:14 am
content: Quote from: coppice on September 29, 2024, 08:43:58 pmIn my experience, in urban interference conditions, all 2.4 MHz devices work about the same, especially considering that on the opposite side the same cheap decrepit device responds to the expensive router, this also applies to Bluetooth. However, there are outstanding examples that work very poorly. I had one, called Huawei. It was on Realtek, with 2 antennas, but I have never seen anything worse. If you have such crap, then replacing it with anything will give a noticeable result.Quote from: argintviu on September 30, 2024, 06:03:22 pmMediaTek has a 100 Mbit network, so any old junk will do. I don't even remember its IP address, recently I wanted to enable the 5 GHz mode, which is disabled. Both sockets work in parallel, dhcp is disabled, everything unnecessary is disabled. Only AP mode, and this mode works flawlessly.Quote from: Halcyon on September 30, 2024, 11:57:22 pmTry to make your high jump 10 times higher for money.Quote from: Halcyon on September 30, 2024, 11:57:22 pmOn 5 GHz I don't see any problems with interference at all, but this range physically works not far. I can go to my neighbor with a dect phone, but the 5 GHz connection breaks off in front of her door. And on the 2.4 GHz range there is a choice between 3 zones. To make a choice from 3 possible - of course, you need a huge computing power, you can't do without a program. I recommend always setting channel 6 manually - I always do this and have never made a mistake (2.4 GHz).

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 03:02:39 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 01, 2024, 02:06:14 amI'm not entirely surprised that 5 GHz doesn't work outside your home. It's easily blocked by walls and other obstacles, compared to 2.4 GHz. I have enterprise access points in my home and even still, I need an outdoor access point to provide 5 GHz coverage to much of my backyard.There is also no one "best" channel for all applications. It depends what other networks are around you. 2.4 GHz is a very congested band. In some areas there might not be any "good" channels and you just have to deal with what you've got. Personally, I consider 2.4 GHz "legacy" these days. I disable it entirely on my main network and it's only on a different network to support older/unimportant devices.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 03:35:56 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 01, 2024, 03:02:39 amI needed to transmit video from my computer through 2 walls. First I bought a 2.4 DLNA dongle, it didn't work, and it was so bad that I could hardly find a firmware that worked even close. Then I bought a 5 GHz DLNA dongle. The signal gets through fine, but the FHD video stops and stripes. Then I bought a 5 GHz HDMI extender - and the problem was solved.Quote from: Halcyon on October 01, 2024, 03:02:39 amI use a 2.4 GHz tablet before going to bed (photo from the Internet). I have already partially crushed it. If you suggest that I crush a more expensive tablet - I do not agree.Also I bought RPI4, loaded the latest OS and it doesn't work with 5Ghz but works very well with 2.4Ghz. Although RPI400 works well with 5Ghz.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 09:36:28 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 01, 2024, 03:35:56 amSure, but that's probably down to antenna/product design. The higher the frequency, the easier the signal is attenuated and the more directional they are. Also 5 GHz WiFi is capable of much higher data rates compared to the old 2.4 GHz standards.This is why whenever we do RF planning in commercial buildings, we map out radio placement carefully, across all bands we intending on using. Once 6 GHz WiFi becomes more popular, you're going to have the same issue, at the expense of much greater throughput and a less congested band.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 10:50:00 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 01, 2024, 09:36:28 amNo-no-no! This will all be very buggy. Example: a new Raspberry Pi 4 Model B sees a 5 GHz network and cannot connect. (2024-07-04-raspios-bookworm-arm64-full.img)

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 03:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 01, 2024, 02:06:14 amThere is a huge difference between the coverage you get with the typical router using chip antennae on the PCB, and one with the larger antennae sticking up in the air. Typically the chip antennae can't really be oriented to spread their energy in a horizontal doughnut, and the designers don't even seem to try.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 03:54:02 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 01, 2024, 03:06:46 pmThat's exactly what I said. I've never even seen the routers you're talking about. They must be some terrible piece of crap. The MediaTek router has crooked metal strips inside the case as antennas. I'm sure your new router will gain a couple of centimeters in range when connecting to my kid's tablet.I have and have experience using a powerful TL-WN7200ND adapter with a large antenna. If I use it, your router will show a significantly greater range than MediaTek with an internal antenna. Unfortunately, the range is determined by the weak side, and if I want to move away with my tablet, your router will not give a noticeable advantage.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 04:50:43 pm
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 01, 2024, 03:54:02 pmThere are reasons for that mass of antennae on the higher end modern routers. Look up MIMO and beam forming in the latest wifi specs. It works wonders for coverage when the signal is massively multi-pathing around a building. A modern cell phone does wonders with a tiny antenna inside the phone, and large antennae at the base station. With modern techniques the nature of the two ends of the link is highly unbalanced.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 05:13:18 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 01, 2024, 04:50:43 pmAll you need is for the signal from a weak source to exceed the interference level where your router is installed. My second router is no worse than yours in the 2.4 GHz band, and there is no difference with MediaTek in the range of communication with the tablet.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 05:20:27 pm
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 01, 2024, 05:13:18 pmYou are thinking in pure point to point terms. The cheapest modern routers, the sort with a single antenna, are still like that. The more expensive ones are not.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 01, 2024, 05:27:09 pm
content: For the 2.4GHz band, all the routers mentioned, including yours, have 2 antennas.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 12:54:28 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 01, 2024, 10:50:00 amWhat are you on about? 6 GHz Wifi is great and devices already support it.Not all products are designed equally. Just because a device sees a network, doesn't mean it's compatible with it. For example, a lot of older devices don't support WPA3 at all, other's don't support 160 MHz wide channels, there might also be other features enabled on a given network that isn't supported by a device. It's not the fault of the network/access point.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 03:34:29 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 12:54:28 amI'm talking about global degradation. Too many newly developed things have started to appear that are terrifying in their stupidity of design.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 04:41:57 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 02, 2024, 03:34:29 amSure, but what has that got to do with improvements in WiFi?

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 05:00:33 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 04:41:57 amQuoteQuote

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 05:22:00 am
content: I'm honestly confused with what you mean.Firstly, the 802.11ax standard itself is not the reason for the increased coverage. Perhaps better antenna design is.Secondly, 802.11ac devices can definitely connect to 802.11ax (i.e.: WiFi 6) radios, but that depends on their configuration. I have 802.11b devices still connecting to my 802.11ax networks, however if you have certain features enabled, then you might run into problems (like I previously explained). Requiring protected management frames (802.11w-2009) is one example. This is why I have seperate networks for modern and legacy devices. If you are only running one network, then you need to configure it according to the lowest common denominator.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 05:29:03 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 05:22:00 amStupid software developers for routers (including Raspberry PI) refute you.

author: Jeroen3
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 06:09:59 am
content: The range of most WiFi AP's is lower each generation because the width of the channels is increasing for more throughput.When you then keep the unit within the radiated power limiting, it's range is limited.When you configure a lower channel width the range increases but throughput lowers.Since WiFi bands are busy, and the better frequencies are easily blocked by thing walls, it's become normal to install multiple accesspoint in strategic locations. For example, I havetwoubituiti wifi 6 lites for full coverage of my house. These are mediatek based.And a family member requires 5 mikrotik ap's to cover his house and garden.For optimum fast wifi it's better to have more weak radios than one strong radio.Quote from: argintviu on September 28, 2024, 06:16:24 pmPlease stop buying brands that only do the bare minimum reference design implemenations.edit: Look atthis guyexplaining all the stuffs.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 06:13:27 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 02, 2024, 05:29:03 amWhy would I care if "stupid software developers" refute me? I've been designing wireless networks for many, many years, and as they say, the proof is in the pudding (referring to the screenshot of my own home network). It's not the fault of the wireless standards if people can't design good products.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 06:41:58 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 06:13:27 amQuote from: Postal2 on October 02, 2024, 03:34:29 amQuote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 06:13:27 amI'm glad you took my advice to use channel 6.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 09:20:13 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 02, 2024, 06:41:58 amIt has absolutely nothing to do with your advice. Channel 6 happens to be the least congested, non-overlapping channel where I am, because I did a proper site assessment. I'd use Channel 1, but my neighbour is occupying that one (we arranged that previously).You don't just "guess" which channel is best, you plan.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 10:37:38 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 09:20:13 amOkay, you've done a lot of research and found channel 6 to be the most suitable. For everyone else, I simply advise (and have advised) not to bother with nonsense, but to put channel 6 and forget about it.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 02:16:10 pm
content: That's the curse of the ISM bands.Today channel x might work fine for you, tomorrow it could be crowded. And another tip: if other SSIDs on the same channel (or within the overlapping channel bandwidth) have a significantly lower signal strength you can usually ignore them. Recommending a specific channel without a prior scan is just nonsense because you don't know anything of the specific radio band situation.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 02:22:34 pm
content: Quote from: madires on October 02, 2024, 02:16:10 pmThis is an area where the MS "have you tried turning it off and on again?" actually works, as most routers set to automatically find a quiet channel only do it at startup. You need to power off and on at a time when other people's use of wifi is likely to be the busiest, like early evening, as so many turn off for much of the time.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 03:33:51 pm
content: Quote from: madires on October 02, 2024, 02:16:10 pmYou didn't ask why - and I won't explain. Just don't show a screenshot of the best channel 6 - you'll look like a fool.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 02, 2024, 11:11:49 pm
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 02, 2024, 10:37:38 amSo then everyone uses Channel 6 and then all of a sudden that is the most congested channel? Your logic doesn't make sense, nor have you provided any explanation as to why you seem to think setting this particular channel, regardless of where you are, without proper planning, is the best choice.What happens if you're in an area where Channel 6 is congested? Is it still the "best" channel to choose? (Hint: The correct answer is "no".)Planning networks isn't "nonsense", and in fact, takes quite a lot of experience to get right.Quote from: Postal2 on October 02, 2024, 03:33:51 pmBecause youcan'texplain. Who looks like the fool now?

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 04:30:00 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 11:11:49 pmOkay. Once upon a time, when you hacked other people's networks via WPS with a high-power adapter, the number of networks visible to you was the same as for any device now. And you switched the remote router to channel 6. Nothing has changed now. Few people read this thread. Nobody wants to bother, everyone has the channel set to "auto". And if the channel is selected automatically, then it is either 1 and goes forward, or 11 and goes back. The least gets to 6.

author: 5U4GB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 04:39:28 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on September 30, 2024, 11:57:22 pmWas going to mention this too, you can get something like a Ruckus R600 off eBay for as little as $20-30 that will leave any consumer-grade router (at many times the price) for dead. I get five bars of signal from mine (a secondhand R710) everywhere on the property despite it being in a concrete basement because they do a huge amount of signal processing to make sure the radio energy goes specifically where it's needed, not in random directions.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 07:54:52 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 03, 2024, 04:30:00 amNot really. Channel 6 is favoured just as equally as all the other channels, even on most crappy consumer routers that have rudimentary automatic channel selection. They don't just stop scanning part way through and lock onto the first channel they come across, they evaluate every channel first before making a decision. In most consumer devices, this happens only once upon boot. On enterprise equipment it can be configured to occur periodically or continually. That being said, why do you think some routers don't choose Channel 6 (despite you claiming it's the "best" channel)? Could it be because it's more noisy and congested than some of the others? Now hopefully you understand the flaw in your own thinking.In a 2.4 GHz, 20 MHz wide band plan that suits most of the world, channels 1, 6 and 11 are cited as being the "most suitable" due to their non-overlapping nature.In some parts of the world, channels 1, 5, 9 and 13 are non-overlapping.But a band plan is just that, a theoretical plan, which not everyone follows.These are some situations where defaulting to channel 6 might be a bad idea:1. Several other, or heavily utilised networks are already occupying that channel (as already discussed).2. Non-Wifi devices sharing the same frequency at WiFi Channel 6 (SonosNet is a good example of that; You ONLY have a choice of Channels 1, 6 and 11, none of the others can be utilised).3. Someone is using a 40 MHz wide 2.4 GHz network (that essentially takes up everything from Channels 1 through to 7)4. According to statistcs, channel 6 is the second-most commonly used channel in the world (Channels 5, 7 and 8 are the least used).Notwithstanding any of that, why would you simply guess and take a stab in the dark without considering your surroundings? Instead of learning something and letting go of your misconceptions, why do you keep repeating the same "advice" simply because you happen to like the number 6? I really don't understand that mentality.In a nutshell: What is the "best" WiFi channel to use? There is no such thing. It depends entirely on your surroundings and use-case. If you don't know what you're doing, leave the router to automatically select a channel.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 08:08:34 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 03, 2024, 07:54:52 amI don't think. I just use channel 6 for 20 years and I don't make mistakes. As soon as I forget and leave "auto" - the result is much worse, then I remember and put 6.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 08:12:26 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 03, 2024, 04:30:00 amAnd we get a more or less random distribution across those three channels, unless the neighbors are some distance away.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 08:16:30 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 03, 2024, 08:08:34 amThis is the first correct thing you've said.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 08:21:05 am
content: Try setting a different channel when connecting to a hacked access point from a distance - you will have to wait 2 weeks for a connection to return back, and you may be noticed because the access point is receiving your signal.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 08:38:07 am
content: Over here most people aren't interested in hacking their neighbor's APs or WLAN routers (they also lack the knowledge to do that).

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 08:54:31 am
content: Quote from: madires on October 03, 2024, 08:38:07 amAs for "lack of knowledge", I already understood. I recommend running Kali-linux from a live-cd to improve the situation with knowledge.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 09:09:08 am
content: tools != knowledge

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 07:46:31 pm
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 02, 2024, 05:22:00 amActually 802.11ax is a reason for increased coverage. 802.11ac only specifies beam forming for the 5GHz band, although some routers actually implemented some form of beam forming for the 2.4GHz band. 802.11ax supports all the 5GHz stuff, except super wide channels, at 2.4GHz, and improves on it.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 10:36:10 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 03, 2024, 07:46:31 pmI did say the standarditself. While there were improvements to beam forming in 802.11ax, there were still ways to improve coverage on older standards. A lot of the older 802.11a/b/g access points had external antenna ports (even some of the consumer devices like Linksys). The point I was making was the standard alone wasn't the cause, but it was a contributor. The standard is nothing without good design. I've come across some pretty piss poor 802.11ax devices.It's a bit like saying "5G improves coverage", while yes, it makes more efficient use of the spectrum, it also involved the installation of many more cell sites.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 11:22:24 pm
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 03, 2024, 10:36:10 pm5G generally has worse coverage, unless MIMO is working really well. It has a higher throughput, when the signal is adequate. Beam forming directly increases range. By adding it to the 2.4GHz spectrum, which has the greater penetration, in 802.11ax they extended the range between a compliant 802.11ac router and a similar compliant 802.11ax router which implements all the features. The fudgey beam forming you can go outside the spec does not extend things as far as the cooperative version in the standard will.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 03, 2024, 11:48:14 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on October 03, 2024, 11:22:24 pmI suppose it comes down to implementation and where you are in the country/world. Over here 5G is the norm around cities and towns with a fallback to 4G/LTE as you move further out (3G will be dead in the water in less than a month). 5G uses a lot of the same UHF bands as 4G (i.e.: 700, 850 and 900 MHz), whilst also operating on the higher frequencies in the 1.8 to 3.5 GHz range plus 26 GHz, so you still get fairly good distance and penetration into rural and bushy areas, just with lower throughput.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 12:15:19 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 03, 2024, 11:48:14 pmSorry, I meant 5GHz, not 5G cellular.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 03:52:43 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 03, 2024, 11:48:14 pmLooks like 3G is already dead in my area. My phone has been showing the "2G" icon for a week now.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 08:04:21 am
content: Quote from: coppice on October 04, 2024, 12:15:19 amAhhh no worries! Yes, that makes sense then. I wondered that for a second...

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 08:05:37 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 04, 2024, 03:52:43 amI'm still surprised 2G cellular is still around. That died in Australia many years ago. Once 3G goes, there is only 4G/LTE and 5G left. Then again, people have had many years to upgrade equipment, phones etc... And the coverage footprint of 3G has been replaces by the above-mentioned standards and in many cases, significantly improved coverage. But anyway, I digress...

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 09:40:24 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 04, 2024, 08:05:37 amI'm interested in your opinion. Let's say one access point is set to channel 6, and the second access point, which is nearby, has a choice of 6 or 8. I've always believed that you should set the same channel in such cases.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 10:16:45 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 04, 2024, 08:05:37 amIn many places 2G will be around for a long time, as so many embedded things have committed to its use with locked in long term service agreements. 3G is also in a lot of embedded uses, but they seems to be ones with less lock in, like communication with vehicle systems. We have recently seen people like Mercedes getting blow back as 3G infrastructure has been turned off, and owners have suddenly lost service. I found this weird, as it seems many not very old cars have this issue. Why were they not built with an LTE modem?

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 10:18:40 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 04, 2024, 08:04:21 amI really need to ensure I include Hz after every reference to a frequency. Not long ago saying 5G was clear. Now its really murky.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2024, 11:32:31 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 04, 2024, 09:40:24 amIn the 2.4 GHz band channel 6 occupies channels 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. Again, channels are 5 MHz apart but have 20 MHz bandwidth. This is the reason for using only channels 1, 6 and 11.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 05, 2024, 12:15:18 am
content: Quote from: Postal2 on October 04, 2024, 09:40:24 amIf the second access point is not within your control, and is close enough to be interfering, and assuming none of the other channels are more suitable for you to change your access point to, then it's better to share a channel with another radio (this is known as co-channel interference), as opposed to suffering from adjacent channel interfere. If you are sharing channels with other networks, you also need to consider utilisation. If those networks are getting smashed with traffic, you're better off choosing another channel with less traffic.WiFi access points and devices are half-duplex, so if something else is already transmitting on the same channel, it will wait until there is airtime before transmitting.There's a good writeup here with diagrams:https://www.metageek.com/training/resources/adjacent-channel-congestion

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2024, 05:37:51 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 05, 2024, 12:15:18 amThanks. I assumed that channels 6 and 8 would interfere with each other anyway, but the access points would sync better if the channel was the same. However, this is illustrated by such a good picture that I copied it here from your link.I also provide screenshots of the number of 2.4 GHz networks in my area (with channels), I don't know how to save the entire list.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 05, 2024, 10:09:26 am
content: Yep! If everyone just stuck by the non-overlapping channels, that would be great, however it's not possible in all areas. Sometimes you just have to cop interference. That's the reality of the 2.4 GHz ISM band.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2024, 12:51:53 pm
content: They should make the next version of 2.4GHz Wifi use the entire band split into the channels 1, 6, and 11 (and extending up to 13 in countries where it is allowed), but be mindful of neighboring networks as to which channel groups to transmit on at any time. So it basically would pick the channel that's least used at any time, making the best of the situation.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2024, 04:04:51 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on October 05, 2024, 12:51:53 pmThey seem to regard 2.4GHz as a lost cause. All the clever stuff seems to go into the 5GHz band spec, and then some gets backported to the 2.4GHz band. The two bands seem to have different strengths and weaknesses. Practically anything blocks 5GHz, but it sure does bounce around a lot.Depending on the path between the two terminals penetration of reflection may work out best. If you take the whole 2.4GHz band for one purpose, is that going to wipe out other things using the band right now?

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2024, 06:02:39 pm
content: I connected to the router on MediaTek, the browser had a password for its address.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 06, 2024, 12:18:22 am
content: Also, another tip. If you value your privacy, don't post your network SSID on the internet, particularly if it's relatively unique. People can use a database like Wigle to find out where you live to a pretty high degree of accuracy, particularly as information, such as the channel you use can be used to narrow down your location.

author: Postal2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 06, 2024, 12:51:53 am
content: I value privacy at a reasonable level. I even kept the network open for several years, it turned out that it concentrated unpleasant people nearby, and I closed the network. And 3G mobile network were indeed turned off, but there is no talk of 2G, since many elderly people use such phones with large buttons.Anyway, thank you for your good intentions.