• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Does 802.11g offer better range and interference-compensation than 802.11b?

G

Goatboy

Senior member
Just wondering if there were other benefits of 802.11g besides the obvious increase in bandwidth versus 802.11b. Just trying to figure out if its worth it to spend a little extra money on 802.11g hardware.

Thanks.
 
I don't think so.
Interferance & Attenuation depend on frequency. As far as I know 802.11a & g only differ in the transmission algorithm, not in the actual physical characteristics.'

I might be wrong, though.
 
controllers and radios are not created equal but if you make the assumption that the hardware is identical, only the modulation type (CCK for 11 mb/OFDM for 54 Mb), then the range would be exactly the same, however the farthest cell would be different in that the 802.11b card would be associating at 1 Mb, while the 802.11g client would be, I believe, 6 Mb. Each cell size would be about the same, but since the .11g AP starts out at a much higher data rate, the distant cells are incrementally higher as well.

Edit: Just looked at the spec's on DLinks .11g AP. Since the fallback is 802.11b and 802.11 modulation types, CCK at 11 and 5.5, QPSK and BPSK at 2 and 1 Mb respectively, and if all things hardware were equal, the range would be exactly the same at those modulation types with either AP standard, or in the case of 802.11g hardware, pre-standard. The controller/chipsets and radios are not the same as previous generation 802.11b devices though, so the range may actually be better on the more current hardware.
 
I've wondered about this range issue. My theory is that, with 802.11b, there would be some point where you'd still be receiving transmissions, but it would be so weak (say, .2mb) that you wouldn't be able to do anything. But, with 802.11g, you'd be receiving at 1mb, so you would be able to do something. If so, range would be extended. Is that wrong?
 
I installed some 802.11g stuff yesterday (wireless ethernet bridge, PCI card, card for laptop and an access point).
I live in an appartment and the signal has to travel through some walls.

the laptop card is working just fine
the PCI is really unstable even when I'm really close to the access point (los of signal).
On the ethernet bridge (802.11B) I'm getting 250-300 kbyte -----> is this OK????



 
"But, with 802.11g, you'd be receiving at 1mb, so you would be able to do something. If so, range would be extended. Is that wrong? "

Once the .11g AP hits the distance/obstruction wall, and starts bumping down it's signalling rate to 11 Mb and below, it becomes a .11b AP in essence. Same frequency, same modulation types. The only difference in the newer hardware at those data rates (11, 5.5, 2 and 1 Mb) would be more efficient controllers, better radios (receive sensitivity et al.),etc.. as I mentioned before. Certainly a possibility and if your .11g WLAN is getting better throughput numbers than your .11b WLAN with the exact same variables (distance/obstruction/interference), then that is why.
 
In an envioroment that 802.11b is capable to deliver 5Mb/sec. up to 100'. 802.11g will deliver it up to 125'.

Put a very thick concrete wall at the 90? point and both signals will be ?killed? there.
 
Originally posted by: rw120555
I've wondered about this range issue. My theory is that, with 802.11b, there would be some point where you'd still be receiving transmissions, but it would be so weak (say, .2mb) that you wouldn't be able to do anything. But, with 802.11g, you'd be receiving at 1mb, so you would be able to do something. If so, range would be extended. Is that wrong?
Click to expand...
You are right that is the way it works.

In an envioroment that 802.11b is capable to deliver 5Mb/sec. up to 100'. 802.11g will deliver it up to 125' (based on actual testing).

Put a very thick concrete wall at the 90? point and both signals will be ?killed? there.



 
Perhaps as I mentioned, because of better radios and/or controllers, power output etc.. but putting a g on the end of 802.11b doesn't magically give you better range. At 5.5 Mb they are both using CCK modulation, and 802.11b technology, 2.4 Ghz radios, Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum and on and on. If you get better range at the lower data rates with your .11g hardware, it isn't because it's g, its because it's better hardware
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top