Wiring a new home.....Should I bother or go wireless?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

azazel1024

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
901
2
76
So Blue Ray uses a network? Mine just plugs into my Home theater using HDMI. Shows you how out of touch I am :LOL:

OK...you guys have convinced me to run Cat6 wiring. As far as Coax goes....my cable company uses Ethernet (Uverse). Some still use coax?
Thanks again guys. You've been a big help :)

You don't have to do runs to every room.

Wireless can work well, but especially if this is a somewhat larger house, a single router isn't going to give you good wireless cover through the entire house, so you'll want to run wires to at least a couple of dispersed locations so you can setup a router and a couple of access points (or routers in access point mode) so that you CAN get good wireless coverage over the entire house.

Typical rule of thumb, a good router will cover about 1,200sq-ft on a single story with 2.4GHz and good to excellent signal strength. It'll cover about 2,500sq-ft on 2/3 floors (3 if located on the middle floor) with good to excellent signal strength. This is with traditional 2x4 construction and the wireless router centrally located. If it isn't centrally located, or is, say, down in a basement or on the top floor, reduce the coverage.

If you are building a 3,500sq-ft home or something, I can guarantee you won't get good to excellent coverage over the whole thing, even if the router is centrally located. You might get fair signal in some locations, which might be okay for you, but if you have a nearby neighbor, their network might adding interference on top of that possibly.

5GHz is generally about 75% of the coverage of 2.4GHz (so figure about 900sq-ft on one floor, or 1800sq-ft across 2/3 floors).

Obviously open concept homes will have a bit better coverage, because fewer walls to go through.

Unless the costs are obscene, especially since you are building from scratch, the "pain" of a few hundred bucks up front is pretty cheap compared to finding out you wish you HAD run some networking cables while the sheetrock was off.

My suggestion if you aren't a huge computer user or don't forsee needing a lot of bandwidth, then just run 2 network cables and some RG6 to where you foresee your entertainment center going. I'd do the same to any bedroom you think might have a TV/entertainment center/home office located.

I'd also consider an RG6/single network cable to a kitchen if you think there is any chance you'll have a TV/similar hooked up. Also the same to any actual home office. I'd also run one to the basement.

You don't necessarily need stuff in every single room, but it would be nice anywhere a TV or a desktop/laptop is going to go gets 1-2 LAN drops and maybe some coax. Plus one or two places that are somewhat central on a floor for a router to go (which means 2 drops, in case you are running internet and LAN connection there), or stagger it (so one side of the house on the main floor has a place for a router to go, then on the upstairs and in the basement on the opposite side of the house are places for access points).

Wireless can do a lot, but routers/access points have to be connected somehow, and a single router is rarely enough unless you live in an apartment or reasonably small condo, townhouse or apartment. At least if you have decent bandwidth needs.

As for future needs for wired networking. Who know, stuff changes.

Today Netflix only takes 8-9Mbps for a good 1080p stream, but their SuperHD is more than that, and 4k is up around 25Mbps. 25Mbps is more than what a "fair" wifi connection is likely to be able to handle, especially since a lot of smart TVs, phones, cheaper tablets and cheap laptops can manage on a fair Wifi connection.

Now lets try 2-3 devices all trying to stream wirelessly at once, especially if far from the router.

That means more routers/access points so everything has a good or excellent connection. Or it means wiring some devices.

Might not be an issue today, but it might be in 5 years, or 10 years. Over building rarely causes problems other than a bit of "wasted" money. Can always add resale value later if nothing else.

Other thoughts on the future, Netflix is fun and I can't remember what I did without it, but I'd bet good odds that within 10-15 years, there will be NO cable TV. It'll all be IPTV, even if such a thing is a traditional cable TV package exists, it is likely to be delivered fully over the internet to your house, and probably to a DVR or similar set top box to your TV from you "TV provider of choice".

Again, higher quality requires higher bit rates. A lot of stuff is 720p/1080i/1080p today, which doesn't require a huge amount, but 4k is creeping in to being the new top dog standard, even if it might take 3-5 years. 8k is already starting to be a real thing (though I suspect that'll take at least 3-5 years before we see any penetration below about $10,000 TVs).

Might take awhile, but just to watch TV might take a 25-40Mbps internet connection, or more. Wireless advances and gets faster, but there are rules of physics to obey. A lot of the speed advances are over relatively short distances, with performance at the edge of wifi not improving a whole lot. So a fair/poor wifi connection isn't a whole lot faster today than it was 10 years ago, even if a good/excellent wifi connection is massively faster (say, 10-20x faster) than it was 10 years ago.
 

kevnich2

Platinum Member
Apr 10, 2004
2,465
8
76
Wow....the OP clearly asks for simple information and I'm seeing recommendations all over the place that include cat6a and using vlan's

For the OP's needs, I'd recommend wherever you run a coax cable/jack to also run ONE cat5e/cat6 cable as well. For your needs, cat5e would be fine as it supports gigabit without a problem and I can't see your needs going past that but, they are right as far as the cost being negligible for running cat6. The chances that you will use the data jack are slim but if your already running wire for coax, why not put a data jack there as well.

My biggest recommendation would be to install either a wall mounted or ceiling mounted access point. Look into either ubiquiti unifi or open-mesh.

My reason for this is because I'm constantly asked why wireless in client's homes sucks so much and then upon inspection, they have one wireless router in a far away room and their laptop or smart tv is on the other end of the house. My solution is always to put a central ceiling mounted AP and I never hear another peep from them. You will be doing a big favor by having this done as well. If you have a larger house, put 1-2 additional ones in the far away areas. Make sure they meet to a central point and put a small switch there, voila.
 
Last edited:

homeby5

Junior Member
Apr 13, 2015
11
0
0
Thanks for all the info guys. My head is swimming againo_O

OK...What about combo cables that have an RG6 and cat6 cable bundled? Then drop one of these in the main distribution point and then one in each room?
 

JackMDS

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 25, 1999
29,545
422
126
For starter this.

My suggestion if you aren't a huge computer user or don't forsee needing a lot of bandwidth, then just run 2 network cables and some RG6 to where you foresee your entertainment center going. I'd do the same to any bedroom you think might have a TV/entertainment center/home office located.

I'd also consider an RG6/single network cable to a kitchen if you think there is any chance you'll have a TV/similar hooked up. Also the same to any actual home office. I'd also run one to the basement.

Really nice this.

Wow....the OP clearly asks for simple information and I'm seeing recommendations all over the place that include cat6a and using vlan's

For the OP's needs, I'd recommend wherever you run a coax cable/jack to also run ONE cat5e/cat6 cable as well. For your needs, cat5e would be fine as it supports gigabit without a problem and I can't see your needs going past that but, they are right as far as the cost being negligible for running cat6. The chances that you will use the data jack are slim but if your already running wire for coax, why not put a data jack there as well.

My biggest recommendation would be to install either a wall mounted or ceiling mounted access point. Look into either ubiquiti unifi or open-mesh.

My reason for this is because I'm constantly asked why wireless in client's homes sucks so much and then upon inspection, they have one wireless router in a far away room and their laptop or smart tv is on the other end of the house. My solution is always to put a central ceiling mounted AP and I never hear another peep from them. You will be doing a big favor by having this done as well. If you have a larger house, put 1-2 additional ones in the far away areas. Make sure they meet to a central point and put a small switch there, voila.




:cool:
 
Apr 4, 2015
43
0
6
I installed a wired system in my home long after it was built and it was much nicer than the wifi system ($250 consumer router), but it took a lot of sweat and, worse, time to put in. If you're building a house, and it only costs $500 to put in a upgrade-able network structure, I think you get more than $500 added value to the home anyway.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
I installed a wired system in my home long after it was built and it was much nicer than the wifi system ($250 consumer router), but it took a lot of sweat and, worse, time to put in. If you're building a house, and it only costs $500 to put in a upgrade-able network structure, I think you get more than $500 added value to the home anyway.
My thinking on that part, too, is this: if you have a bunch of cable you don't use, that still gives you a lot of choice for where to place what devices may use one or two of those cables, and you can have them routed in a way that can help keep them from having to go across the walls to reach a TV, for example, or be able to add or move access points, if positioning of something is bad.

FI, you install a new TV, with a Roku, wireless, only to find that there is enough interference to affect the quality, with your original layout. With spare runs, you could move your router/AP to a position with better line-of-sight. So, even with mainly wireless, there are advantages. I have seen some real-world examples of this, including two cases where the difference between full bandwidth and nothing required moving just a couple feet.
 

azazel1024

Senior member
Jan 6, 2014
901
2
76
I would not personally use combo cables. Greater chance of interference between the cables and at least in my prior experience, they tend not to be any cheaper than two seperate cables. Electrician is likely to charge the same for a LAN jack and a cable jack if it is a combo or two cables..
 

Crab Balls

Junior Member
Apr 5, 2015
18
0
0
I installed a wired system in my home long after it was built and it was much nicer than the wifi system ($250 consumer router), but it took a lot of sweat and, worse, time to put in. If you're building a house, and it only costs $500 to put in a upgrade-able network structure, I think you get more than $500 added value to the home anyway.

Exactly! That's my point. You got the walls open it would be foolish to not take advantage of this perfect opportunity. It's funny how people tend to resist this concept. One case I had in a large commercial building where the manager was resistant in running the network infrastructure for future expansion of an energy management system. Got him to do it and now he sees the benefit as adding equipment is effortless, painless, and quick. Old school thinking and future planning pays off.