I actually have an asus rt-n58u router (which is SUPER fast and strong), yet I could only get like 5 mbs on my prime! Great signal, but no speed for some reason.
I had the 2.4ghz N-only on channel 11 originally. When I moved it down to 1 or 3 in the 20/40mhz range, it upped the connection speed 5x from where it was so my transformer is connecting at 54-72 mbs instead of the 19 before.
Odd, but give it a try on your router and see what works!
That kind of makes sense - lower frequencies are better able to penetrate solid substances, so it might make the signal strength better.
It's very odd, however, that a drop of only 40 MHz would have such a huge influence if that was the reason. Are you in a highly-populated area? I think it's more likely that there was interference on the other channel. Do you have any other wireless devices to test with? Did you try putting it back to the original channel and seeing if the speeds went back down? Also, were you holding the tablet in the same position during both tests?
I live in a small condo complex, but I used wifi analyzer to see what channels the other networks were in... At my old 11 channel, there were zero, while at 3 there are 2 others to contend with. My laptop works at 300 mpbs at either channel but the prime seems to perform much much better at the lower frequencies.
Odd part is that the signal strength was the same between channels 3 and 11, the only thing that changes was the speed thoroughput. Suddenly the speed listed in Android went from 5mpbs to 65 ish by just changing the channel, yet the db- signal strength remained very good.
If anyone can explain this, I would be all ears.
I recently used Wifi Analyzer to change to channel 11 from 1. Why? Farther away from my router 11 was stronger than 1. So maybe speed is sacrificed by distance & vice versa? Wifi Analyzer also tells which channel is "better" but is it using "better" as determined by???
Interesting, I am playing around with the channels as well, and there seem to be differences in speed of each channel.
I live alone in the woods, where definitely no intereferences from other WiFi Networks appears.
Channel 11 works slightliy faster than channel 1, but I have not tested many configs yet.
The signal strength is not the issue because I am sitting right next to the router, but the speed behaves odd.
I cannot connect to my DLINK DIR 655 on channels 6 and 13, no problems on others.
The Prime WiFi wierdness continues
Lock-N-Load said:
I recently used Wifi Analyzer to change to channel 11 from 1. Why? Farther away from my router 11 was stronger than 1. So maybe speed is sacrificed by distance & vice versa? Wifi Analyzer also tells which channel is "better" but is it using "better" as determined by???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It determines better based on the channel of other networks in range. So the higher the channel rating, the fewer other networks there are in that frequency range.
TF201 | XDA Premium
looking at this from a physics standpoint, this makes sense. lower frequencies use more energy and so at a higher energy, you're able to pump out more speed. I'm guessing it's the prime that's using more energy since the router is not the device in question...
interesting though...you would think that it wouldn't make such a big difference!
FWIW, I've always gotten much better performance on my wireless network in both terms of speed and connectivity, using channel 1.
what app are you guy suing to test speeds? Speedtest.net
Lock-N-Load said:
what app are you guy suing to test speeds? Speedtest.net
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. That seems to be the standard app for speed testing. If you really want to be accurate, the best thing you can do is transfer a large file locally over your WiFi network.
Lock-N-Load said:
I recently used Wifi Analyzer to change to channel 11 from 1. Why? Farther away from my router 11 was stronger than 1. So maybe speed is sacrificed by distance & vice versa? Wifi Analyzer also tells which channel is "better" but is it using "better" as determined by???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interference. Other Overlapping wireless routers.
I'm a little skeptical of the OPs findings, as the difference in channels (in the tens of Mhz range) shouldn't make a significant (and definitely not a factor of five) difference in bandwidth. It is interesting though. Can you do some controlled test runs and provide the specific data?
I am just as confused as everyone else...but trust me it makes a big difference.
The DB rating at channel 11 was -40 (lower better), while the DB rating at channel 1 was -38. Again, channel 1 is crowded with other routers, yet 11 or even 14 is empty (no one knows how to properly use their router here!)
I would have full bars (according to android) at the higher wifi channels, yet the prime would only show 5 mbs, sometimes 19, but most of the time around 13-19mbs (per android menu, speedtest around 7 mbs). When I moved to channel 1, the prime (and my droid charge) would go to 52-65mbs (android, 13-15 using speedtest)...but my computer would go to 144mbs only because of no channel bonding.
Moving to 3, a 40mhz channel, my charge would get 52 mbs and my computer bonded to a full 300mbs. Channel 11 is a 40mhz channel too so not sure why 3 is any different than 11 that is also 40mhz, but the speed rates in android is consistently higher.
The test is through one wall, about 20 feet from the router. Could be just my router, but who knows! I have an Asus rt-n56u router, with dual bands. I would be curious to see what the tests would be at the 5ghz band if that was ever enabled in android.
My tests were in a controlled place, same spot for laptop, droid charge and my prime. All i did was change the wifi channels from 11 to 7 to 3 to 1 and see how it changed the speeds.
I measured the rates speed provided in android from the wifi interface and also used speedtest on all 3 to rate actual speeds. speedtest results went from 6-7mbs at channels 11, to around 15-16 at 1. Just checked again this morning and still faster.
Here is a wiki article picture on the bands:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NonOverlappingChannels2.4GHzWLAN-en.svg
I also got a significant speed boost from moving off channel 11 onto 1. Went from 3mbit to 14mbit
I am about to conduct my own channel 1 versus channel 11 tests right now...
I've just tried it on mine and Channel 1 and 11 were near identical and 3 halved my DL speed.
Did the most scientific test I could. Never moved tablet, same environment, same location, 10 feet from router, Los Angeles server, ran 5 tests as quick as possible on each channel - with 3 minutes in between to change channels and let the change settle - and then spent 3 minutes watching dbm strengths on each after all tests complete
CHANNEL 11 =2462mhz
0. ping ms/ down mbps / up mbps
1. 24 / 20.15 / 1.15
2. 22 / 20.44 / 1.16
3. 21 / 19.92 / 1.16
4. 18 / 21.81 / 1.17
5. 24 / 21.26 / 1.17
*high and low dbm over 3 minutes -36 to -47
CHANNEL 1 = 2412mhz
0. ping ms/ down mbps / up mbps
1. 21 / 19.84 / 1.16
2. 22 / 20.57 / 1.15
3. 23 / 21 / 1.13
4. 21 / 20.79 / 1.16
5. 23 / 20.34 / 1.15
*high and low dbm over 3 minutes -39 to -43
Results = Negligible differences with 1 real benefit to channel 11 shown by Wifi Analyzer is that it reachs around my home farther. Channel 11 seemed to stick to better dbm ratings but had wider range in high to low but stayed mostly in 30's. Channel 11 got the best average up speeds barely. Channel 11 got the best average down speeds barely. Channel 1 barley had best average png. As well, of the other neighbors signals I pick up, most are in 1 and 6 - no one on 11 but me. Thus, I will stay on channel 11 for all obvious reasons.
Lock-N-Load said:
Did the most scientific test I could. Never moved tablet, same environment, same location, 10 feet from router, Los Angeles server, ran 5 tests as quick as possible on each channel - with 3 minutes in between to change channels and let the change settle - and then spent 3 minutes watching dbm strengths on each after all tests complete
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like maybe you conducted your tests close enough to the router that the bottleneck is in your internet connection, rather than the wireless connection. Try again far enough away that the connection drops to like half of that speed on channel 11. If the speeds are still the same then, that will be strong evidence that it's local conditions causing the speed boost for those who report it.
This may be related to your routers and not the TF.
ragesoss said:
Looks like maybe you conducted your tests close enough to the router that the bottleneck is in your internet connection, rather than the wireless connection. Try again far enough away that the connection drops to like half of that speed on channel 11. If the speeds are still the same then, that will be strong evidence that it's local conditions causing the speed boost for those who report it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Easy enough.. will do maybe tomorrow at same time of day to try to best mimic and remove confounding variables best as possible (though saturday may have more congestion as people are home). Either way, will do in my living room, farthest point from my router. Will be interesting to see how distance changes results.
In this day and age of 802.11n I would have thought that a tablet would consistently connect at speeds of 100 - 150 Mbps, even 300 Mbps doesn't seem like an unreasonable expectation if the signal strength is good. However, the fastest I've seen on my Tab Z is 72 Mbps. Is this speed a hardware limitation? Anyone connecting faster?
Answer:
What makes 802.11n different is the specification’s support of multiple radios and antennas that can transmit/receive multiple data streams – called spatial streams. In 802.11n vernacular, these send and receive antenna configurations are noted as 1×1, 1×2, 2×2, or 3×3. These numbers indicate how many transmit and receive antennas and radios are in an 802.11n access point (AP) or client. They determine how many different spatial streams of data can be sent at one time to improve signal reception.
More antennas and streams mean faster speeds, less dead zones, fewer dropped connections, and better coverage. 802.11n 1×1 Wi-Fi adapters don’t take advantage of 802.11n’s multi-stream capabilities so they can only reach a maximum data rate of 72 Mbps. A 1×2 802.11n adapter with two receive streams can double the maximum data rate to 150 Mbps. Take it up to 3×3, the maximum data link can reach 450 Mbps.
dph3055 said:
In this day and age of 802.11n I would have thought that a tablet would consistently connect at speeds of 100 - 150 Mbps, even 300 Mbps doesn't seem like an unreasonable expectation if the signal strength is good. However, the fastest I've seen on my Tab Z is 72 Mbps. Is this speed a hardware limitation? Anyone connecting faster?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not try Googling "wireless n 72mbps" - you'll see loads of stuff about this on various devices
GretaLewd said:
Why not try Googling "wireless n 72mbps" - you'll see loads of stuff about this on various devices
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good and how do we go from 72 mbps to 100 mbps or more.
There are solutions for this?
Try using 5Ghz router.
b3stie said:
Good and how do we go from 72 mbps to 100 mbps or more.
There are solutions for this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With 5Ghz you can get 300mbps.
b3stie said:
Good and how do we go from 72 mbps to 100 mbps or more.
There are solutions for this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i
i have a dual band rooter and my phone dont get 150 mbs i get 72 in fact exist a solition ? to get 108 mBps ?
b3stie said:
i
i have a dual band rooter and my phone dont get 150 mbs i get 72 in fact exist a solition ? to get 108 mBps ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
probably your device connects to 2.4Ghz band on your router. Check your settings to connect it in 5Ghz mode.
Rootk1t said:
probably your device connects to 2.4Ghz band on your router. Check your settings to connect it in 5Ghz mode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i check this and i have the same problem i buy a new rooter and i have the same problem
Did somebody here test the Wlan speed from the device ?
I have a european Honor 7. in the technical features it has AC Wlan. But my fastes connection is 200 mbit sitting 1 meter from my Netgear Nighthawk R8000 ( 1300 mbit)
my fritzbox 7490 the same it connects only to the 40MHz Band ......for me it has only Wlan-N standard .My Galaxy S6 edge shows 850 mbit .
mybe its a softwarebug or Honor is joking us?
Which app are you using to measure? I could test the same on my Asus 66 and share.
Set your wireless router to set only on ac mode and check if you have option in router
The theoretical speed has very little to do with real world speed. I get 90 mbit/s up as well as down speed with file transfer tests. This is about what you can expect from a single tiny antenna with ac in a phone. This is way bettet than I have hade with other ac phones.
I have a Netgear R7000 router and 100/100 fiber.
Skickat från min PLK-L01 via Tapatalk
my Galaxy S6 shows 800 mbit network speed in wlan settings..my Honor max 200 mbit.Honor can only connect to 40 Hz Band but my S6 to 80 Hz
On my tests with Honor 7 I receive next results (to/from FTP server in my local net) :
150Mbit connect, 5 Ghz band, N protocol (my wifi router is N only, no AC)
~13 Mbytes/sec download, ~14.5-15 Mbytes/sec upload .
With AC wifi AP you may receive more speed.
It's very good result for mobile phone, more that really need in a smartphone.
mmx_4 said:
With AC wifi AP you may receive more speed.
It's very good result for mobile phone, more that really need in a smartphone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With all respect, it bothers me to the brim when someone questions in this kind of forums (developers, diy, craft, etc...) if some other user needs or doesn't need. It's not that we need it, it's that we can, it's that we want to do it, because it can be done, the device specs tell you you can. That's why we are hobbyists.
I'm getting also only
I'm also getting 200mbps on honor 7 when using android 6.0 but before on android 5.x I got 433 ,so something is wrong with the new update ?
I can connect my H7 with the lower 5Ghz channels, 36-48, but if I switch my router to any of the higher channels, (I have channels 52 -161 available, but most interested in ch149), the phone doesn't see them when scanning. Other devices I have see these higher channels.
Does anyone connect with the higher 5Ghz channels? Not sure if I have a problem or if the H7 only sees the lower channels.
Well say channel 149 vs channel 136
the power output needed to "pickup" the signal is different by a massive amount its possible the chipset doesn't support it
It might be a regional thing, like we have on 2.4Ghz and channels 12, 13 and 14. First though was just curious if anyone is connected at the higher channels on 5Ghz.
btb55 said:
It might be a regional thing, like we have on 2.4Ghz and channels 12, 13 and 14. First though was just curious if anyone is connected at the higher channels on 5Ghz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Highest channel i can connect to is 128 on my uk router (Huawei HG635)
Thanks for that, interesting that you can go to 128, what country are you in? Highest my phone will connect to is 48. I wonder what's at play that decides how high it can go? It's not the router that is limiting this for me, its the phone.
For a bit more info about the channel bands have a look here, http://www.digitalairwireless.com/wireless-blog/t-eirp/quick-guide-to-5ghz-uk-part-2.html
I'm limited to band A lower with my Honor 7, still wondering if its a regional limit and because my phone is region UK it's limited to ch 36-48.
Hi,
I have Xiaomi mi 10 it's very slow at 5ghz wifi, only 10 mbps compared to 2.4 ghz reach round 97 mbps.
I have fiber internet speed 500 mbps. I tried iPhone and other Android devices with 5ghz wifi it reach 240 mbps, but in my device only 10 mbps even with change many settings in my phone and router.
Anyone facing same problem?
you can try to change the channel of the wifi signal.
I have no problem with 5ghz band, 250mbps right now.
i have 298
-fluffy- said:
i have 298
Click to expand...
Click to collapse