Closing Thoughts (for Now)

It’s really up to the notebook manufacturers to make sure that their WiFi implementations are up to snuff, and that means doing more than a quick test for connectivity in ideal test conditions. The QA and engineering departments at the very least ought to be testing at 5, 25, 50, and 100 feet, using standard Windows operations (i.e. not just IxChariot or iPerf). If there are issues, they should be ironed out before customers (and reviewers) get the product. With that said, a good foundation for wireless networking can go a long way toward improving bandwidth and stability of your connection.

Intel’s adapters aren’t always the best, but they’re rarely the worst, provided you get one of the non-budget offerings (i.e. avoid the 1000 and 2000 series parts). Realtek unfortunately comes in near the bottom of my ranking list in many cases, but most notebooks with Realtek WiFi are already cutting corners—they’re the 1x1:1 2.4GHz only solutions that are so common. The fact is, whether you're using an adapter from Qualcomm/Atheros, Broadcom, Marvell, Realtek, or Ralink, you can have a good adapter in some cases or a downright awful one in others. Broadly speaking, most solutions with two streams end up being better than any of the single stream solutions.

Of course, it's not just about spatial streams. Oddly enough, for a company that has been on the forefront of wireless technologies, as Anand detailed in our MacBook Air 2013 review OS X is not scaling TCP window size beyond 64KB and thus fails to get optimal performance out of 802.11ac. (I assume an OS/driver patch will address this at some point, but that hasn't happened yet AFAIK.) OS and driver issues can definitely put a clamp on WiFi performance, which again is why the notebook makers need to exercise due diligence and test in real-world scenarios to ensure their hardware is working properly.

As I said earlier, one of the best things about 802.11ac wireless is that it raises the bar for wireless adapters. No one can get away with selling you an 11ac adapter without including at the bare minimum a dual-band chipset with support for 5GHz and 2.4GHz networks. If you live in a packed subdivision or apartment complex, 5GHz networking is almost required these days. Ideally, though, I want more than just the bare minimum; I want two 80MHz streams on my 802.11ac connections, and three would be even better. Intel’s 7260 provides two streams, and so do most of the current crop of 802.11ac routers. Hopefully, we won’t see as many solutions going for the bottom of the barrel single stream implementations; they’re not worse than 802.11n, but they’re not much better than two stream 5GHz 802.11n either.

Consider this a warning shot across the bow of the notebook manufacturers: we’re going to be paying more attention to your wireless implementations going forward. I can understand why a $500 or less budget laptop needs to cut every corner possible to hit that price point, but when we’re looking at $1000+ laptops we don’t want to see such blemishes. It may not always be as painful as using a bad LCD on an otherwise excellent laptop, but a bad WiFi implementation that loses connectivity if you’re more than 40 feet from the router in can be even worse in some cases.

We’ll be doing some full reviews of 802.11ac routers in the near future, including the Western Digital AC1300 and Linksys AC1200. The full reviews will better characterize performance as well as other features. Until then, at least right now it looks like most 802.11ac routers are using two streams (867Mbps maximum theoretical throughput), which is at least a nice upgrade over the 300Mbps so many 802.11n routers offer. Meanwhile, Apple's latest AirPort Extreme and Time Capsule go whole hog and give us three streams and up to 1300Mbps. Now if I could just get (Windows) laptops with three 802.11ac streams, I might actually be willing to give up my Gigabit Ethernet and wires!

 

A Quick Test of Real-World Wireless Performance
POST A COMMENT

135 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    I think we're all smart enough here to know that 2.4G and 5G are referring to GHz, and personally I already think the text is too long (it's half the width of the graphs!) Sorry if that bothers you. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    "...middle of an enormous house..." That's basically why 5GHz isn't as big of a deal for you, as 2.4GHz likely isn't getting much interference from other networks. Generally speaking, big home = big yard = 2.4GHz is fine. Reply
  • andrewaggb - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    I did a double take when I saw 5G on the graphs, only took a second to realize what you meant but I agree it's mildly confusing.

    I enjoyed your comment about your wireless routers being unstable. I've used a lot of wireless products, indoors and outdoors, and it's very hit or miss. I've brand hopped, bought expensive, bought cheap, it's just not predictable at all. I consider stability the most important factor and would love some tests showing stability over the course of at least a month or two, including if the device recovered itself (reboots on it's own or whatever it needs to do), or you had to go reboot it.
    Reply
  • bobbozzo - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    IME, lockups are often caused by overheating (add ventilation holes and/or heatsinks), or flaky firmware (replace with DD-WRT). Reply
  • Yuriman - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    I'd like to see some testing done at greater distances - 40ft or more, if that's possible. How does it perform at the edge of its range? Reply
  • seapeople - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    I don't understand this "40ft" measurement you used. Are you trying to say femto-teslas? A unit of charge? That doesn't make sense to me, I only understand logical units that sensible people like me use. Reply
  • wbeyda - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    >>Apple's 3x3:3 dual-band implementation is better than 99% of Windows laptops (and yes, I just made up that statistic).

    Quit reading right there. I'm not gonna tolerate ignorance or bias in a tech review. Last time I checked Windows doesn't make laptops either. Windows is an operating system. Not a tyrannical software/hardware combo for brainwashed zealots.
    Reply
  • lmcd - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    Sorry but Windows OEMs tend to cheap out on WiFi. It's common, particularly outside of gaming laptops. And they're Windows OEMs. They aren't OS X OEMS or Linux OEMS (sadly), so Microsoft takes ownership. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    I don't use Apple laptops, but I've tested so many Windows laptops and do you know how many actually had 3x3:3 dual-band WiFi adapters? TWO. Two laptops in the past seven years. So you'll pardon me for saying that the Windows vendors are being totally cheap. Sure, you can custom order something better from some OEMs, but the vast majority of Windows laptops purchased by consumers come pre-built with single-band, single-antenna solutions. Reply
  • Modus24 - Tuesday, July 09, 2013 - link

    How many of them cost as much as the MBP? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now