Amped Wireless R20000G, SR20000G, and UA2000: Routers, Repeaters, and Adapters (Oh My!)
by Jarred Walton on June 23, 2012 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- wireless
- Networking
- 802.11n
- Amped Wireless
Amped UA2000 Directional Wireless Adapter
The router and repeater are products I’m familiar with, and I’ve used quite a few wireless routers over the years. I’ve also used plenty of wireless adapters (mostly on a variety of laptops), but this is the first time I’ve had a chance to use a directional wireless adapter. Obviously, a directional adapter needs to be oriented such that the antenna points towards the target router (or repeater or access point). As such, it’s not likely to be a good fit for a mobile device—unless you enjoy turning to face your router when using your laptop? But what about for a desktop setup that doesn’t get moved around much if at all, particularly if the desktop in question is located in a place where you can’t (or don’t want to) run an Ethernet cable? Can using a directional wireless adapter help out? That’s what I wanted to find out!
| Amped Wireless UA2000 Directional Wireless Adapter Specifications | |
| Wireless Standard | 802.11a/b/g/n |
| Frequency Band | 2.4GHz, 5.0GHz |
| Wireless Speed |
2.4GHz: 300Mbps (Rx), 300Mbps (Tx) 5.0GHz: 300Mbps (Rx), 300Mbps (Tx) |
| Amplifier |
Dual Low Noise Amplifier Dual 2.4GHz Power Amplifiers Dual 5.0GHz Power Amplifiers |
| Wireless Sensitivity | -95 dBm |
| Wireless Output Power | 26 dBm (max) |
| Wireless Security | WEP, WPA, WPA2, WPA Mixed, WPS |
| Antenna | High Gain Dual Band, Dual Polarity Directional Antenna |
| Interface | USB 2.0 |
| Warranty | 1 Year |
| Setup Requirements |
Wireless 802.11a/b/g/n, 2.4/5.0GHz Network PC with Windows 2000, XP (32/64 bit), Vista (32/64 bit) or 7 (32/64 bit) Mac OSX 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, or 10.7 CD/DVD drive 100 MB of free disk space One available USB 2.0 port (Two USB 2.0 ports for maximum performance) |
| Package Contents |
1 x High Power Wireless-N Directional Dual Band USB Adapter 1 x Dual USB 2.0 Cable 1 x Setup Guide 1 x CD: User's Guide and Software 1 x Laptop Monitor Mounting Clip |
| Price | Online starting at $76 |
This is Amped’s second directional wireless adapter; the first was the UA1000, which only supported 2x2:2 2.4GHz connections. Like the R/SR20000G router/repeater, the UA2000 is a dual-band product, again capable of up to 300Mbps connection speeds (2x2:2 MIMO). Amped uses a Ralink chipset this time, but again the amplifiers, antennas, firmware, and drivers are customized to offer improved performance. (The UA1000, incidentally, uses a Realtek chipset like the R/SR20000G.)
The front of the UA2000 has a glossy black curved surface; I don’t know if the curvature helps to focus the signal or if it’s purely for looks, but I’d assume it serves some purpose other than aesthetics. Anyway, that’s the side you “point” towards the router for best performance; the adapter will still pick up a signal even if it’s not aimed at your router, but throughput and signal strength definitely suffers. Other than the name and USB connector, the only other features on the UA2000 are a WPS button and a clip on the back.
Note that the USB cable that comes with the UA2000 has two connectors for the host PC/laptop; the primary connector is for regular functionality while the secondary connector allows the adapter to draw more power and operate in a high performance mode. I tested with and without the second plug connected but didn't experience any difference in performance. I asked Amped why this might be, and they suggested that perhaps the use of a higher performance USB 3.0 port allowed the UA2000 to run at maximum speed. My impression is that the second port is only necessary if your PC/laptop doesn't deliver sufficient power on the primary port.
Looking at the back, the clip is there so you can clip it to a laptop display, but you can also use it try to orient the adapter properly. For the latter, I’d find some other sort of mounting mechanism much more useful. Right now, the UA2000 is very light and has a tendency to move around if you bump the cable at all, which can create problems. Amped informed me that they’re looking into a better stand that will make the adapter less likely to accidentally shift positioning, but if you’re really considering buying the UA2000 I would recommend creating/buying some sort of mount where you can clip the adapter into place.
You can choose to use either Windows’ wireless networking control panel or go with the Amped interface. Even when using the Windows control panel to manage connections, you can still see signal strength and some other information in the Amped drivers. There’s really not much to say that isn’t apparent from the above gallery; the UA2000 works like any other wireless adapter. Ah, but you’re here to find out how good it is, right?
Full results are on the next page, but the UA2000 definitely delivers on higher throughput when you’re not located right next to your wireless router—at least, it does when compared to a USB thumbstick adapter and built-in Intel Advanced-N 6235 wireless in a laptop. RSSI (Received Signal Strength Indication) is also generally better—sometimes very much so, depending on the router/adapter combination. At our moderate distance test location, performance was generally better than with a thumbstick adapter, with anywhere from ~10% to upwards of 50% better throughput and 5-10 dB better RSSI. At our stressful location (outdoors and around 60 feet from the router), the UA2000 really excels, delivering a more stable connection and at times more than doubling transfer rates.
Obviously, measuring wireless networking performance can be a bit tricky as there are numerous factors in play, but if you’re trying to connect to a router that’s farther away (e.g. sharing a wireless network with a neighbor), I could see the UA2000 being extremely useful. If you have multiple PCs that you need to connect, though, the cost of the UA2000 is quite high and it might be more economical to simply buy the SR20000G instead.
The big sticking point here is going to be the price; the UA2000 currently sells for $80 online at Amazon or $90 at Newegg. Compare that with other dual-band 2x2:2 wireless adapters and the UA2000 costs twice as much as the Belkin E9L6000 and three times as much as the Rosewill RNX-N600UBE; if you drop 5GHz support, you can get 300Mb USB adapters for as little as $15. But of course, those adapters are all omnidirectional, and reliability and driver support is questionable at best on some of the least expensive products. Given the performance and general stability of the connection you get with the UA2000, personally I think it’s the most interesting of the three Amped Wireless products I’m looking at today. Let’s hit the benchmarks next before wrapping things up with some recommendations.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
28 Comments
View All Comments
Conficio - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
I wonder why Amped Wireless would not combine the repeater and the directional antenna. As Jarred mentioned, for a mobile device a directional antenna is a bit inconvenient, especially if it does easily move.However for a repeater it would be ideal. Place your repeater in a quite weak spot and use the power of the directional antenna to still get a good signal. Then broadcast the repeated signal onmi-directional. That should cut down on the interference too. And a repeater is a heavier object to begin with and stationary. Sure if you don't need it, then you won't need it. But if you have a tricky situation, or simply a very large property (lets say a boats house or an artists shed) then this should be a great solution.
Even better would be to add an additional directional antenna to the main router and the ability to use different channels for the directional link. That could make a point to point link that would cut down on interference even more.
JarredWalton - Sunday, June 24, 2012 - link
I believe Amped does support this, though you'd need to provide the antennas yourself (Amped sells them, though). The only problem is that you'd basically have one antenna directional and pointed at the router with the second omnidirectional, so your total omnidirectional signal strength would likely be limited.Conficio - Monday, June 25, 2012 - link
Thanks Jarred for clarifying this.In my mind that poses one more question, is the directional USB stick a 2x2 config? are both antennas directional? Or is it only one antenna?
But I think you are right, just replacing an antenna with a directional one is not the same as building a real repeter that has a separate notion of (set of) input antenna (directional) and set of output antenna (omnidirectional). Hence there is the opportunity for a company like Amped.
Another question. Is it possible to use only one band (5GHz) to talk to the router and the other band (2.4 GHz) to redistribute? The same for channels? Which should get down the interference even better.
JarredWalton - Monday, June 25, 2012 - link
AFAIK, the UA2000 has both antennas pointing the same direction. It can also pick up other routers that aren't being pointed at, but range and performance drop considerably.As for routing one band to the router and the other for talking to devices, I asked Amped about this, and they said while in theory it's possible to have the repeater send wireless traffic over the other connection (when present), they chose not to do it this way to "keep things simple" or something. If you use a 2.4GHz only router (or disable the 5GHz channel), then 5GHz traffic will get routed over the 2.4GHz radio; likewise, you could disable your router's 2.4GHz channel and have the repeater's 2.4GHz traffic route over 5GHz. That might actually be interesting to test out.
mike8675309 - Tuesday, June 26, 2012 - link
I actually do that in my home. Using DD-WRT I have a WDS network setup with 3 dual radio routers. Clients connect on the 2.4GHz antennas and the routers talk to each other over the 5GHz antennas.PS3, Xbox, Dish DVRs connect with ethernet and get a 5Ghz connection to the internet router, perfect for streaming from Netflix or Dish.
This eliminates the issue with 1/2 the bandwidth when using the same radio to talk to clients as you use for repeating to the main router, which is what is happening for most repeaters in the market.
tlcqualityrentals - Tuesday, July 3, 2012 - link
Lots of great information on this site. If only I could figure out what you guys are talking about. LOL. I had narrowed down my selection to the Amped Wireless R20000g to replace my years 5+ year old Linksys router/modem. The Linksys was fine for my home. I have recently added a cottage and a pavilion to my property. Both are approximately 300 to 400 feet from the Linkysys router. It is imperative that i provide good network coverage in the cottage. My question to you is, how would you solve this issue? What items would you buy?Thanks for any suggestions.
Much appreciated.
Rhonda
bman212121 - Monday, June 25, 2012 - link
One of the biggest issues when trying to pick a wireless AP for range is dechipering through all of the claimed power ratings. I bought an AP that was listed as having a 400mW power rating. I figured that meant that it was a 200mW radio output and 200mW for the 3dbi antennas on it. That is technically true but the issue with N is that those numbers are also divided by the number of antennas you have. So in reality it was 100mW per amp with 100mW (3dbi gain) for each antenna.So in the case of this amped wireless device it would be 125mW (21Db) amps and 5dbi antennas (26dbi EIRP per antenna, making 29dbi total power output) This would make it slightly more powerful than the average home router but for devices where you can replace the antennas you will get more power by having bigger antennas than what is provided on this device.
Case in point, I was floored when our old Linksys WRT54G actually out ranged my 400mw N access point because it used the same 100mw (20Dbm) output and a 2dbi antenna. I'm guessing it must have had a slightly better method of determining the best path and probably a bit more sensitive receiver. I was already planning on swapping the antennas with 9dbi rubber duckies. Once I did that then my AP was able to travel farther however location seems to be far more important for range than anything you can do on the AP side.
GullLars - Sunday, July 8, 2012 - link
"If I had been wise, I would have tabulated all the individual results and come up with a throughput distribution graph (similar to what Brian does with our smartphone Speedtest results), but unfortunately I only considered doing that after the fact. It would also become rather difficult to compare results between routers and adapters using such charts. Still, if there’s enough desire for such testing, I can revisit the subject with a smaller article. Either leave a comment or drop me an email if you’re interested in such testing."Yes, when there are very variable results, using result distribution graphs can give very important information averages leave out, like best and worst case, and consistency of performance.
I'd rather have a wireless connection at average 80Mbps ±10Mbps than average 140Mbps with drops to 40Mbps 10% of the time. Especially if this is also reflected in latency. I'm kinda surprised there were no meassuring of ping, just throughput. Ping and ping spikes are very important for how it feels to use wireless connections.
For most rewiews of IO devices there is mention of both throughput and latency, why not also do this for wireless?