802.11ac: 533Mbps Over WiFi

Haswell isn’t all that’s new with the 2013 MacBook Air, Apple also integrated support for 802.11ac. I wrote a primer on 802.11ac last year, but I’ll provide a quick recap here. 802.11ac is a 5GHz-only WiFi standard, with support for wider channels (80/160MHz vs. 40MHz in 802.11n) and better spatial efficiency within those channels (256QAM vs. 64QAM in 802.11n). Today, that means a doubling of channel bandwidth and a 4x increase in data encoded on a carrier, which are responsible for the significant increase in bandwidth. Usable bandwidth should also see improvements on 802.11ac as high-end access points are all expected to ship with beam forming enabled.

The first 802.11ac implementations we saw were on the smartphone side with HTC’s One and Samsung’s Galaxy S 4. Both of these devices were single antenna/single spatial stream implementations with 80MHz channels and 256QAM, resulting in a max PHY rate of 433Mbps. In his review of the HTC One, Brian documented peak performance using iPerf and a TCP transfer. In a smartphone, such high bandwidth from WiFi is really useful for improving battery life (race to sleep). In a notebook, you get the same potential improvement in battery life but there’s one more: a wireless alternative to Gigabit Ethernet.

In a 3-stream configuration given what’s available today, we’re talking about a 1.33Gbps PHY rate. Assuming better link efficiency on a notebook compared to what we’ve seen in smartphones thus far, we could be talking about a real alternative to Gigabit Ethernet - at least close to an AP. While wired GbE is always going to give you a more consistent experience, the vast majority of homes aren’t pre-wired with Gigabit Ethernet. In living situations where you can’t just run a bunch of Cat6 everywhere, but still want high speed networking, 802.11ac could be a real alternative.

The 2013 MacBook Air adds support for 802.11ac via Broadcom’s BCM4360. The controller is capable of supporting up to 3 spatial streams, but in its implementation in the MacBook Air we see a maximum of 2 used. I fully expect the 2013 rMBPs to use a third antenna to leverage all 3 streams. BCM4360 supports 80MHz channels, 256QAM and short guard intervals. The result is a max PHY rate of 867Mbps.

ASUS sent me its RT-AC66U based on the same BCM4360 silicon (coincidentally the same controller that’s in the new Airport Extreme), which I promptly used for testing the new MacBook Air. The ASUS router and MacBook Air combination worked perfectly. In the same room as the AP, I had no issues seeing the maximum 867Mbps PHY rate (above).

Within about 5 - 8 feet of the AP, I saw an average of 533Mbps using iPerf. That’s real data sent over TCP:

WiFi Performance

A 3-stream solution could definitely rival wired GbE, at least for short distances.

I then went about characterizing 802.11ac performance vs. distance to get an idea for how performance fell off as I moved away from the AP. My desk and test area is in the corner of my office, which is where I put the ASUS 802.11ac router. Performance around my desk was always up around 533Mbps.

Move around 18 feet away but remain in the same room and measured performance dropped to 450Mbps. One set of walls and another 10 - 15 feet dropped performance to between 250Mbps - 340Mbps. Another set of walls without moving much further and I was looking at 200Mbps. When I went one more set of rooms away, or dropped down to a lower level, I saw pretty consistent falloff in performance - dropping down to 145Mbps. Note that my setup is pretty much the worst case scenario for longer distances. The AP isn’t centrally located at all. If I were setting up an 802.11ac network for max coverage, I’d probably see 300 - 400Mbps in most immediately adjacent rooms.

So 802.11ac on the new MacBook Air is pretty awesome, there's just one issue...

PCIe SSD Performance Real World 802.11ac Performance Under OS X
Comments Locked

233 Comments

View All Comments

  • Sm0kes - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    I would presume that the rMBP's would get the Thunderbolt 2 refresh if they are released around the same time.
  • mikk - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Do I miss something or isn't there an info about the exact memory configuration? In particular important for iGPU tests.
  • darwinosx - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Nobody is going to take such an immature poorly written post seriously. It screams high school kid whose daddy buys his laptop on sale at best Buy.
  • Subyman - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Fantastic read as always. Great job finding the ac file transfer culprit. Maybe some consulting work from Apple is in the future? :)
  • helloworldv2 - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    I bought the i7 version with 8GB ram and and 512GB SSD. I think with real world usage (some browsing, mail on, a little office, running some terminal stuff that utilizes both cores 100% for an hour or so), battery life is something like 5-7 hours. Pretty good, but rather disappointing in the light of the advertised 12 hours. It's by no means an 'all day computer'..
  • secretmanofagent - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Did you read what Apple said? 12 hours is for the i5 13" MBA.
    http://www.apple.com/macbook-air/features.html
    "Testing conducted by Apple in May 2013 using preproduction 1.3GHz dual-core Intel Core i5-based 13-inch MacBook Air units and preproduction 1.3GHz dual-core Intel Core i5-based 11-inch MacBook Air units. The wireless web test measures battery life by wirelessly browsing 25 popular websites with display brightness set to 12 clicks from bottom or 75%. The HD movie playback test measures battery life by playing back HD 720p content with display brightness set to 12 clicks from bottom or 75%. The standby test measures battery life by allowing a system, connected to a wireless network, to enter standby mode with Safari and Mail applications launched and all system settings left at default. Battery life varies by use and configuration. See www.apple.com/batteries for more information."

    Would be a shame to have to read, though.
  • helloworldv2 - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    I did read it. I knew I wouldn't get 12 hours out of it with normal use. However, I was expecting more than 5 hours, that's for sure. Also, many reviews hype how amazing the battery life is. IMO it's just OK. Definitely far from amazing..
  • Paapaa125 - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Are you sure you got the Haswell version? If you get only 5h with light usage using 75% brightness, something is totally wrong.
  • helloworldv2 - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Yes, I'm sure. With light usage, meaning nothing but a few tabs in FF, I get maybe 7-8 hours (display in full brightness). Rather unremarkable, I would say. It's a fine machine, nonetheless. Just don't expect miracles with the battery..
  • Paapaa125 - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Ah, try Safari and also set the brightness to 75%. Apple figure (12h) has been done with brightness set to 75%. This has a big impact to battery life. Set it to 50% and you might get even more.

    You can't compare figures which have been achieved with different brightness levels.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now