Choosing a Network G, Super-G or Pre-N

Current computer with XP home is wired and runs fine on Broadband. (no lag) I am taking this puter and moving it upstairs and don't plan (want) to make the effort to run cable to it. New puter with XP Media will go in downstairs where the wire is now. I was concerned about possible lag going wireless with the puter upstairs and hoped to avoid it, if possible.

The wired connection is an assured 100 megabit (mb) connection with few errors. Going to wireless is less than an assured connect at maybe 54 megabit. You'll incur a little lag just due to the drop in speed. The router, if and when you implement WPA or WEP will add a bit more. Whether this will be noticed in the game will only be known later. BUT since you are moving from 1 user to possibly 2 or 3 at a time, then it's assured that there will be new lags.

The wireless machines will share the airspace since that's how it works and for simplicity each may get 1/2 the 54 mb speed or 27 mb. Again, if this translates to lag will have to be tested but in my experience it gets worse since wireless is prone to external interference.

To expect no lag would be a bit optimistic.

Bob

Thanks for the reply. Its understood that adding a puter to the network and doing it wireless will slow communication down as you stated. The question now is:

What is the best choice in network vendor and protocol to minimize the downside of slower communication and drop-out for the wireless puter? (The converse being which vendor and protocol will give the strongest signal and best comm. speed.) I have been reading about Pre-N, Super-G, G, etc. and about the suppliers, Belkin, Netgear, D-Link, etc. I am looking for comments based on recent experience other users have had.

Note: The network will all use the same protocol as I am starting from scratch. I do not plan to mix b/g as I understand that can slow things down too.

Some can't accept that wireless networks are not an exact science. The only way to determine which works best in your house is to try each model and select the winner.

Let me recant on the exact science. Yes, there is science behind it all but the analysis costs and time involved would be so great that by the time all the models were made and the engineering study was completed, the models you listed may be off the market.

The active antenna model will have a slight edge.

Bob

I assume you are referring to the Netgear Rangemax, Yes?

Didn't you mean to say that the active antenna model "may" have a slight edge.

Thanks for all your help.

If you have more than one active antenna, you get an edge since the better performing antenna can be used without the owner having to move the unit around for best performance.

You'll find the words to blur after a while.

Bob

You've confirmed much that I have been learning in my search to make this setup as robust as possible.

I plan to stick with one supplier for the network. Now it just comes down to who and is the cost of the proprietary protocols (Super-G or Pre-N) worth it over g.

Note: I expect to boost Broadband up to 6 Mbps since its locally available. My closest (2) neighbors are about 200 feet away so I hope not to have to worry about them too much. And as for the kids, if they make the popcorn and lose signal on their puter, they'll get the learning experience.

If you are willing to stray from the .g standard into the uncharted territory of Pre-N or SuperG, have you considered the MIMO stuff? I don't have a view or recommendation, just know that there is alot of talk about it.

Even with 6meg broadband, I personally don't think your wifi speeds will be impact your internet experience. If you have multiple streams going on the wifi network causing it's throughput on each stream to drop to 25% of expectations (i.e., a 100Mbs ''expectation'' real world throughput on the SuperG, chopped up 6 ways as Bob correctly notes in his thread, leaves each getting a 25Mbs stream), but only one of which is to the internet, you'll still have 4 times the capacity in that stream than your internet connection can feed. And if more than one of those wireless streams is to the internet, then your 6Mbs fat pipe to the internet will get divided too. So in the end, the wifi by itself will not slow the internet feed. Your biggest problem will be random dropouts caused by interference and other gremlins that are inherent in the nature of wifi, not internet lag, IMO.

Now if you are going to depend on the wifi for robust internal traffic, with lots of large files (such as multimedia) being transferred between inside systems over the wireless network rather than through a wired segment, that's a different kettle of fish. Yup, that will definitely show visible lag as the load increases.

dw