Wireless N with DSL

[dlbaynecpa]

I am considering replacing my wireless G modem with a wireless N. But I am wondering if the increase in router speed will be limited due by my DSL speed. I do not see the corrolation between the two speeds. My DSL speeds are 4.73 mbps download and 0.64 mbps upload. The wireless N speeds for the routers I am considering range from 300 mbps to 450 mbps. So I am definitely missing something in my understanding of the speeds.

The use would be a stand-alone business computer (XP), a Macbook laptop, an IPad and Voice over Internet.

Is there an article or posting that will help me understand the corrolations, if any?

Thanks,
Don

[dane]

You could check to see if your current WiFi is a bottleneck by doing a speed test from a wired system and a wifi one.

A new WiFi-N router will not only deliver better performance than a "G" or "B" unit, it will also provide better coverage, with about 2x the total area covered. It also allows faster access to local resources, for example a shared file server, local network backup or media library.

If you do decide to upgrade, Sonic.net now offers a new DSL modem/router/firewall with powerful WiFi-N, statefull firewall and remote diagnostics and management. Details here: http://www.sonic.net/solutions/home/int ... /equipment

[Guest]

Also this this tool or similar to find a vacant (or least competition) channel for your Wi-Fi
http://www.metageek.net/products/inssider/

[dane]

With the Sonic.net equipment, it includes automatic best channel selection.

[dlbaynecpa]

Is my thinking correct here, generally speaking?
If my fastest download speed is 5 megabytes per second, that equates to 40 megabits per second.
If I connect four devices (two ethernet and two wireless) to my router, I would need a max of 160 megabits per second.
As long as I am limited to DSL, if I connect two additional wireless devices (on occasion), the highest router speed that would make a difference would be 300 mbps.
A reason for a higher speed router is that they often have better range due to dual bands. The distance between my router and my wireless devices is at the most 50 ft. (Two story wood frame home)
Another reason for more available speed would to be ready for Fusion in Orange County <grin>

[klui]

N routers have better reception because of the extra antennae, not because it's dual band.

You also need to remember wireless is basically a shared medium so your maximum bandwidth afforded from an AP will be shared among all wireless devices for that band. Devices that operate in that band--telephones, monitors, etc.--will also have a negative impact on your throughput. Your client devices can also have an impact on the speed you get.

[thulsa_doom]

Is my thinking correct here, generally speaking?
If my fastest download speed is 5 megabytes per second, that equates to 40 megabits per second.

It is highly unlikely that you are getting 40 megabits per seconds over your ADSL1 connection. If you get a 300mbps wireless connection locally, this will be greatly useful for local data transfer between hosts on your LAN, but will likely not result in huge gains in your connection to the rest of the world.

[dane]

Your DSL connection is 6Mbps, so as long as the wireless goes at least that fast, an upgrade won't be noticeable for Internet traffic.

For LAN traffic - system backups to a local file server, access media from a local server, features like AirPlay, faster wireless would help.