802.11n performance (5100 vs 5300)

I got a 802.11n router for Christmas (D-Link DIR 655) and have been running some performance benchmarks on it. Please post your setup and performance results in this thread. I am trying to get an actual conclusion on the benefits of the 5300 over the 5100 (more antennas is good for theoretical speed/range, but actual numbers are few and far between).

Test Setup:
D-Link DIR655 - 2.4GHz 802.11BGN, 20MHz channel width (default setting)
Vista x64 on x200 Tablet w/ webcam (10' from router), Vista x64 on Desktop (GigE)
All using WPA2 AES (unless otherwise noted), 2.54GB transfer (2 files using File and Folder Sharing)
Reports at 130Mbps Access Connections/D-Link admin, 65 Mbps Task Manager

802.11G (Router G only, reports at 54 Mbps all) - 16:33, 20.95 Mbps (44-65% utilization)
802.11N (Router N only) Max Performance - 6:05, 57.01 Mbps (95% network utilization)
802.11N (Router N only) Max Power Saving - 6:40, 52.02 Mbps (95% network utilization)
802.11N (Router BGN) Max Performance - 6:07, 56.70 Mbps
802.11N (Router BGN) Performance Transmit - 8:22, 41.45 Mbps (74% utilization)
802.11N (Router BGN w/ passive G client) Performance - 9:13, 37.64 Mbps
802.11N (Router BGN w/ active G client) Performance - 19:05, 18.17 Mbps
Gigabit Ethernet Receive - 0:59, 352.67 Mbps
Gigabit Ethernet Transmit - 4:00, 85.70 Mbps

Intel Proset Wireless Tools 802.11N (2.4GHz, 20 MHz channel width) -
Transmit: 100% of packets at 1x60mbps
Receive: 60% packets at 2x60mbps, 35% packets at 2x54mbps, 5% at lower speeds

According to benchmarks I have seen online, the DIR-655 should be capable of ≈110mbps real world transfer so the 5100 may be limiting throughput (or I may have some setting wrong). Update, 40MHz channel width (on the router and the adapter) is required to achieve these speeds. Using 40MHz width and either WPA2 or unencrypted gave me every bit of this performance for receive and 75% of it for transmit (the Intel 5100 may be limiting me here [although I couldn't do any better pushing files using Gigabit Ethernet either]).

2.4 GHz 40 MHz "Fat channel" width FORCED (this is NOT default for 2.4 GHz)
300 Mbps in Access Connections/D-Link client list, 150Mbps Task Manager

802.11N (Router BGN, WPA2) Max Power Savings Receive - 3:08, 111.10Mbps (85% utilization)
802.11N (Router BGN, WPA2) Max Power Savings Transmit - 4:12, 82.88Mbps (62% utilization)
802.11N (Router N only, NO ENCRYPTION) Max Performance Receive - 3:16, 106.56Mbps
802.11N (Router N only, NO ENCRYPTION) Max Performance Transmit - 4:08, 84.22Mbps

Intel Proset Wireless Tools 802.11N (2.4GHz, 40 MHz channel width) -
Transmit: 26% of packets at 1x60mbps, 25% at 1x54, 24% at 1x48, 25% at 1x36
Receive: 10% of packets at 2x60mbps, 29% at 2x54, 40% at 2x48, 16% at 2x36, 5% lower

I await performance results from people with the Wi-Fi 5300/5350/4965 for comparison to determine the value of those options vs. the 5100 (which seems very good as long as you configure it properly).

UPDATE August 2009:

I recently acquired and installed an Intel 5300 Wi-Fi card in my x200 Tablet. I repeated the same transfer from the same position and found the following:

802.11N (5 300, Router BGN, WPA2) Max Power Savings Receive - 3:10, 109.54Mbps
802.11N (5 300, Router BGN, WPA2) Max Power Savings Transmit - 3:12, 108.37Mbps

Therefore, I have reached the conclusion that the 5300 is NOT noticeably better than the 5100 for receiving. However, it is marginally better for transmitting and seems to achieve symmetry. Disclaimer - the 5300 tests were performed under Windows 7 x64 with a newer driver, I do NOT have the 5100 card anymore to verify the numbers under these conditions.

 

I found that N performance on the 2.4 Ghz band is lack luster. I switched back to G because my N performance was terrible. I've hear that 5ghz routers will offer much better performance.

When I had my router (Trendnet TEW-633GR) in N mode, according to windows it would flucuate between 117mpbs-1mpbs and was not consitent at all. Based on my experience and the numbers you posted, I don't think it is worth it to run N on the 2.4 band.

 

I doubt you'd see a real-world difference in your home network
it's the likes of yours truly who spends mucho time in internet cafes with 20+ other computers around where you MIGHT see some difference, with the added antennas and input/output channels

 

I know that I won't see a real world difference in my Internet speeds. In fact, my home DSL is so slow that 802.11b was plenty adequate for me for the last 5 years.

I switched to 802.11N for large file transfers (e.g. video files) between computers in my own house.

My performance for 802.11N @ 2.4GHz is adequate and consistent (and it seems about 3 times as fast as 802.11G on the same router (I clocked 802.11G at 19.54mbps for the same files).

My goal of this thread is not so much to improve my speeds, but to see what (if any) difference exists between the Wi-Fi 5100 and 5300. I have recommend numerous times on this forum that the Wi-Fi 5100 is adequate and the 5300 is a waste of money for most people. However, I would like some real world performance numbers (not the Intel spec sheet, or this Centrino 2 preview).

 

Gotcha!
And I support this investigation

 

I'd like to hear more as well. Although N is still pretty slow when gige networking is cheap enough if you don't mind cables around (going through walls ).

 

jonlumpkin
when you set up the router as "WPA2-PSK (AES)" the limiting factor becomes the chip in the router. As it has to crypt every single packet with cipher of 256bit lenght.

And the fact that you have actual speeds of ~6.5Mb/s is not bad at all. Comared to my old Zyxel 660HTW which only could do 2-3Mb/s...it had trendnet chipset, which is not great.

So, you either change sth in your setup, or stop wasting your time

 

I will also run the test w/o encryption to see if that is slowing me down.

I have posted updated stats and come to the following conclusions.

802.11N is able to deliver the speeds that 802.11G promises (≈54 Mbps) but can't deliver (I only get 21 Mbps w/ 802.11G). However, I am unable to get near the promised 802.11N speeds (300 Mbps for Wi-Fi 5100, 450 Mbps for Wi-Fi 5300, 113 Mbps for DIR-655 according to this review).

This performance is adequate, but I was hoping for slightly more. My connection is clearly the bottleneck because I can achieve 352.67 Mbps receiving and 85.70 Mbps transmitting using Gigabit Ethernet with the same setup (I am bottlenecked by my hard drive at this point).

On the plus side, the Intel Wi-Fi 5100 is comparable for both transmitting and receiving. The Wi-Fi 5100 has 2 receive but only 1 transmit antenna (contrast with 3 each for the Wi-Fi 5300). However, I was able to achieve 73% of my receive speed when transmitting under 802.11N (for some odd reason my transmit speed was only 24% of my receive speed for Gigabit Ethernet). For this reason, I still recommend the 5100 over the 5300 for most people (Wi-Fi 5300 performance numbers may cause me to reverse my recommendation) as the performance is adequate and the price is lower.

 

Enable fat channel (40mhz), if you're in N only mode. Not all routers have this option because it's kind of evil in that it zaps all of the 2.4ghz spectrum creating ****loads of interference.

It should be on by default in all 5.8ghz routers.

 

Thanks for the tip. My router is set to Auto 20/40 (default was 20Mhz, there is no 40Mhz only option). Also, the DIR-655 is a 2.4GHz router only, I am not sure what effect on performance this has.

 

Some more research turned up something interesting.

According to this thread, Intel Wireless adapters (4965, 5100, 5300, 5350) are NOT able to operate at 40MHz mode . This apparently locks them into a maximum speed of 130Mbps (40MHz is required for 300Mbps).

I was not previously aware of this limitation and it seems somewhat disingenuous of Intel (the product literature lists 300 Mbps for the 5100, and 450 Mbps for the 5300/5350, but this would imply both are capped at 130 Mbps).

Correction:

The Intel 5100 (and presumably 5300/5350) can operate at 40MHz/300Mbps. This is the default behavior for the 5GHz band, however it must be MANUALLY FORCED FOR 2.4 GHz (open up device manager, locate the adapter, right click and select properties, advanced, 802.11N channel width for 2.4GHz, Auto). You may also need to enable this setting on your router as well as most default to 20MHz for the 2.4GHz band.

 

http://www.intel.com/support/wireless/wlan/sb/cs-025787.htm

My system has the options listed, which would indicate that there is at least the option to allow 40MHz channels (Intel 5100). I don't have an N network, so I can't test it, though.

 

Further reading ( D-Link forums and others) implies that the Intel adapters (and apparently most Draft 2 adapters) only support 40MHz on 5GHz networks (apparently it kills neighboring B/G networks if you enable it on 2.4GHz networks), and that an aftermarket adapter is required to get 300 Mbps out of my particular router.

Device manager did turn up this setting for 20/40MHz channels. My "802.11n channel width for 2.4GHz" was set to 20MHz only. I have changed this to automatic (there is no 40MHz only option) and will see if this changes anything.

 

This tip did it !

Selecting 20/40 automatic on BOTH my router config page and the Intel 5100 config (device manager) improved my connection speed considerably. This is disabled by default on both (20 MHz only to play nice with 802.11 B/G networks), but is supported by the 5100 (contrary to reports I have read).

This setup shows my connection at 270 Mbps in AccessConnections and the D-Link client page (it is still only 150 Mbps in Task manager ). A quick test with the same files showed a marked improvement.

From ≈15 ft. with Access Connections set to "Maximum Power Saving" yielded 4:31 to receive and 4:28 to transmit. This equates to 77-78 Mbps of real world throughput for both transmit and receive and is in line with what I was expecting out of this router/adapter combination. I will rerun the test at 10' with Access Connections set to "maximum performance" to see if that makes things even better.

Thanks very much for the tip. I recommend setting 20/40MHz to automatic both on your router and in device manager to maximize speed on your 2.4GHz network. The downside is that 40MHz mode is detrimental to 802.11 B/G networks, but it should automatically drop down to 20MHz if it detects an ACTIVE 802.11 B/G network. In fact, I am able to get these performance numbers with the router set to 802.11BGN, using WPA2/AES encryption on my main SSID, and with a WEP guest SSID (802.11G only by rule) [however, I don't have any other wireless clients at present].

 

I have updated my earlier posts in this thread with stats for 40 MHz mode (much better performance) so you may want to reread them (especially the 1st post) to get a better idea of possible Intel 5100 performance.

 

It is quite possible there are other access points, microwaves and cordless phones that are trampling the signal at this frequency.

 

Thanks for the update.

 

This may be true for some people. However, I live in a single family home with no other access points in close range (my neighbors barely know what the internet is), I rarely use a microwave, and my cordless phones are still of the 900MHz variety.

 

I recently received a new T500 with the Intel WiFi Link 5300 (AGN) card. Can anyone recommend a good wireless router that works well with it? I have an older Belkin g based router, but I'd like to upgrade to n to get better performance.

 

The easiest method (avoiding what I did) is to pick up a SIMULTANEOUS DUAL BAND (2.4GHz/5GHz) router (e.g. the DIR-825 or WRT-600N). This will let you run your 802.11N clients at 5GHz, and your 802.11B/G clients at 2.4GHz.

If you don't mind tweaking the configuration settings (enable 40MHz width for 2.4GHz mode), and don't have any active G clients (they will kill your N performance on a 2.4GHz only router); you would be well served by the DIR-655. This is what I have at home, my performance results are above, it also has Gigabit Ethernet (good if you hardwire your desktops), very good firmware (QOS, guest SSID, lots of port forwarding, and a basic USB host service for Print serving or basic NAS), and is one of the fastest 802.11N routers (as long as you set it up properly). This model (and other 2.4GHz only models) also tends to cost less than Dual band routers (especially those that also have GigE).

 

I indeed do still have a wireless g client at home, so thanks for the advice. I'll start looking at the dual band models. I've had my existing router for over 5 years now, so I'm okay with spending a little more to get a good one. Thanks!

 

I will be moving into an apartment complex that has wireless internet available (and built into the rent cost) so I have no idea about the router's specifications. I'm assuming it will be a dated/low-end router.

Am I safe in getting a 5100 or 5300 card when ordering a T400? Basically, what is the best option if I don't have a choice in my accompanying router?

 

It will most likely be a run of the mill 802.11G router at your complex.

ANY of the options available should work just fine. I have heard that the B/G card is less power efficient so I would avoid that one. Both the 5100 and 5300 should work identically, but there is a chance that the 5300 will get slightly better range due to the extra antennas (both should be perfectly fine though).

 

I think the 5300 has an extra antenna which may help reception?

 

I don't think you can turn encryption off in N mode. It is part of the draft standard, and intel chips will not do N without encryption (at least the earlier models wouldn't).

 

I have 5100, and I think to upgrade to 5300.I need better range! The router is far away from me, and signal is poor.5300 has an extra antenna which may help me?I need help

 

If you have access to the router, can you put on an external antenna to boost the range? Alternatively I believe there are some USB wireless adapters that have external antennas that may also help.

 

The 5300 supports extra simultaneous streams. However, you will need to have the antennas in your notebook (or be willing to string a new one) in order to get a benefit from the 5300.

If you are seriously considering the upgrade, you should remove the keyboard and see if you have a third antenna lead (NOT the WWAN antennas) before buying a 5300 card.

I also doubt that any PCMCIA or ExpressCard adapter would do a better job than the 5100 in terms of range.

 

Thank you

 

I have an Linksys WRT-300N, v1.1 and there are no option to change to 40MHz.

 

intel 4965 is the best of all intel wifi cards, and the last decent card,
intel 5100 was a constant headache, a pain in the rearend to me
for the last 6 months .
no more intel wifi cards , lets see if their wimax card is getting any better.

 

fixed my 65.0 Mbps issue with DIR-655; thanks for the tips...

 

You're welcome.

 

I was able to see a HUGE difference in my parents' house with my N network. Forget XP, Vista, and Vista post SP1 again, have better WiFi embedded in general. I simply couldn't get a signal on XP, when I could on Vista, using the system in my sig!

As far as speed.l How come you're not seeing 300Mbps?? I was slinging my TV from home in L.A. 8,000 miles to my parents' house and the speeds were phenomenal! Over 2,000kbps with that distance? Insane! I've used N networks with repeaters also for even more noteworthy results. WDS on Cisco is a dream!

I had the Intel X25M MLC SSD once, and I was disappointed. SLC ones are much better yes, but still...Hmm...How's yours treatin' ya?

 

Bump. First post updated with data for the Intel 5300.

 

Actually, I've had issues with the 4965 that aren't present on my 5100 and 5350: if I do large transfers to my NAS on my 4965 machines, it crashes as though it lost connection to the NAS. This happened on my T61p, and happens on my 8710W. I've resorted to simply plugging in the Ethernet cable and turning WiFi off while docked (not a big deal)

My W500's 5350 and the 5100 I stuffed in my NC10 don't exhibit this.


Router is a WRT600N, latest BS DD-WRT Mega, connecting via 5ghz band. NAS is a DLink DNS-321 with the latest firmware (1.3b9)

 

Hey jon, have you checked out:

http://forums.dlink.com/index.php?board=129.0

 

What about it? I messaged the D-Link mod a few months back and had him fix the point about Intel Wi-Fi cards ( it said NONE worked at 300 Mbps, but this i only true of the 4965). But I haven't really looked there since.

 

What firmware version are you using? I just added the link in case you ran into any issues. It's nice to have a dedicated forum for your router.

 

1.32NA (although I may have been running an older version for my first batch of tests).

 

interesting stuff.

 

Indeed. One of my favorite subjects. Wireless-N.

jon: Speaking of wireless cards, isn't it a fact that Atheros (Lenovo dubs these "Thinkpad 11a/b/g/n") are the gold standard of WiFi cards? I have the Atheros 5008X in my T60p, which was one of the upgrades I performed on that unit. Cisco Linksys and D-Link on the router side have Atheros chips in them, and so do a lot of Thinkpads regarding Atheros cards.

I do find the 5300/5350 to be excellent, however, which wasn't the case with the Intel 3945ABG that used to be in my T60p. I heard similar issues with the 4965AGN, in the T61/p's, which I skipped over.

Did you configure/change any of the values in Device Manager ---> Intel 5300, or any other cards in the past? I removed the WWAN card, and that freed up a third antenna for the Atheros mini-PCIe card my T60p.

I'm sure you heard: Wireless-N is "going gold" perhaps as early as September. Are we really going to see 600Mbps?

 

Atheros does have a very good reputation, but I believe the current ThinkPad ABGN card is actually Realtek (I don't know much about them).

The only thing I changed in the device manager for the Intel 5300 was setting 2.4GHz 802.11N mode to "Auto" rather than "20 MHz only" as this is required for breaking the 130mbps barrier.

I didn't have to remove the WWAN card (although I never use it) because my x200 Tablet has five antennas (3 for 802.11N, 2 for WWAN).

Hadn't heard about 600mbps, but I believe some 450mbps routers are already on the market.

 

Most people has agreed that one of two things will happen once Wireless-N becomes an official standard:
1) A firmware will be provided for draft-N routers to support the 600Mbps transfer speed
2) New official Wireless-N standard routers will be produced to support the higher transfer speed, while the draft-N routers are left in the dust

Option two is more likely to happen, as I doubt router manufacturers would spend the time and effort writing a firmware for old products rather than trying to make a profit selling new products.
Also, you won't see 600Mbps transfer speed but a bit less than that, due to packet encryption, and overhead.

 

A quick off-topic post:

I just converted my last machine that had run Vista x64 to Windows 7 Ultimate x64. Per instructions from the Windows 7 installer, I had to uninstall the Intel PRO/Wireless due to compatibility problems, so the drivers are gone, too.

I have a 5350, but don't care about WiMAX. I just need the WiFi drivers that work really well for the WiFi N portion of the card, and I can't find one on either Intel, nor Lenovo. Would 5300 drivers work, too?

Thank you in advance.

 

The 5300 drivers should work for the 5350 as they are effectively the same card (except for WiMax). Of course the only way to know for sure is to try.

 

Jon, how do you determine your Rx/Tx speed? Since I have 5300 in my T400s and also have DIR-655 (hw v A2, fw 1.32NA), I'm curious about my performance. When I go into DIR-655 Status->Wireless, it shows 130Mbps, but I'm not sure what is it based on. Also, can you summarize what you set in 5300 to optimize its performance? Thanks!

 

Awesome. Duh me. It works now after installing the Vista driver on 7. Sorry for the n00b-like question.

This was the only driver that did not work during the Win 7 in-place(!) upgrade. I never do this. Upgrade from one version of Windows to another. But I was floored at how well Windows Vista upgraded to Windows 7. Today's the first time of working exclusively with Windows 7 on all machines. Oh, and, it wasn't the SSD that had caused that 10-second delay I was crying about. lol... No, it was Vista. The SSD is just fine, and now, the boot time from swiping the fingerprint to the fully populated Windows 7 desktop is cut in half (at least!).

 

Do you have WPA2 w/ AES as your encryption method configured on both your router and WiFi card?

 

You'll need to enable "Fat channel" 40Mhz transmission at 2.4 GHz in properties for the 5300 and possibly your router.