The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    [Q] Dual Band Receiver

    Discussion in 'Networking and Wireless' started by strangesweet, Aug 5, 2011.

  1. strangesweet

    strangesweet Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    44
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I have question about purchasing dual band receiver.

    My mother's laptop has Intel WiFi 1000 which only supports 2.4 GHz. However, my router at home supports both 2.4 GHz and 5.0 GHz.

    1) Because the router and where my mother usually uses her laptop is bit away, she never seems to get full 5 bars of networks. Will switching to 5.0 GHz band improve signal strength and speed?

    2) If I purchase dual band receiver such as this ( Linksys/Cisco AE1000 300Mbps 802.11n Dual-Band Wireless | eBay, I understand that this laptop will be able to connect to 5.0 GHz band as well, right?

    3) At her work, she has a Cisco Wireless-G Router, so internet doesn't seem to take advantage of the speed. Will dual-band receiver catch 5.0 GHz? I don't think this will work, but just wanted to verify.

    Thanks in advance! :)
     
  2. downloads

    downloads No, Dee Dee, no! Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,729
    Messages:
    8,722
    Likes Received:
    2,230
    Trophy Points:
    331
    First question makes the rest irrelevant- unfortunately for you 2.4GHz band has far better range than 5GHz so situation would actually get worse had you purchased a dual band card/receiver for her.
    And as for working with Linksys "G" it wouldn't have worked anyway- you'd need 802.11a to use 5GHz but that wouldn't have been faster than "g".