Like every other website on the planet, SmallNetBuilder uses cookies. Our cookies track login status, but we only allow admins to log in anyway, so those don't apply to you. Any other cookies you pick up during your visit come from advertisers, which we don't control.
If you continue to use the site, you agree to tolerate our use of cookies. Thank you!

Router Charts

Click for Router Charts

Router Ranker

Click for Router Ranker

NAS Charts

Click for NAS Charts

NAS Ranker

Click for NAS Ranker

More Tools

Click for More Tools

Wireless Reviews

Throughput vs. Path Loss - Product Comparison

So how does the 600N compare to the other dual-band options available? Pickin's are still slim for dual-band, but we can compare the 600n to the Apple Airport Extreme (Atheros XSPAN) and Buffalo WZR-AG300NH dual-band (Marvell Topdog). Since you can use the Wireless Charts to generate the plots you want, I'm going to show only comparisons using 20 MHz channel mode in 2.4 GHz and 40 MHz channel mode in 5 GHz, since those are the defaults.

Figure 23 shows the 600N having the highest throughput under 2.4 GHz downlink strong-signal conditions, but then falling below the Apple Airport Extreme as path loss increases.

Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 2.4 GHz downlink
Click to enlarge image

Figure 23: Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 2.4 GHz downlink

Uplink in 2.4 GHz with 20 MHz channel (Figure 24) shows a similar pattern, but this time the 600N's throughput falls below both the Apple and Buffalo products as signals grow weaker.

Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 2.4 GHz uplink
Click to enlarge image

Figure 24: Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 2.4 GHz uplink

In the 5 GHz plots, the Apple Airport Extreme is running at a disadvantage, since it was not tested with an Atheros-based client. And it's hard to say whether the Buffalo dual-band or 600N is superior, since they trade positions multiple times over the curve.

Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 5 GHz downlink
Click to enlarge image

Figure 25: Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 5 GHz downlink

But with 5 GHz / 40 MHz channel uplink (Figure 26), the 600N appears to be the better choice than the Buffalo. But even though the Apple's throughput is lower (most likely due to the mismatched client), it has the same range as the 600N.

Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 5 GHz uplink
Click to enlarge image

Figure 26: Throughput vs. Path Loss product comparison - 5 GHz downlink

More Wireless

Wi-Fi System Tools
Check out our Wi-Fi System Charts, Ranker and Finder!

Support Us!

If you like what we do and want to thank us, just buy something on Amazon. We'll get a small commission on anything you buy. Thanks!

Over In The Forums

I have attached a 2TB WD elements and partitioned it for 1.8TB for network share and 200GB for use with jffs partition on a RTAC88U with Merlin 384.18...
Hello guys.Right now I'm using that line to make a backup of my entire jffs in shell:Bash: tar -cf some_folder/jffs_"$FWVER".tar /jffs >/dev/null 2>&...
This is FlexQoS, a fork of the original, groundbreaking FreshJR_QOS script written by @FreshJR.FlexQoS provides a fully customizable Adaptive QoS expe...
Supermicro SuperServer E302-9D Review: A Fanless 10G pfSense Powerhouse www.anandtech.com With this piece of kit, I could see myself wadin...
Hello,I'll start by saying that I'm a bit of a novice with networking and I've been searching around for information about this for ages and I'm a bit...

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3