Ubiquity WiFi speed

[vitali]

Hi,

We used Ubiquiti WAPs  Ap- Ac Pro.,for a while. It worked not bad so far. They have pretty bad support, but I almost never called them. So good so far,. Till download speed was under 150-200 Mb.

Now all new clients (and old as well ) get higher speed internet, They mentioned, they can't get higher than 180/220 Mb. download speed. I tried to connect cable coming from switch  to my comp and I got proper numbers, but WiFi connection 2 meters from WAP still 180-220 Mb. I checked with my comp, checked with iPhone, checked with clients comp. 

I can assume 2 things, 

1. My and clients comps got WiFi adapters that do not support that speed ( iPhone 8 does not support as well )

2. Ubiquiti doesn't provide speed higher than 200 Mb.

Any thoughts?

Thanks.

[aptiii]

I'm not a pro so I would appreciate help also. I put in my own Ubiquiti gear and have AC-Pro as well as In-wall HD units. Even though I have 1 Gb connection and constantly over 900 Mb on wired network, I never get more than 250 Mb on Wifi. Tested with MacBook Pro, iPhone 10, iPhone 11. I can't figure out settings to get more and don't any local pros who use Ubiquiti.

[Neo1738]

Pretty sure the wifi AP don't do gig speeds. Only up to 300 Mbps

 

[SMHarman]

What do you have beyond the WAP?

edge Router. Switches, cloud key?

Sent from my E6603 using Tapatalk

[SMHarman]

Pretty sure the wifi AP don't do gig speeds. Only up to 300 Mbps
 

AC pro does 450 on 2.4 and 1300 on 5 Ghz.

Does seem the devices are connected at 2.4 not 5 Ghz. With Contention and interference it 200 seems reasonable.

Wonder what other networks are in range.

Sent from my E6603 using Tapatalk

[ekohn00]

The Unifi 5G defaults to a vht40 channel size. you can change to vht80 and your BW should double. However there's a lot of congestion using this channel size, thus stability may be an issue.

 

 

[SMHarman]

Hi,
We used Ubiquiti WAPs  Ap- Ac Pro.,for a while. It worked not bad so far. They have pretty bad support, but I almost never called them. So good so far,. Till download speed was under 150-200 Mb.
Now all new clients (and old as well ) get higher speed internet, They mentioned, they can't get higher than 180/220 Mb. download speed. 

Is this actually a problem? UHD needs an 8Mb stream. Is this a use case thing or a theoretical problem that you and we are spending time on.

Hi,
 I tried to connect cable coming from switch  to my comp and I got proper numbers, but WiFi connection 2 meters from WAP still 180-220 Mb.

What is the power setting? At 2m the signal may be too strong. WiFi is like the three bears porridge.

Hi,
I checked with my comp, checked with iPhone, checked with clients comp. 
I can assume 2 things, 
1. My and clients comps got WiFi adapters that do not support that speed ( iPhone 8 does not support as well )
2. Ubiquiti doesn't provide speed higher than 200 Mb.
Any thoughts?
Thanks.

As commented by others and me above.
On what frequency, what channel, what interference. What channel width.
I still think this is sufficient Internet bandwidth for most use cases on most devices so ponder what you are trying to solve for.





Sent from my E6603 using Tapatalk

[robbie3130]

I’m running nano hd’s and see just under 500meg consistently, usually around ~480 up and down. 

[Adidaswood]

I've had this issue since I put ac pros in 5 years ago.  That said.  They have been rock solid in terms of my wifi coverage and the number of clients they can handle.

My research into this has told me two things.  If you block multicast on your wifi network you will get some better speeds.  However lots of other things will or can suffer.  I left allow multicast on.  Second, numerous threads on the subject can be found in the unifi forums.  Those threads all say the AC Pros were never built for pure speed, they are built for coverage and the number of clients they can handle, as I eluded to above.  The speeds they publish are theoretical limits and are rarely seen in practice.

Just relaying what I've read.  

[esanto1]

I have a Unifi network and see similar speeds but it’s because I have IPS/IDS enabled on my USG. I suspect for me there is also some inter vlan routing issue as I can get 500mb+ on my Management vlan but less on my user vlan

i use AP HD’s

[BraydonH]

Set the 5 GHz channel to VHT 80 and set transmit power to High. You should be flying at that point.

Also disable band sterring to make sure you are actually connecting to the 5ghz channel and not the 2.4

[ejn1]

On 11/26/2019 at 9:50 AM, aptiii said:

I'm not a pro so I would appreciate help also. I put in my own Ubiquiti gear and have AC-Pro as well as In-wall HD units. Even though I have 1 Gb connection and constantly over 900 Mb on wired network, I never get more than 250 Mb on Wifi. Tested with MacBook Pro, iPhone 10, iPhone 11. I can't figure out settings to get more and don't any local pros who use Ubiquiti.

The receiving end and what type of antenna it has is very dependent on your download speeds.   Unless you put a PCI AC1300 wifi card in a PC, you will max out around 200-250mbs with a modern Ipad or Iphone or laptop.  Which is faster than you are likely to ever need.

[Cyknight]

Most phone and tablet devices don't do speeds higher than 400-ish from what I've seen, though laptops can certainly go higher.

 

On 11/26/2019 at 8:49 AM, SMHarman said:

AC pro does 450 on 2.4 and 1300 on 5 Ghz.

Yeah and my truck speedomoter goes up to 270 km/h. Tose are theoretical/laboratory numbers and not reality.

 

On 11/26/2019 at 10:29 AM, SMHarman said:

Is this actually a problem? UHD needs an 8Mb stream. Is this a use case thing or a theoretical problem that you and we are spending time on.

This is the real question though. Sppedtest number are getting to be like car stereo systems. Too much value is given to the 'wattage' numbers.

 

[Adidaswood]

I ultimately came to terms that streaming services only need a certain amount of bandwidth and I never experience any type of buffering.  Also my wife and I both work from home and I am on Skype and Teams video calls all day.  She is on Zoom calls all day.  Real time audio and video and all day.  These are far more demanding than netflix.  If you saw my speed test results you would cry, but ultimately it doesn't matter, I don't have problems.  I'm not really sure what i would even notice if i realized the full speed they were "promising".  Probably nothing.

I will also second this sentiment.  You should really be striving for good coverage and the ability to handle more clients than you need.  I had the whole family over one christmas years ago and they crushed my wifi (apple extreme), with too many clients and connections.  I went for a coverage and volume solution, not a speed solution.

On 11/26/2019 at 10:29 AM, SMHarman said:

Is this actually a problem? UHD needs an 8Mb stream. Is this a use case thing or a theoretical problem that you and we are spending time on.

 

[SMHarman]

Zoom calls

 

For group video calling:

 

600kbps/1.2Mbps (up/down) for high quality video

 

For gallery view and/or 720p HD video: 1.5Mbps/1.5Mbps (up/down)

 

Receiving 1080p HD video requires 2.5mbps (up/down)

 

Sending 1080p HD video requires 3.0 Mbps (up/down)

 

Skype

 

1 Mbps per added participant for comfortable video conferencing. For example, for a group video call with 7-8 persons, 8 Mbps should be largely sufficient for HD video quality if you want to talk concurrently to them.

 

Netflix

 

To stream in 4K Ultra HD with HDR, Netflix recommends you have a consistent minimum download speed of at least 25 megabits per second. That multiplies out to roughly 11.25 gigabytes per hour.May 5, 2016

 

HDR plus 8 channels or more of audio does seem to be the highest bandwidth use case.

 

But your work day requires stable robust connections not peak speed. More important you have an undropping 25 Meg than a flakey 400 Meg.

 

 

 

 

[Adidaswood]

yes, but you can't buffer a phone call or it isn't a known stream.  I'm just saying it has to be stable and fast enough.  Its a different kind of workload.  a movie could buffer and then play and you would never know, except that you might see it buffer at the beginning.  That will not and cannot happen on a live phone call.  you just end up with drops and and jitter and all that.

The point is that pure speed shouldn't be the goal. 

[SMHarman]

Latency is the biggest problem on Skype LAN, VLAN, WAN or Internet. Latency drops calls.
My last employer was the largest deployment of Skype Video plus softphone over virtual desktop (VDI).
We has MSFT staff on campus for a few months ironing the bugs out.

[Cyknight]

8 hours ago, SMHarman said:

Latency is the biggest problem on Skype

For gaming as well. Some streaming services don't play nice either, dropping download speeds in their respective apss if it sees too much latency causing ridiculous buffering and loading times.

 

Internet speed is overrated. Soooooo many people are convinced that the 'cap' or 5 or 10 Mb/s on rural internet options is the reason they have a hard time using streaming services - it isn't, it's the latency.

[ILoveControl]

I have quite a large Unifi network at home over 11 APs (Pros) a 48 port POE switch, Gen 2 controller and a 1U USG. 

There are just so many config options to tweak it l, I found their community forums actually brilliant and get help almost immediately. 
 

few things to check as mentioned IPS and DPS - these reduce the over all speed quite a bit and they have / use to have a warning about this. Advanced features options same. Both in my opinion are only valuable if you actively monitor them they do have valuable info so you need to decide on the benefit vs impact.

You need to look at your network with a wholistic approach. Look at the wireless clients on the controller are you getting ant tx or rx drops due to clashes on bands? 2ghz is especially problematic. Run the band tool it will give you a good view of which band on the channel is the best or has the least clashing. 
 

Check the broad cast power and if you POE the device(s) make sure its getting enough power from the switch if you go to high. 
 

check which clients are connecting to the ap and their behavior, somehow I had a client downstairs and i have three stories each being concrete slabs. It was connecting to outdoor AP on the roof and not the AP next to it, for some reason. Lots of retries this causes overhead. Find out why - mine was because the device was next to a window and somehow thought that was the best AP. 
 

Suggestion create a different WLAN for you 2ghz and then on the AP on radios - 2ghz select that WLAN splits the networks and provides better selection. 
 

Turn of auto band steering wont let older devices android and apple to connect on the network. 
 

Check your uplink config make sure if you have to auto its using the right uplink. 
 

Then if you have a unifi switch tons of settings there.

These are just some of the adjustments. I am holiday so my brain is on holiday to  

excuse grammatical or spelling errors typing quickly on my mobile.

[vitali]

On 11/26/2019 at 7:49 AM, SMHarman said:

AC pro does 450 on 2.4 and 1300 on 5 Ghz.

Does seem the devices are connected at 2.4 not 5 Ghz. With Contention and interference it 200 seems reasonable.

Wonder what other networks are in range.

Sent from my E6603 using Tapatalk
 

I separated wifi for Home and Home _5G, connected to 5G. didn't help. 70 on 2.4 and 200- 220 on 5G

[vitali]

Here is a problem, clients starting to ask " why do I pay for 500meg or 1G" or what ever, but from YOUR equipment I can't get speed I was promised. 

Explanations like " 200 is away higher then you may need", or "the traffic is shared with all users", or " it is like a car, you will never use it's highest speed". not good enough because nearby ISP router the speed was pretty close to promised (390)

In that case, what equipment is better to use? so I can just show to client speed close to ISP provides? araknis, rukus? 

 

[lippavisual]

Ruckus has the best performance IMO.

Then it all comes down to your devices and what they’re capable of.

[SMHarman]

Ruckus has the best performance IMO.
Then it all comes down to your devices and what they’re capable of.

Indeed but your average home has a free to $150 router / wap everything combined.

Uniquiti is a $500-1000 system. Depending on number of waps and if you already have a poe switch.

Rukus is a further step change in pricing.

[lippavisual]

You get what you pay for certainly applies in this field.

Most “WiFi systems” that I see installed are overkill.  3-6 Araknis, Pakedge, Luxul, Meraki, whosever waps spread out with not the best of performance, sluggishness.

Replace all of it with 2 Ruckus R510’s and you can try to take the customers smile off of their face.  It won’t happen however.

Saying Ruckus is too expensive is comical nowadays.  Can be had at many places for way less than msrp.

what I explain above outperforms these other systems, are far cheaper and truly set it and forget it. 

[vitali]

On 11/26/2019 at 7:49 AM, SMHarman said:

AC pro does 450 on 2.4 and 1300 on 5 Ghz.

Does seem the devices are connected at 2.4 not 5 Ghz. With Contention and interference it 200 seems reasonable.

Wonder what other networks are in range.

Sent from my E6603 using Tapatalk
 

450 Mb  on 2.4 GHz???? I have never seen that speed on 2.4. 80 Mb max, 35-40 Mb usually.