You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
89 points

I guess one reason why no one is paying attention to it is because is the Wi-Fi speed usually the limiting factor? In my case I’ve rarely ever maxed out my Wi-Fi 6 speeds. Typically the host or the network that I’m on that is the limiting factor.

Although I’m also in the US so I know where not know for having the fastest internet in the world. Maybe in other areas of the world WiFi 7 might be more useful.

permalink
report
reply
28 points

Canada, one of our primary ISPs offers fibre to the home with speeds of 1Gbit and even higher. So many threads on their forums with users confused why they can’t get anywhere close to 1Gbit and it always turns out to be WiFi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

I can get very close to 1 Gbit on Ethernet but top out at maybe 400 Mbps on wifi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Exactly, wifi 7 will probably get us to or close to practical 1Gbit wireless speed vs theoretical 1Gbit speeds.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

This is very useful in places like big city where there are gazillion of devices fighting for airtime. Wifi 7 devices can dynamically switch channel, or even use multiple channels at once which should help a lot in congested environment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I’m more excited about reducing congestion when more of my neighbors upgrade to 6, so that BSS coloring and other wifi 6/7 features can enable more efficient use of the spectrum. Before wifi 6 most of the upgrades were just increasing data rates, but really lacking in improvements to spectral use efficiency (like the resource unit allocation in OFDMA which splits channels into sub carriers and centrally plans assignment to multiple client devices for simultaneous use which results in much less wasted airtime compared to each device yelling and listening while waiting to see if they can have exclusive access to the whole channel which wastes time) and interference management (like preamble puncturing which allows partial use of a channel when only a portion has interference). In a crowded environment like an apartment building wifi 6 should help a lot in reducing channel utilization.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I have one WiFi 6 access point and unless I’m running a benchmark while right next to it, I can’t tell the difference between it and the WiFi 5 access points. I doubt WiFi 7 will make much difference unless you are running 320MHz channels. There’s only enough bandwidth for 3 of them, so good luck getting decent performance unless you live out in the country though.

High speeds are helpful for anyone that has network storage and doesn’t want to plug in an ethernet cable. It doesn’t have anything to do with how fast your internet is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They’re is so much wrong here I don’t know where to start.

  1. get a better wifi 6ap. You should be getting about 2x the bandwidth. I get about 900mbps on my 5 year old cell phone sitting on the couch.

  2. Wi-Fi 7 smaller width channels to avoid interference. Pretty much everything you’ve said here is backwards/wrong and i encourage you to do some learning on your own.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m using a Unifi U6-Lite access point and an Intel AX210 WiFi card on an 80MHz channel. Iperf showed about 600mbps down on WiFi 6 and 550 on WiFi 5 from across the room last time I tested it. There’s no other WiFi networks anywhere near me to interfere with anything.

Smaller channels will avoid interference, but you get less bandwidth on them. The bitrate only increased 20% between WiFi 6 and 7. To get a large speed boost, you need the wider channels that WiFi 7 supports.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

I guess one reason why no one is paying attention to it is because is the Wi-Fi speed usually the limiting factor?

On a LAN? Pretty easily if you have a gigabit or greater network. Wi-Fi 6 can do close to gigabit but not consistently and needs to be close to an AP, and it’s unlikely a bunch of devices using it at the same time will be able to do maintain that peak. Maybe 6E, although I don’t have any devices myself that support it.

And WAN speeds of gigabit and greater have become more common, too.

And this ignores the improvements in latency with Wi-Fi 7, which is definitely an issue with traditional Wi-Fi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Also the fact that the faster the wifi, the easier it is to block.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

These new standards aren’t really targeting residential use so just people shouldn’t care.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ok, I know why we changed the version naming scheme: a, b, g, n, ac, ax… It was a nightmare, just awful.

But I’ll bet it does still have a IEEE designation, so how does 6 or 7 map to the previous scheme? Also, what’s new, what are the impressive current speeds and features?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

WiFi 7 = 802.11be, FYI

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

5 is AC, 6 is AX

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 544K

    Comments