900MB full fibre wireless lack luster

[WSH]

Most likely problem is interference or the walls are better in the new house.  I’d try it on different channels, like 40, 44 and 48.  The whole world and his dog are using 36.  (Some of the higher channels can be a problem for other reasons but if you can select them, then give them a try).

5GHz is also far worse at penetrating walls than 2.4GHz.  That’s good, in-so-far-as you’ve less chance of picking up interference from the neighbour but bad if you want to pick it up two rooms away.  (Even in a new build, the plasterboard is now foil backed.  Terrible for Wi-Fi.  And old houses, well they’re just solid, full stop). 

[naylor2006]

Exactly thats the point, in a residential situation which most of us are, you're gonna be fine and youre definitely gonna be fine for WIFI. Other benefit of Cat5e besides price is the Cat6 stuff you really want is a little harder to work with from a malleable point of view. Also dont get STP cables unless you know what you're doing, UTP is fine.

[WSH]

Cat 6 is not STP, 6A is.

The last 6A I installed was like 13A mains flex but cat 6 is little stiffer than 5e.

Edit:  ...Anyway, I'm off for a beer.  See you later.

[naylor2006]

If you are using 160Mhz I wouldnt, this bonds 8 channels together and will not perform faster in the real world than 80Mhz which is only bonding 4 channels.

You might wanna take a look at this: 

Using 160Mhz never really makes an sense in a real world setup, it bonds channels 36-48 or 100-128. 80Mhz is still problematic but a better compromise.

[naylor2006]

I was kinda pointing to the fact that you cant get Cat5e STP or UTP and just to avoid STP unless you have the appropriate equipment. 

[Troubled_Talent]

The new router has about 200 DFS bands available that I'll need to play with. Thanks for that infographic though, very handy.

I will keep people updated on what I manage via what settings. I have good confidence in the theoretical numbers for now. It really looks like the technology took a serious leap in ability and affordability since I last looked a couple years ago.

It's quite a tightly packed new build estate so i'm wondering how many people are gonna suffer interference from my broadcast 😅

[naylor2006]

DFS channels are there in that image I shared, I use some DFS channels but they hard to get right.

To be honest other people are unlikely to suffer your interference because they probably don’t care about 300+ Mbps, it’ll be you who suffer there’s whilst you try to reach 600+!

[Troubled_Talent]

Then suffer I must! If it's possible I'll work it out. If it's not I'll stare upwards and grumble a bit.

I remember being excited by the prospect of Pre-N whilst using my neighbours WEP network.
Why wouldn't you want more than 300Mb/s on wireless? I want my downloads to blister my eyes.
Haven't paid any attention for a decade now I'm excited again 😁

[naylor2006]

Well im just speaking for the majority of people who have a few devices at home and arent worried about top speed, for the most part latency is the biggest concern, for gaming and such.

Indeed getting 900Mbps from BT spurred me on but it wasnt as easy as just buying good WIFI gear and this equals 900Mbps WIFI speeds, the issue is far more nuanced and to achieve over 700Mbps in every room in my house I installed an AP per room all connected to a backend 2.5Gbit network, all on channels that would not overlap whilst using 80Mhz channels, AP's on channels that would overlap I would need to ensure were far enough away from one another as not to interfere. There isnt enough normal channels to use on 80Mhz if you have many AP's where their range overlaps, so I had to experiment with DFS channels, FWIW the most reliable DFS channel is 100, if you are interested in the others I use let me know.

With a mix of DFS and normal channels its possible eventually in my house to avoid interference, if you have one AP only you probably could get away with 160Mhz but you would get interference from next door most likely on the lower of the two channels.

Anyway, enjoy the journey my friend.

[Troubled_Talent]

It seems you will be suprised by my results 😁
Pretty much plug and play. I have the router set to choose the bands automatically and given permission for it to use DFS channels of it's own accord.

Over 80mhz I get 340 down 100 up. Linkspeed 556

When I turn the router up to 160mhz I get linkspeed 1201 and an astonishing 760 down and 100 up!

Also the TP-link Archer TX20UH has the added benefit of looking identical to a star trek communicator 😅

I'm happy to leave it there for now.  I was lucky to get 200mb/s via the BT hub and it would drop all the time. For about £150 I've more than trippled my wireless speed.