Whether a new radio-based service will interfere with existing services in the same slice of the spectrum seems like a straightforward physics problem. Usually, though, opposing parties’ technical analyses give different results. Disagreement among the engineers then opens the way for public safety to become just one among several competing interests. I’ve been in the thick of such arguments, so I wanted to share how these issues arise and how they are settled.
Battling for Bandwidth
Not all radio spectrum is created equal. Lower frequencies travel farther and propagate better through buildings and terrain. Higher frequencies offer the bandwidth to carry more data, and work well with smaller antennas. Every radio-based application has its own needs and its own spectral sweet spot.
Suitable spectrum for mobile data—4G, 5G, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, many others—runs from a few hundred megahertz to a few gigahertz. Phones, tablets, laptops, smart speakers, Wi-Fi-enabled TVs and other appliances, Internet-of-things devices, lots of commercial and industrial gear—they all need these same frequencies.
The problem is that this region of spectrum has been fully occupied for decades. So when a new service like 5G appears, or an older one like Wi-Fi needs room to expand, the FCC has two options. For a licensed service like 5G, the FCC generally clears incumbent users from a range of frequencies—either repacking them into other frequencies nearby or relocating them to a different part of the spectrum—and then auctions the freed-up spectrum to providers of the new service. To accommodate an unlicensed service like Wi-Fi, the FCC overlays the new users onto the same frequencies as the incumbents, usually at lower power.
The FCC tries to write technical rules for the new or expanded service that will leave the incumbents mostly unaffected. It is commonplace for newcomers to complain that any interference they cause is not their fault, attributing it to inferior incumbent receivers that fail to screen out unwanted signals. This argument usually fails. The newcomer must deal with the spectrum and its occupants as it finds them. Strategies for accomplishing that task vary.
Alternative Realities
This radio tower, located near downtown Los Angeles, is bedecked with 6-GHz fixed-microwave antennas that serve area police and fire departments.George Rose/Getty Images
Congress prohibits the FCC (and other federal agencies) from changing the regulatory ground rules without first soliciting and considering public input. On technical issues, that input comes mostly from the affected industries after the FCC outlines its tentative plans in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. There follows a back-and-forth exchange of written submissions posted to the FCC’s website, typically lasting a year or more.
Ordinarily, parties can also make in-person presentations to the FCC staff and the five commissioners, if they post summaries of what they say. Sometimes the staff uses these meetings to test possible compromises among the parties.
All this openness and transparency has a big exception: Other federal agencies, like the FAA, can and sometimes do submit comments to the FCC’s website, but they also have a back channel to deliver private communications.
The submissions in a spectrum proceeding generally make two kinds of points. First, the newcomers and the incumbents both present data to impress the FCC with their respective services’ widespread demand, importance to the economy, and utility in promoting education, safety, and other public benefits. Second, both the proponents and opponents of a new frequency usage submit engineering studies and simulations, sometimes running to hundreds of pages.
Predictably, the two parties’ studies come to opposite conclusions. The proponents show the new operations will have no harmful effect on incumbents, while the incumbents demonstrate that they will suffer devastating interference. Each party responds with point-by-point critiques of the other side’s studies and may carry out counter-studies for further proof the other side is wrong.
How do such alternative realities arise? It’s not because they are based on different versions of Maxwell’s equations. The two sides’ studies usually disagree because they start with differing assumptions about the newcomer's transmitter characteristics, the incumbent's receiver characteristics, and the geometries and propagation that govern interaction between the two. Small changes to some of these factors can produce large changes in the results.
Rather than settle anything, experiments just add fuel to the controversy.
Sometimes the parties, the FCC, or another government agency may conduct hardware tests in the lab or in the field to assess the degree of interference and its effects. Rather than settle anything, though, these experiments just add fuel to the controversy. Parties disagree on whether the test set-up was realistic, whether the data were analyzed correctly, and what the results imply for real-world operations.
When, for example, aviation interests ran tests that found 5G transmissions caused interference to radio altimeters, wireless carriers vigorously challenged their results. In contrast, there was no testing in the 6-GHz Wi-Fi proceeding, where the disagreements turned on theoretical analyses and simulations.
Further complicating matters, the disputed studies and tests do not predict interference as a binary yes/no but as differing probabilities for various degrees of interference. And the parties involved often disagree on whether a given level of interference is harmless or will cause the victim receiver to malfunction. Reaching a decision on interference issues requires the FCC to make its way through a multi-dimensional maze of conflicting uncertainties. Here are some concrete issues that illuminate this all-too-common dynamic.
Fixed Ideas
Those ubiquitous sideways-facing dishes on towers and buildings are fixed‑microwave antennas. Equipment of this kind has operated reliably since the 1950s. The 6-GHz band, the lowest-frequency microwave band available today, is the only one capable of 100-kilometer hops, making it indispensable. Along with more pedestrian uses, the band carries safety-critical information: to coordinate trains, control pressure in oil and gas pipelines, balance the electric grid, manage water utilities, and route emergency telephone calls.
The red lines on this map of the 48 contiguous U.S. states show the location of existing 6-gigahertz fixed-microwave links, as recorded by Comsearch, which helps companies to avoid issues with radio interference. These links connect people in almost all areas, including far offshore in the Gulf of Mexico, where drilling platforms are common.Comsearch
Four years ago, when the FCC proposed adding Wi-Fi to the 6-GHz band, all sides agreed that the vast majority of Wi-Fi devices would cause no trouble. Statistically, most would be outside the microwave antennas’ highly directional main beams, or on the wrong frequency, or shielded by buildings, terrain, and ground clutter.
The dispute centered on the small proportion of devices that might transmit on a frequency in use while being in the line-of-sight of a microwave antenna. The Wi-Fi proponents projected just under a billion devices, operating among 100,000 microwave receivers. The opponents pointed out that even a very small fraction of the many new transmitters could cause troubling numbers of interference events.
To mitigate the problem, the FCC adopted rules for an Automatic Frequency Control (AFC) system. A Wi-Fi device must either report its location to a central AFC database, which assigns it non-interfering frequencies for that location, or operate close to and under the control of an AFC-guided device. The AFC system will not be fully operational for another year or two, and disagreements persist about the details of its eventual operation.
More controversially, the FCC also authorized Wi-Fi devices without AFC, transmitting at will on any 6-GHz frequency from any geographic location—but only indoors and at no more than one-quarter of the maximum AFC-controlled power. The Wi-Fi proponents’ technical studies showed that attenuation from building walls would prevent interference. The microwave operators’ studies showed the opposite: that interference from uncontrolled indoor devices was virtually certain.
How could engineers, using the same equations, come to such different conclusions? These are a few of the ways in which their analyses differed:
Wi-Fi device power: A Wi-Fi device transmits in short bursts, active about 1/250th of the time, on average. The Wi-Fi proponents scaled down the power by a like amount, treating a device that transmits intermittently at, say, 250 milliwatts as though it transmitted continuously at 1 mW. The microwave operators argued that interference can occur only while the device is actually transmitting, so they calculated using the full power.
Building attenuation: A 6-GHz signal encounters substantial attenuation from concrete building walls and thermal windows, less from wood walls, and practically none from plain-glass windows. The Wi-Fi proponents took weighted averages over several building materials to calculate typical wall attenuations. The microwave operators reasoned that interference was most likely from an atypical Wi-Fi device behind plain glass, and they calculated accordingly, assuming a minimal amount of attenuation.
Path loss: In estimating the signal loss from a building that houses a Wi-Fi device to a microwave-receiving antenna, the Wi-Fi proponents used a standard propagation model that incorporates attenuation due to other buildings, ground clutter, and the like. The microwave operators were most concerned about a device located with open air between the building and the antenna, so they used free-space propagation in their calculations.
Using their preferred starting assumptions, the Wi-Fi proponents proved that Wi‑Fi devices over a wide range of typical situations present no risk of interference. Using a different set of assumptions, the microwave operators proved there is a large risk of interference from a small proportion of Wi-Fi devices in atypical locations, arguing that multiplying that small proportion by almost a billion Wi-Fi devices made interference virtually certain.
Up in the Air
Americans want their smartphones and tablets to have fast Internet access everywhere. That takes a lot of spectrum. Congress passed a statute in 2018 that told the FCC to find more—and specifically to consider 3.7 to 4.2 GHz, part of the C-band, used since the 1960s to receive satellite signals. The FCC partitioned the band in 2020, allocating 3.7 to 3.98 GHz for 5G mobile data. In early 2021, it auctioned the new 5G frequencies for US $81 billion, mostly to Verizon and AT&T. The auction winners were also expected to pay the satellite providers around $13 billion to compensate them for the costs of moving to other frequencies.
A nearby band at 4.2 to 4.4 GHz serves radar altimeters (also called radio altimeters), instruments that tell a pilot or an automatic landing system how high the aircraft is above the ground. The altimeter works by emitting downward radio waves that reflect off the ground and back up to a receiver in the device. The time for the round trip gives the altitude. Large planes operate two or three altimeters simultaneously, for redundancy.
Even though the altimeters use frequencies separated from the 5G band, they can still receive interference from 5G. That’s because every transmitter, including ones used for 5G, emits unwanted signals outside its assigned frequencies. Every receiver is likewise sensitive to signals outside its intended range, some more than others. Interference can occur if energy from a 5G transmitter falls within the sensitivity range of the receiver in an altimeter.
To make way for new 5G cellular services, the Federal Communications Commission reallocated part of the radio spectrum. That reallocation resulted in 5G transmissions that are close in frequency to a band used by aircraft radar altimeters.
The FCC regulates transmitter out-of-band emissions. In contrast, it has few rules on receiver out-of-band reception (although it recently opened a discussion on whether to expand them). Manufacturers generally design receivers to function reliably in their expected environments, which can leave them vulnerable if a new service appears in formerly quiet spectrum near the frequencies they receive on.
Aviation interests feared this outcome with the launch of C-band 5G, one citing the possibility of “catastrophic impact with the ground, leading to multiple fatalities.” The FCC’s 5G order tersely dismissed concerns about altimeter interference, although it invited the aviation industry to study the matter further. The industry did so, renewing its concerns and requesting that the wireless carriers refrain from using 5G near airports. But this came after the wireless carriers had committed almost $100 billion and begun building out facilities.
Much as in the case of 6-GHz Wi-Fi, the 5G providers and aviation interests reached different predictions about interference by starting with different assumptions. Some key areas of disagreement were:
5G out-of-band emissions: The aviation interests assumed higher levels than the wireless carriers, which said the numbers in the aviation study levels exceeded FCC limits.
The FCC must regulate “in the public interest,” but the commissioners have to determine what that means in each case.
Off-channel sensitivity in altimeter receivers: There are several makes and models of altimeters in use, having varying receiver characteristics, leading to disagreements on which to include in the studies.
Altimeters in the same or other aircraft nearby. A busy airport has a lot of altimeters operating. Wireless carriers said these would overpower 5G interference. Aviation interests countered that multiple altimeters in the area would consume one another’s interference margin and leave them all more vulnerable to 5G.
Aircraft pitch and roll: Aviation interests argued that the changing angles of the aircraft as it approaches the runway can expose the altimeter receivers to more 5G signal.
Reflectivity of the ground: Aviation interests favored modeling with lower values of reflectivity, which reduce the received signal strength at the altimeter and hence increase its susceptibility to 5G interference.
The carriers temporarily paused 5G rollout near some airports, and the airlines canceled and rescheduled some flights. At this writing, the FAA is evaluating potentially affected aircraft, altimeters, and airport systems. Most likely, 5G will prevail. In the extremely improbable event that the FAA and the FCC were to agree that C-band 5G cannot operate safely near airports, the wireless carriers presumably would be entitled to a partial refund of their $81 billion auction payments.
These radio towers, which sit atop Black Mountain in Carmel Valley, Calif., include many drumlike antennas used for 6-gigahertz fixed-microwave links.Shutterstock
Hard Decisions
Making complicated trade-offs has long been the job of the five FCC commissioners. They are political appointees, nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The four now in office (there is a vacancy) are all lawyers. It has been decades since a commissioner had a technical background. The FCC has highly capable engineers on staff, but only in advisory roles. The commissioners have no obligation to take their advice.
Congress requires the FCC to regulate “in the public interest,” but the commissioners must determine what that means in each case. Legally, they can reach any result that has at least some support in the submissions, even if other submissions more strongly support an opposite result. Submissions to the FCC in both the 6-GHz and 5G matters conveyed sharp disagreement as to how much safety protection the public interest requires.
To fully protect 6-GHz microwave operations against interference from the small fraction of Wi-Fi devices in the line-of-sight of the microwave receivers would require degrading Wi-Fi service for large numbers of people. Similarly, eliminating any chance whatsoever of a catastrophic altimeter malfunction due to 5G interference might require turning off C-band 5G in some heavily populated areas.
The orders that authorized 6-GHz Wi-Fi and C-band 5G did not go that far and did not claim they had achieved zero risk. The order on 5G stated that altimeters had “all due protection.” In the 6-GHz case, with a federal appeals court deferring to its technical expertise, the FCC said it had “reduce[d] the possibility of harmful interference to the minimum that the public interest requires.”
These formulations make clear that safety is just one of several elements in the mix of public interests considered. Commissioners have to balance the goals of minimizing the risk of plane crashes and pipeline explosions against the demand for ubiquitous Internet access and Congress’s mandate to repurpose more spectrum.
In the end, the commissioners agreed with proponents’ claims that the risk of harmful interference from 6-GHz Wi-Fi is “insignificant,” although not zero, and similarly from 5G, not “likely…under…reasonably foreseeable scenarios”—conclusions that made it possible to offer the new services.
People like to think that the government puts the absolute safety of its citizens above all else. Regulation, though, like engineering, is an ever-shifting sequence of trade-offs. The officials who set highway speed limits know that lower numbers will save lives, but they also take into account motorists’ wishes to get to their destinations in a timely way. So it shouldn’t come as a great surprise that the FCC performs a similar balancing act.
This article appears in the July 2022 print issue as “Radio-Spectrum Turf Wars.”
From Your Site Articles
- Radio Spectrum - IEEE Spectrum ›
- The Uncertain Future of Ham Radio - IEEE Spectrum ›
- DARPA's AI Spectrum Management Challenge Completes its First ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
FAQs
What is the speed of WIFI 7? ›
I detailed Wi-Fi channels in this post, but generally, the new channel width means Wi-Fi 7 can double the base speed, from 1.2Gbps per stream (160MHz) to 2.4Gbps per stream (320MHz).
What is the difference between Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 7? ›First, the speed difference. Wi-Fi 6 maximum speed is 9.6 Gbps (which, honestly, is fast), while Wi-Fi 7 is expected to have a maximum speed of 46 Gbps. That's 46 Gbps for a single client.
Is there a Wi-Fi 7? ›This 7th generation of Wi-Fi, also referred to as IEEE 802.11be or Wi-Fi 7, is an extremely high throughput wireless network that uses 2.4Ghz, 5Ghz, and 6Ghz frequency bands. Wi-Fi 7 leverages advanced technology to maximize overall capacity, decrease latency and increase speed to every device.
How far away is Wi-Fi 7? ›When Will Wi-Fi 7 Be Available? According to a news release from MediaTek, which claims to have already demonstrated the maximum Wi-Fi 7 speed mentioned above, Wi-Fi 7 products are expected to hit the market in 2023. An article in IEEE Spectrum cites 2024 as a potential availability date.
When was Wi-Fi 7 released? ›Wi-Fi 7, officially known as Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers standard 802.11be, is still being finalized and is expected to be ready for the consumer market in early 2024.
Will Wi-Fi 7 have better range? ›Getting to the point, Wi-Fi 7 will still use the same frequencies as before – 2.4GHz, 5GHz and 6GHz – but it can go faster and, in theory, offer better range thanks to the way it's able to use those three bands.
What is the fastest Wi-Fi protocol? ›If you're looking for faster Wi-Fi performance, you want 802.11ac — it's that simple. In essence, 802.11ac is a supercharged version of 802.11n. 802.11ac is dozens of times faster, and delivers speeds ranging from 433 Mbps (megabits per second) up to several gigabits per second.
Is there a Wi-Fi 8? ›NETGEAR's Nighthawk AX8 router uses the latest Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) standard to provide eight WiFi streams. With four 2.4 GHz and four 5 GHz streams, the AX8 enables up to four 1x1 devices to send and receive data at the same time.
What is Wi-Fi 7 and will replace wired Ethernet? ›"The rollout of Wi-Fi 7 will mark the first time that Wi-Fi can be a true wireline/Ethernet replacement for super high-bandwidth applications," said Alan Hsu, corporate vice president and general manager of MediaTek's Intelligent Connectivity business.
What is the next Wi-Fi technology? ›Compared to the previous generation (WiFi 6, 802.11ax), WiFi 7 is expected to support up to 30Gbps of throughput, which is about three times faster than WiFi 6, and can exceed twice the number of frequencies use.
What is the newest Wi-Fi? ›
WiFi 6 is The New Standard. WiFi 6 massively upgrades WiFi capabilities, and it is doing so through several feature enhancements, expansions, and additions. Virtually every WiFi component is improved with the IEEE 802.11ax standard, leading to better user capacity, data rates, latency, and power efficiency.
What is MLO in Wi-Fi 7? ›Wi-Fi 7 Multi-Link Operation (MLO) white paper download >
MLO technology aggregates multiple channels on different frequencies bands at the same time, negotiating seamless network traffic even if there is interference or congestion.
IEEE 802.11ac –
This standard is developed in 2013 named 802.11ac. Wi-Fi 802.11ac works on the 5 GHz band. The maximum speed of this standard is 1.3 Gbps. It gives less range because of the 5 GHz band, but nowadays most of the devices are working on 802.11n and 802.11ac standards.
Not only Wi-Fi cannot work as full-duplex, but also two or more devices cannot transmit or receive traffic simultaneously. Unlike 3G/4G, Wi-Fi uses unlicensed frequencies in the spectrum, which simply means you do not have to pay for using them.
What is the best type of Wi-Fi? ›Wireless N routers are a good choice for a home office wireless network. They support several computers and other electronic devices at one time, so the router will continue to perform even when running computers, entertainment systems and other peripheral items at once.
Which Wi-Fi protocol is best? ›When choosing from among WEP, WPA, WPA2 and WPA3 wireless security protocols, experts agree WPA3 is best for Wi-Fi security. As the most up-to-date wireless encryption protocol, WPA3 is the most secure choice.
What are the 3 types of Wi-Fi? ›- Wi-Fi-802.11a.
- Wi-Fi-802.11b.
- Wi-Fi-802.11g.
- Wi-Fi-802.11n.
Wi-Fi 6E expands on the existing Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) standard and allows access to a new 6 GHz band. Wi-Fi 6E takes the efficiency features from Wi-Fi 6 like OFDMA, WPA3, and Target Wake Time and extends them to the 6 GHz band to provide more contiguous spectrum and less interference.
How fast is Wi-Fi 6? ›So, how much faster is Wi-Fi 6? 9.6 Gbps is the maximum throughput of Wi-Fi 6 across multiple channels. In contrast, Wi-Fi 5 offers a maximum of 3.5 Gbps. These are theoretical maximums however; in real-world situations, local networks may not reach this top speed.
How can I increase my Wi-Fi speed? ›For the best signal, put the wireless router out in the open on the main floor of your house, away from walls and obstructions. Ideally, you'll want to position it off the floor, above the furniture. Keep it away from other electronics that might cause interference, like microwaves, baby monitors, and cordless phones.
What is the best frequency bandwidth? ›
If you're able to use most of your devices near your router, 5 GHz is your best choice to take advantage of higher speeds. Similarly, if you're doing a lot of high-bandwidth activities online, such as gaming or videoconferencing, it's best to use this frequency and move as close as possible to the router.
What's the fastest router speed? ›What is the fastest Wi-Fi router speed? The fastest routers on the market transfer data at the rate of 11,000 megabits per second under optimum lab conditions. Three of our recommendations reach these speeds: the ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AX11000, NETGEAR RAXE500, and NETGEAR RBKE963.
How long do routers last? ›As a rule of thumb, a Netgear representative told us, consumers should consider replacing their router after three years, and representatives from Google and Linksys said a three-to-five-year window was appropriate. Amazon, which owns the popular Eero brand of routers, put the range at three to four years.
What company has the best high speed internet? ›- #1 Xfinity Internet.
- #2 Mediacom Internet.
- #2 AT&T Internet.
- #4 Verizon Internet. #5 Frontier Internet.
Just as a switch connects multiple devices to create a network, a router connects multiple switches, and their respective networks, to form an even larger network. These networks may be in a single location or across multiple locations. When building a small business network, you will need one or more routers.
Is Ethernet faster than Wi-Fi 7? ›While Wi-Fi 7's maximum theoretical speed is 46Gbps, other estimates put real-world speeds much lower—around 6Gbps—which is still significantly faster than Gigabit Ethernet.
Does Ethernet cable make Xbox one faster? ›Use an Ethernet cable
Simply connect the Ethernet cable to your internet router and to your Xbox One. Once the Ethernet cable is connected, your internet connection will be stronger and your downloads should speed up considerably.
When it comes to wifi vs ethernet connections, an ethernet cable will provide more consistent speeds. However, with the constant advancement in wifi technology, the difference in speed is getting smaller.
Is there anything better than Wi-Fi 6? ›Called Wi-Fi 6E, these products support 6GHz wireless spectrum. Essentially, this means Wi-Fi 6E enables faster speeds and lower latencies than Wi-Fi 6 and earlier iterations.
What is boost Wi-Fi 6? ›WiFi 6, also known as IEEE 802.11ax, is the new standard for WiFi. It's an upgrade from the current IEEE 802.11ac, or WiFi 5, standard. WiFi 6 is designed to deliver blazing fast speeds, support more devices at the same time, decrease latency, and increase bandwidth.
Can I use a Wi-Fi 6 extender with a WiFi 4 router? ›
Although it's a Wi-Fi 6 extender, it will also work with routers that use older Wi-Fi 4 and Wi-Fi 5 technology.
Does Wi-Fi 6 penetrate walls better? ›Wi-Fi 6 can be thought of as High-Efficiency Wireless and consists of devices that are certified to follow the IEEE 802.11ax and 802.11ay specification standards. You won't see much about 802.11ay, but it's part of Wi-Fi 6. It uses the 60 GHz frequency band, which has difficulty penetrating walls.
Does Wi-Fi 6 improve latency? ›Wi-Fi 6 lowers latency compared to older Wi-Fi standards, using more advanced technology like OFDMA (orthogonal frequency-division multiple access). Basically, it's better at packing data into a signal. Of course, Wi-Fi 6 will also be faster.
Does Wi-Fi 6 have better range than WiFi 5? ›Longer Range
While Wi-Fi 5 is limited to the 5 GHz band, Wi-Fi 6 takes advantage of both the 5 GHz band and the 2.4 GHz band. This means its signal is able to reach much farther than Wi-Fi 5.
NETGEAR's Nighthawk AX8 router uses the latest Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) standard to provide eight WiFi streams. With four 2.4 GHz and four 5 GHz streams, the AX8 enables up to four 1x1 devices to send and receive data at the same time.
How fast is Wi-Fi 6? ›So, how much faster is Wi-Fi 6? 9.6 Gbps is the maximum throughput of Wi-Fi 6 across multiple channels. In contrast, Wi-Fi 5 offers a maximum of 3.5 Gbps. These are theoretical maximums however; in real-world situations, local networks may not reach this top speed.
How fast is 2.4 Gbps? ›Hence, a 2×2 connection has a ceiling speed of 2.4 Gbps (2400Mbps), and a quad-stream (4×4) tops at a whopping 4.8 Gbps. What is this? The 2.4GHz band of Wi-Fi 6 has a base speed of about 288Mbps per stream on paper and tends to be relatively slow in real life.
Is Wi-Fi 6 GOOD? ›WiFi 6 provides the fastest real-world speeds and range
In WiFi technology, each frequency band (2.4 GHz or 5 GHz) is made of component streams. It is on these streams that our WiFi data travels. WiFi 5 and WiFi 6 carry the highest number of streams, thus allowing for gigabit WiFi speeds.
As a rule of thumb, a Netgear representative told us, consumers should consider replacing their router after three years, and representatives from Google and Linksys said a three-to-five-year window was appropriate. Amazon, which owns the popular Eero brand of routers, put the range at three to four years.
What is the next Wi-Fi technology? ›Compared to the previous generation (WiFi 6, 802.11ax), WiFi 7 is expected to support up to 30Gbps of throughput, which is about three times faster than WiFi 6, and can exceed twice the number of frequencies use.
What are the 3 types of Wi-Fi? ›
Your choice for your home or business will come down to three: Wireless G, N or AC. Routers that only support Wireless B are no longer manufactured.
What is fastest Wi-Fi speed? ›In most cities, the fastest internet speeds are around 1 gigabit per second, which is the same as 1,000 megabits per second. You may see this written as 1 Gbps or 1,000 Mbps. In some areas, you may find speeds twice that fast or be limited to slower cable or DSL internet service.
Whats the fastest Wi-Fi? ›Google Fiber is the fastest internet provider in the United States, delivering the fastest average speeds to its customers on the most consistent basis. With maximum advertised speeds up to 2,000 Mbps and 12-month average download speeds of 167.1 Mbps, the fiber provider earns an integrated speed score (ISS) of 185.2.
What is a 6GHz Wi-Fi? ›The 6 GHz band is newly certified and is exclusive to devices that support WiFi 6E. This means that on 6 GHz, the WiFi network doesn't need to slow down to accommodate legacy devices. The 6 GHz band also supports almost twice as many channels as 5 GHz.
How can I increase my Wi-Fi speed? ›For the best signal, put the wireless router out in the open on the main floor of your house, away from walls and obstructions. Ideally, you'll want to position it off the floor, above the furniture. Keep it away from other electronics that might cause interference, like microwaves, baby monitors, and cordless phones.
Should I use both 2.4 GHz and 5GHz? ›If you want a better and a longer range for your devices, use 2.4 GHz. If you need higher r speed and could sacrifice for range, the 5GHz band should be used. The 5GHz band, which is the newer of the two, has the potential to cut through network clutter disturbance and interference to maximize network performance.
How do I get 900 Mbps Wi-Fi? ›Even third party testing confirms using a WiFi Network Extender with MoCA provides the best Wi-Fi boost at 900 Mbps or better. WiFi Network Extenders including ScreenBeam's WCB6200Q combine the ease of WiFi with a wired network backhaul using Ethernet or MoCA technology.
Does Wi-Fi 6 improve latency? ›Wi-Fi 6 lowers latency compared to older Wi-Fi standards, using more advanced technology like OFDMA (orthogonal frequency-division multiple access). Basically, it's better at packing data into a signal. Of course, Wi-Fi 6 will also be faster.
What is the benefit of Wi-Fi? ›Using Wi-Fi to connect to the Internet drains less battery life than using a mobile network, especially in situations where the cellular coverage fluctuates. Since Wi-Fi is generally faster than using mobile networks, you will also not spend as much time transferring the data, which further decreases battery usage.
Does Wi-Fi 6 Use 6GHz? ›Bottom line: Early-adopter devices using Wi-Fi 6 (such as the first batch of Wi-Fi 6 routers) are limited to the 2.4GHz and 5GHz spectrum, while Wi-Fi 6E-compliant devices will have access to all those juicy 6GHz airwaves.