Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

2.4ghz vs. 5.7ghz Wireless Broadband?

Posted by Cliff on from the packet-friendly-EM-band dept.

As a bit of a follow-up to our previous discussion on wireless broadband options, Linxx asks: "I work for a company in Yuma, Arizona that offers Wireless Internet access. We cover a large area that extends into Southern California as well as Mexico. We currently use 2.4ghz equipment to do this. We are looking into using 5.7ghz equipment to feed our access points and the rebroadcast at at 2.4ghz. We hope to releive some interferance issues. What I want to know is if anyone has actually compared the two, and if so what kind of results were produced."

1 of 14 comments (clear)

  1. 2.4GHz vs 5.8GHz - real world by fwc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been doing wireless ISP stuff for quite a while so I know what you're talking about.

    Here's the key points:

    5.xGHz is EXPENSIVE. I can't in good faith recommend it for ISP to customer links, except for those customers who need to have solid, VERY high speed links. Use 5.x GHz for your backbone between pops.

    5.xGHz tends to be ROCK SOLID. There are actually two chunks of bandwidth up there which are useful this. I personally have used the UNII band stuff which is below 5.8 (three bands - the highest at 5.7GHz), and I can't say I've been really interfered with. This is in a community where 2.4GHz in parts of town is completely saturated.

    So if you want expensive but rock solid use the 5.8 GHz stuff.

    What we tend to do is use the 5.8GHz for Backhaul from our repeater "cell" sites and use the 2.4GHz for our "last mile". Keeping the cell cites small and using polarization, channels, and sectoral antennas to your advantage is the key.