# Wireless 2.4G or 5G, does it matter?



## lmacmil (Oct 26, 2015)

My router sits about 10' from my Roamio. I recently updated the router firmware and had to set up the connection again. I chose the 5G connection this time and notice my signal strength is showing 80-82%. With the 2.4G connection, it runs 97-100%. There doesn't appear to be any difference in functionality. Is there a reason to run one speed vs the other?


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

lmacmil said:


> My router sits about 10' from my Roamio. I recently updated the router firmware and had to set up the connection again. I chose the 5G connection this time and notice my signal strength is showing 80-82%. With the 2.4G connection, it runs 97-100%. There doesn't appear to be any difference in functionality. Is there a reason to run one speed vs the other?


Not really. Your distance is short. Likely the power of the router's 5GHz transmitter is less that the 2.5GHz. At this time there are more devices using 2.4HGz, so the chance of interference is higher. Much depends on your location and other environmental factors. I use 5GHz, my router is on a different floor, and my signal is 85% to 90%.

If you can find a free copy of inSSIDer, you can get a picture of what's around you if you have a wireless PC to use.


----------



## Sheffield Steve (Jun 11, 2010)

2.4G will travel further distances than 5G hence the signal strength readings you see.

Use 5G, because it's range is shorter and not as widely used as 2.4G and thus it's less likely to be subject to interference from other routers.



lmacmil said:


> My router sits about 10' from my Roamio. I recently updated the router firmware and had to set up the connection again. I chose the 5G connection this time and notice my signal strength is showing 80-82%. With the 2.4G connection, it runs 97-100%. There doesn't appear to be any difference in functionality. Is there a reason to run one speed vs the other?


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

lmacmil said:


> My router sits about 10' from my Roamio. I recently updated the router firmware and had to set up the connection again. I chose the 5G connection this time and notice my signal strength is showing 80-82%. With the 2.4G connection, it runs 97-100%. There doesn't appear to be any difference in functionality. Is there a reason to run one speed vs the other?


When most people think of wireless speed, they naturally associate it with signal strength based on the number of "bands" or in your case a percentage of something related to "strength". This kind of logic starts to fail when the comparison is between the 2.4 GHz and 5GHz bands, particularly with newer AC rated equipment. In a typical example, a dual band router sold as offering "1750 Mbps" potential throughput offers a max. of 450 Mbps on the 2.4Ghz band but 1300 Mbps on the 5 GHz band. Notice that the 5Ghz band offers almost 3 times the potential max speed of the 2.4 GHz band. When you run an actual network speed test in the real world, it is normal to have a "3 bar" 5GHz signal out perform a "5 bar" 2.4GHz signal in throughput and by a wide margin.
Here are some tools to measure for network congestion.
Free version of inSSider.
http://www.techspot.com/downloads/5936-inssider.html

For windows XIRRUS WI-FI INSPECTOR
http://wvw.xirrus.com/wifi-inspector

For android use WiFi analyzer, a free app.


----------



## justen_m (Jan 15, 2004)

Interference is the deciding factor for me. I use 5GHz because I live in an apartment complex and can detect over a dozen 2.4GHz networks. Mine is the only 5GHz I can see.


----------



## CCourtney (Mar 28, 2006)

justen_m said:


> Interference is the deciding factor for me. I use 5GHz because I live in an apartment complex and can detect over a dozen 2.4GHz networks. Mine is the only 5GHz I can see.


I'd recommend using an App to see what channels they're on, and find a relatively open channel (with nothing or very week signals next to the channel) and set your router to use that channel. That should take care of the channel issues.

OT:
As for 5GHz, if you're strong enough to make a solid connection your good. The reason for seeing a lower 'strength' is the higher the frequency the lower the penetration. I'm guess that while it's 10' away it has a wall in between.

But I'd agree at 80%+ I'd go with the 5GHz network.


----------



## Worf (Sep 15, 2000)

Higher frequencies are attenuated more by the atmosphere, hence their shorter range. They're also more directional (travel in straighter lines).

At 2.4 GHz, channel matters because only 1, 6 and 11 are the only non-overlapping channels (in WiFi, each channel overlaps with other channels, so if you use channel 3, your router is transmitting part of the signal on channels 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 as well).

5GHz has much more bandwidth (the ISM band is wider) so there are a lot more channels so you get less interference and things can be spaced out wider. You generally can't set the channel as it's auto-determined because of interference concerns. (5GHz may be ISM, but it's a secondary user so primary users have priority over the frequencies.) The primary user of 5GHz is radar - weather and airport radar in particular. Doppler radar requires a wide swath of frequencies (because the return frequency is unknown), and by law, if your ISM gear (WiFi included) detects a radar signal, it must switch to a new frequency immediately. The WiFI protocol has management frames to coordinate this so it's seamless.


----------



## lmacmil (Oct 26, 2015)

Worf said:


> 5GHz has much more bandwidth (the ISM band is wider) so there are a lot more channels so you get less interference and things can be spaced out wider. You generally can't set the channel as it's auto-determined because of interference concerns. (5GHz may be ISM, but it's a secondary user so primary users have priority over the frequencies.) The primary user of 5GHz is radar - weather and airport radar in particular. Doppler radar requires a wide swath of frequencies (because the return frequency is unknown), and by law, if your ISM gear (WiFi included) detects a radar signal, it must switch to a new frequency immediately. The WiFI protocol has management frames to coordinate this so it's seamless.


This reminds me of the old lawyer joke: everything you've said is perfectly true but you've given me no useful information! 

Thanks for taking the time to explain this, even though I didn't really understand any of it.


----------



## lmacmil (Oct 26, 2015)

CCourtney said:


> As for 5GHz, if you're strong enough to make a solid connection your good. The reason for seeing a lower 'strength' is the higher the frequency the lower the penetration. I'm guess that while it's 10' away it has a wall in between.
> 
> But I'd agree at 80%+ I'd go with the 5GHz network.


I'm seeing 82-85% now. The Tivo's line of sight is blocked by my receiver and TV, probably worse than a wall. I will leave it on the 5Ghz band.


----------



## gweempose (Mar 23, 2003)

Like others have already said, the 5Ghz band generally has much less traffic. Unless range is an issue, 5Ghz is the way to go.


----------



## justen_m (Jan 15, 2004)

CCourtney said:


> I'd recommend using an App to see what channels they're on


I did a while ago. That's why I know 5GHz is the way to go. (wavemon on linux). It shows all signals, their channels and strength, utilization, etc, and some summary info. e.g. I just ran it and see...
1/31, top 3 ch 1(9), 11(9), 6(8)
meaning 1 5GHz signal, 31 2.4GHz signals, 9 signals on channel 1, on 11, and 8 on 6. I see a few oddballs on 2,4,7, and 8.

Seeing as I get a perfect 5GHz connection (my router is 6 feet away, unobstructed LOS), I think I'll stick with it for my 5n/ac devices.  My ancient netbook only does 2.4g, but I just leave my router on autoselect for both bands.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Worf said:


> Higher frequencies are attenuated more by the atmosphere, hence their shorter range. They're also more directional (travel in straighter lines).
> 
> At 2.4 GHz, channel matters because only 1, 6 and 11 are the only non-overlapping channels (in WiFi, each channel overlaps with other channels, so if you use channel 3, your router is transmitting part of the signal on channels 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 as well).
> 
> 5GHz has much more bandwidth (the ISM band is wider) so there are a lot more channels so you get less interference and things can be spaced out wider. You generally can't set the channel as it's auto-determined because of interference concerns. (5GHz may be ISM, but it's a secondary user so primary users have priority over the frequencies.) The primary user of 5GHz is radar - weather and airport radar in particular. Doppler radar requires a wide swath of frequencies (because the return frequency is unknown), and by law, if your ISM gear (WiFi included) detects a radar signal, it must switch to a new frequency immediately. The WiFI protocol has management frames to coordinate this so it's seamless.


Every router I've used lets me set the specific channel used for 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz. Even the crappy FiOS Actiontec routers let you choose. I never let it auto select. Every time I test auto select with routers, I typically end up with slower wireless speeds. So I typically see what networks are in the area and choose the channels used based on what channels I see in use and the number of networks per channel.


----------

