Well, if you're already using them and happy... They are cheap and available.Would you stick with cAP AC?
I need about 140 devices, so management is critical. I need a working CLI, etc.Expectations. The TP LINK EAP 245 is the same cost as a CAPAC and works far better.
I am not sure, if he tried to test both APs with the same channel at the same time.Somebody on YouTube made a comparison and found much weaker coverage with the XL
Not congested - intereference. There will be only 5 clients vor 3 APs. The warehouse is filled with high metal shelfs in long rows up to the ceiling. In every row, there are 5 robot-cars carrying boxes.Since you mentioned "congested environment", without Wave2, you're going to battle without the full army of tools.
It's true, there are some doubts over his testing.I am not sure, if he tried to test both APs with the same channel at the same time.Somebody on YouTube made a comparison and found much weaker coverage with the XL
If I played backseat robot driver here, stick with cAP ac – you know it, it works well enough. A working CLI is certainly in the plus column on Mikrotik. Both the cAP ac and cAP ac XL have the same ARM chip, so one really just a bigger (more gain) antenna. Given the intereference, you'll likely need to de-power the APs the XL anyway. Same units at both your shops, means you have spares that be drop-in replacements. The lower cost means you can order extra if needed more APs.
[...]
I need about 140 devices, so management is critical. I need a working CLI, etc.
[...]
Not congested - intereference. There will be only 5 clients vor 3 APs. The warehouse is filled with high metal shelfs in long rows up to the ceiling. In every row, there are 5 robot-cars carrying boxes.
--> VERY low bandwidth demands
--> VERY low client number
--> VERY much interference
That would be great!!I will do my own comparison this weekend and post the results.
...Very close to this area (about 5 meters from the AP, other side of the till area), I saw a surprisingly weak signal on 5GHz (~-65 - -68dBm if I recall)
The power output is reduced from 20dBm to 14dBm because routerOS is told that the antenna is 6dBi gain.
I suspect the antenna might not be very good or not really be 6dBi :-/ Who knows.
@carl0sI will do my own comparison this weekend and post the results.
Last I checked, this is a Mikrotik forum?The Ubiquiti WIFI U6 Pro is cheaper than the TPLINK eap660HD by about $80 and thus may be excellent value IF, IF it can be configured in a stand alone mode.
if you really thinking about using netgear and tplink anywhere, NOBODY wanna understand you....If anyone has extra money to give CZFAN some Netgear WIFI6E products maybe he will understand!!
Hmm, I thought Czech folks were practical and used what works!!if you really thinking about using netgear and tplink anywhere, NOBODY wanna understand you....If anyone has extra money to give CZFAN some Netgear WIFI6E products maybe he will understand!!
It's very hard to know from specs if any antenna design is actually good. Why I suspect @bpwl isn't offering a conclusion .[...][...]
I suspect the antenna might not be very good or not really be 6dBi :-/ Who knows.
cAP ac XL will reduce it's TX power due to regulations in Europe....
So somebody measuring the received signal strength indoors at the client, will likely find that the cAP ac XL is weaker than the cAP ac. (The signal path comes from many directions due to reflections)
Concluding that therefor the cAP ac XL is inferior to the cAP ac is wifi being contra-intuitive.
The cAP ac XL antenna gain amplifiies the received signal from the client! That is the usual benefit of an AP with higher antenna gain: "amplifying the reception", and as such extending the range.
That's a lot of APs, congrats! Certainly never easy, but Wi-Fi can be deploy successfully using most vendors, some easier than others. But no situation or environment is identical, with variables out of anyones control – that what makes Wi-Fi hard. The question at hand is cAP ac XL...we deployed around 30 grand stream wifi AP
I think of Wi-Fi more like sound, not light: Speakers as AP, Clients as listeners, distortion/compression/reverb/etc. Also not entirely true either – wifi is two-wayI think too often on RF as light propagation. It's not. Diffuse light is good, diffuse RF is somewhat the worst to get (good SNR, poor CCQ)
cAP ac XL has a mirror plate they say. What does it do? Creating a second mirrored coherent source? Does it introduce destructive interference? I have no idea.
We use the hAP ac2 a lot as Wi-Fi for M&C things, I too found it works pretty well (perhaps better stated: meets the needs). We tried the cAP ac's when they came out, but we found they work about the same then hAP ac2. So we just use another hAP ac2 as 2nd+ AP when add'l Wi-Fi is needed. Since they have more ports than the cAP ac it might avoid some devices needing Wi-Fi @ roughly same cost, so the hAP ac2 were a good fit, even if not an "AP" or industrial device. Maybe that's not a bad idea for the OP.https://courses.lumenlearning.com/physi ... xperiment/
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhysics/com ... structive/
In my experience a free standing hAP ac2 always outperforms a cAP ac on the wall? Placement is crucial.
I don't have a cAp ac XL, maybe because my tests with an Omnitik indoors gave such bad wall-passing performance, it holds me back buying one with higher gain/directional antenna.
(And the Omnitik radiation pattern is documented, but didn't help me to find a good setup)
I have been using CAP ac for several years, and now I have got CAP XL ac. Taking this opportunity, I made a comparison of access points at home. My conditions: walls made of reinforced concrete. A large number of neighboring access points operate in the 2.4 GHz band (about 20 with a signal level greater than -80 dB, maximum level -40 dB). In the 5 GHz range, there are some free frequencies.
The access point is attached to the ceiling approximately in the center of the apartment and operates in CAPs mode. I tested it using a smartphone (80MHz/1S) and an old laptop (40MHz/2S) in 3 locations: from 3m with almost line of sight to 10m and two walls. After measuring CAP ac, I replaced it with CAP XL ac (the same location and also in the CAPs mode with the same settings). I got the following results:
- 2.4 GHz SAP on a smartphone and on a laptop, the results of CAP ac and CAP XL ac are about the same.
- 5 GHz - the laptop has about the same results as on CAP ac. Smartphone remote location - practically does not work with both AP. At nearby locations, the speed has significantly increased from 150 - 170/160 - 180 to 210 - 240/240 -300
According to data from the WiFi analyzer on a smartphone, the signal levels CAP XL ac are slightly lower compared to CAP ac
These measurements are for rough estimation in my particular case.
This final comment seems to suggest the XL is actually worse signal strength wise. What's the situation 2 years later? There was some suggestion that RouterOS was getting the antenna gain etc. wrong.According to data from the WiFi analyzer on a smartphone, the signal levels CAP XL ac are slightly lower compared to CAP ac