I will agree with Mark on the performance of the 450 3.65ghz NLOS. Having run all 3 of the different frequencies bands in 450 the 2.4Ghz version of 450 will out perform the 3.65ghz version all day long. Its about somewhere in the middle between 2.4ghz and 5ghz. The only reason I am deploying any 3.65ghz 450 at all at this point is due to the threat of noise on 2.4ghz with all the WIFI routers and wireless cameras and baby monitors people are starting to put up. If there wasn't any possibility of the noise on 2.4 I would be exclusively deploying 2.4ghz and not use any 3.65ghz at all.
Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Mark Radabaugh <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/17/15 2:29 PM, Eric Muehleisen wrote: > >> Has anyone conducted this test yet? 450 might be getting closer to the >> NLOS capabilities of the 320 because of the recent added features like 5ms >> framing and MIMO-A. A side-by-side comparison would be nice. >> >> -Eric >> > 450 3.65 works like you would expect something between 2.4 and 5.7 to > work. Some NLOS capabilities but nothing amazing. > > 320 (and all WIMAX) was in my experience unpredictable. It would work in > some places that seemed impossible and not work in others that absolutely > should have been fine. 450 3.65 is more predictable - you can usually > look at what is in the way and say 'yeah - that should work'. > > I put a 450 3.65 AP up right next to a 320 AP and tried to swap all the > customers. Some worked, some didn't. At this point I'm waiting for > summer and all the trees before trying to figure out what to do about the > customers I can't swap over. > > Mark > > -- > Mark Radabaugh > Amplex > > [email protected] 419.837.5015 x 1021 > >
