There's more than a 6mb difference when you consider 450m.
Your 450 SM's are compatible with the 450m AP, so your investment in
those SM's allows an upgrade path by replacing the AP with a 450m.
That said, I have very little to complain about with the ePMP. Cheap,
reliable, and good set of features. It's a really good value.
------ Original Message ------
From: "That One Guy /sarcasm" <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: 1/5/2017 9:48:54 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] epmp vs 450 comparison
"if im running 75/25, epmp is roughly 87mb capacity, 450 93mb capacity"
is this correct? or have I looked at the wrong spec sheets?
we run 450 3ghz, we like it, but still are burned on the 320 promises
and lack of delivery and have less than zero trust in cambium sales
people.
As far as 5ghz goes, we are pretty lucky, so there is alot of spectrum
outside 5.8 and so many channels across the band, so we are uniquish in
that respect. Im just having a hard time justifying a 4x cost increase
for 6mb more throughput. We also arent dense, 40-50 subs is a heavily
loaded AP to us, we want to offer 25x5, and over-subscription ratios
are so low now thats a hard ball to carry without hiding behind "up to"
when the budget only allows 1/4 the Access points.
Im not arguing, just thinking out loud, Im approved for 450, I just
dont know that its a cost effective choice for our particular market
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists
<[email protected]> wrote:
With ePMP you are limited to (IIRC) 75/25 and 50/50 for the up/ down
ratio. With 450 you can slice and dice the bandwidth anyway you want.
Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 <tel:(312)%20205-2519> Office
574-220-7826 <tel:(574)%20220-7826> Cell
[email protected]
On Jan 5, 2017, at 9:21 AM, Trey Scarborough <[email protected]> wrote:
Your biggest difference is your throughput per MHZ your epmp will do
less bandwidth in a 20mhz channel than a 450. he other big difference
is subscriber density. It is not recommended to go over 20-30 subs
per AP on epmp without loss of performance. I regularly see 450 APs
with 70+ subs per AP. With Medusa I have seen over 130. As far as the
Medusa not being field proven you may not have field tested it yet,
but I know for a fact it has been tested and running on networks for
some time now and a viable solution.
If you have any more questions feel free to hit me up off list.
On 1/5/2017 7:36 AM, David Milholen wrote:
The radios on these 2 are entirely different. One is using std based
radio and the other completely proprietary.
Since framing will be slightly different and so will processing
delay.
The stds based radio gets close to mimicking the
450 series but thats strictly based on Cambium magic. Capacity and
sustained rates per VC is the where you will see a difference.
Latency will be very consistent from ap to sub. PMP450i is where its
at.
On 1/4/2017 2:55 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote:
if im running 75/25, epmp is roughly 87mb capacity, 450 93mb
capacity
is this correct?
are efficiencies batter on 450 if installation is the same? ie, if
I
forlifted one AP with 17 epmps to 450, where would my gains be
assuming everything stays installed in the same spot. Its not like
the
FCC gives 450 any more power than epmp, so path loss should be the
same.
Im looking at this epmp 1000 sector thats running overall about
64-7%
efficient with 17 subscribers and wondering what the gain is to
move
to 450 (exclude medusa, as its not field proven)
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your
team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the
team.
--
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your
team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
