/article/2011/05/06/132857-airport_icon.jpg?lossy){kind=icon}
HardMac reports that the new iMac released earlier this week brings support for 450 Mbit/sec Wi-Fi connectivity, adding a third antenna to support the higher speed using multiple-input/multiple-output (MIMO) standards when connected to a compatible network access point. The iMac joins the latest MacBook Pro in offering the improved connection speeds.
It seems that Apple seeks to standardize this data flow. Thus, the new iMac is also compatible with the 450 Mbits/s. For that, Apple changed their Airport card and also installed 3 antennas (instead of 2 before), something indispensabie to be able simultaneously to use 3 channels of 150 Mbits/s.
In order to take advantage of the increased speeds with compatible base stations such as the latest AirPort Extreme and Time Capsule, users must be sure to set the base station's options to use the 5 GHz band and to allow use of wide channels.
Top Rated Comments
(View all)Sorry, but I don't see the point here, considering that 100% of the Internet connections in the world are well under 200Mbps...other than for internal networks (like file transfer between two devices), what's the advantage?
You just said it. Internal networks. Transferring files between multiple computers, streaming 1080p video from your desktop to your laptop...Especially useful if you do network backups (say to a Time Capsule or NAS) regularly.
I have a gigabit/CAT6 network in the walls of my house. Surely, this is useless since my internet connection is only 40 mbps, right? Not exactly.
Gotcha...streaming video may be a good use for this extra bandwidth...what is the necessary rate for HD streaming?
The real need for gigabit ethernet shows in back-up.
Sorry, but I don't see the point here, considering that 100% of the Internet connections in the world are well under 200Mbps...other than for internal networks (like file transfer between two devices), what's the advantage?
All my photos live on a NAS, therefore a speedy WiFi connection is a must. I use a Canon 5d mark II, and the raw files from it are ~30 MB each, which must be loaded on my computer for correction. After a day of shooting, i can have 16 - 20 GB of pictures that have to be uploaded to the NAS over wifi
Anything less than 5Ghz 802.11 n does not cut it for many users.
Sorry, but I don't see the point here, considering that 100% of the Internet connections in the world are well under 200Mbps...other than for internal networks (like file transfer between two devices), what's the advantage?
Progress?
Besides, a lot of wireless bandwidth is lost due to interference and overhead ... the more theoretical bandwidth you can get, the better overall real-world performance.
Thanks! Could you give details on the actual throughput? The link speed is the maximum theoretical throughput which is never achieved. When tested at release it was much slower than a lot of other models - I'm wondering if this dramatically increases transfer speeds?
I did some tests:There is the distinct possibility of no real world improvements - some 3x3 models just released perform no better than the best 2x2 implementations.
First I copied a file from my TimeMachine drive connected to the APE:
I got a steady 14MB/s, as you can see in the screenshot.
Then I did the same test with the Ethernet Cable connected:
And, of course, it was faster, but not twice as fast as one would expect...
Then, I disabled "wide channels" (necessary for the 450 rate as described in this thread) and my link speed dropped to 216 (I was expecting 300, it must be some kinda noise or interference...)
The interesting thing is that it's not just slower, but much more inconstant than the other two, with speed varying from 6 to 10 MB/s more or less...
I hope that's useful! :)