This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Are these wireless receivers any good?

#1temgunPosted 11/24/2013 3:55:34 PM
http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-WN751ND-Wireless-Adapter-Low-profile/dp/B005FUGPP4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385337086&sr=8-1&keywords=TP-Link+TL-WN751ND

http://www.amazon.com/PCE-N10-Wireless-N-Network-Transmit-Interface/dp/B004ZMGBLQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385337095&sr=8-1&keywords=Asus+PCI-N10

Tbh, I have no idea what is good and what is not since I've never actually used these things. Is the basic 1 antenna model enough? Are they adequate for gaming (FFXIV for starters)? What is the range on these things? The PC and the router has two walls between them, so will it be sufficient? And yes, a wired solution is out of question.
#2_GRIM_FANDANGO_Posted 11/24/2013 4:09:15 PM(edited)
What is the download speed made available to you by your provider.

These do not pick up a signal as well as some of the more expensive PCI wireless adapters. Also, they are only 150Mbps, which for a lot of people would mean that they are not able to provide the full speed available to them. Even though for gaming, upload and download speed is never the limiting factor. What matters is latency and the stability of your network. Though for that, given the description of your circumstances, I think these might not be sufficient. Though of course, this is only one part of the equation. Having both a router and a wireless adapter that provide a stable network and good connection is of course the best way to have a good wireless network.

If range is an issue, there are plenty of options. The new 802.11ac strandard (though range is not its strong point at 5ghz, it may still be a much better option depending on circumstances), range extenders, power line adapters etc.
---
I5 3570 | GTX 760 | FILCO Majestouch 2 tenkeyless | Zowie FK | Asus Xonar DGX | Kingston 120 GB SSD | Sennheiser HD 518 | Samsung S24A350H
#3temgun(Topic Creator)Posted 11/24/2013 4:32:08 PM
150 mbps is not enough for a lot of people? Most people don't even have a 100 mbps (which I have), or is there some restrictive property I'm not aware of? Basically, what's the point of a 300 mbps receiver if only less than 1% of people have a connection that fast?

All I know is that the TP-Link supports 802.11n and so does my router, so that's a good thing? The distance between the router and PC is about 10 m (32 feet?).
#4DragnfyrPosted 11/24/2013 4:54:14 PM
_GRIM_FANDANGO_ posted...
What is the download speed made available to you by your provider.

These do not pick up a signal as well as some of the more expensive PCI wireless adapters. Also, they are only 150Mbps, which for a lot of people would mean that they are not able to provide the full speed available to them. Even though for gaming, upload and download speed is never the limiting factor. What matters is latency and the stability of your network. Though for that, given the description of your circumstances, I think these might not be sufficient. Though of course, this is only one part of the equation. Having both a router and a wireless adapter that provide a stable network and good connection is of course the best way to have a good wireless network.

If range is an issue, there are plenty of options. The new 802.11ac strandard (though range is not its strong point at 5ghz, it may still be a much better option depending on circumstances), range extenders, power line adapters etc.


Most people have 10-50Mbps Internet. It's rare to see anyone with more than 100Mbps Internet.
Wireless N has pretty good range. I can get a good signal even when my router is on the first floor and I'm on the second floor. Two rooms away on the same floor doesn't seem that far away.
---
MacBook Pro with Retina Display | 15.4" 2880x1800 | Core i7-3615QM @ 2.3GHz | 8GB DDR3 1600MHz | GT 650M 1GB GDDR5 | 256GB SSD | OSX 10.9 | Windows 8.1 Pro
#5_GRIM_FANDANGO_Posted 11/25/2013 9:40:34 AM(edited)
temgun posted...
150 mbps is not enough for a lot of people? Most people don't even have a 100 mbps (which I have), or is there some restrictive property I'm not aware of? Basically, what's the point of a 300 mbps receiver if only less than 1% of people have a connection that fast?

All I know is that the TP-Link supports 802.11n and so does my router, so that's a good thing? The distance between the router and PC is about 10 m (32 feet?).


I guess that I did not account for people in the US on average having much worse speeds than us here in Holland . Over here, a lot of people would make good use of a 300 mbps router. I should have thought of that. Anyway, I was just trying to help.

Another thing to consider is that in a real world scenario, you will likely not achieve the rated Mbps that is on the box. There are circumstances where a faster more high end dual band router would give much better results , even if that is more than you would need based on the speeds available to you (as they are often able to achieve better speeds at the same range). You could try the 150 mbps router, but based on the circumstances you describe, I would be surprised if you get your full speeds, but I hope I am wrong.
---
I5 3570 | GTX 760 | FILCO Majestouch 2 tenkeyless | Zowie FK | Asus Xonar DGX | Kingston 120 GB SSD | Sennheiser HD 518 | Samsung S24A350H