![]() How this translates into vertical connections is dependent on how the floors are constructed and, if they are concrete, how much metal reinforcement they might contain. An office or retail space 77ft square is still a good size for a small business unless they have a large workshop or production area. Where the SXK80 can handle a building space of up to 18,000 square feet with a maximum of six satellites, the SXK30 can also connect to six satellites but only covers 6,000 square feet. ![]() And, on the SXK80, additional bandwidth can’t be easily allocated to each user even if the overall pool is greater. With less than a third of the potential bandwidth to share around, the SXK30 can’t effectively handle the same number of users as the SXK80 or provide the same coverage.īecause the backhaul doesn’t have a dedicated 5GHz channel, installing an Ethernet line to provide this data pathway is converted as an option on the SXK80 to a practical necessity on the SXK30.ĭoing that entirely undermines the purpose of MESH wireless networking, but with the limited bandwidth of the Mini, it might be the best policy.įor that small number, maybe up to 10 users, the performance they will experience will match that of the much more expensive option, as each will only be taking a modest amount of the 1800Mbps available. Essentially bandwidth is halved on both 5GHz and 2.4GHz, with not four but two channels on each, and the 5GHz backhaul is now shared with the users and not dedicated. ![]() Where the SXK80 offered tri-band 4×4 AX6000, the SXK30 is reduced to dual-band and only AX1800 operations. That’s a slight change, but the big differences are inside, where Netgear have dramatically reduced the amount of wireless technology available. But, as we’ll see later, for other reasons that might not be a good idea. Therefore, the best backchannel performance of the Mini might be over WiFi since the maximum of a single Ethernet line is just 1Gbit. Where this option differs from the SXK80 hardware is that the Ethernet switch components had link aggregation and 2.5 GbE Ethernet on that design, but those features are both missing from the SXK30. On the satellite, all four are for distributing a wired network.Īs with most MESH wireless configurations, it is possible to extend the network by connecting the satellites using purely wireless communication or by providing a wired backbone. The only significant difference between the router and satellite is that the four Ethernet ports on the router include a single WAN port to connect to the Internet broadband modem. We liked that these don’t merely clip them to the mounts, as it should ensure that they can’t be easily knocked off or stolen.įrom the outside, the two parts look practically identical. They also use similar, plastic L-shaped wall-mounts attached to the wall before the router or satellite are then screwed onto them. And, once mounted high up using the provided brackets, they’re impossible to ignore.Īt just 18.9 cm (7.4 inches), the SXR30 router and SXS30 satellite (combined are called the SXK30) are less imposing, even if they have roughly the same oddly rhomboid shaping. Where this hardware has the edge over the larger and more expensive Netgear Orbi Pro WiFi 6 (SXK80) is in its smaller scale.īoth the router and satellites of the SXK80 are substantial slabs of technology standing some 24.6 cm (9.7 inches) high. (Image credit: NETGEAR) Design and features
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |