Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which router/port

Last response: in Networking
Share
October 22, 2006 5:10:30 AM

Sorry, I'm new to this section, and I couldn't find out where to post this, I'm hoping this is the right part.

Anyways, I've been looking to upgrade my 11 mb/s wireless adapter.

I don't know much of a difference between a wireless ethernet port, and a wireless ethernet bridge, and a wireless adapter are.

Anyways, my four choices, which I am down to are:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1683...

A Wireless Bridge

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E1687...

A wireless ethernet port.

and

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1683...

A wireless Bridge

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1683...

The Wireless Adapter

I have a Linksys router downstairs, but I'm not sure which to get. My main uses for this are just the Internet, and playing PC games such as battlefield 2 and Counterstrike. I was looking to get an ethernet port because usually they are faster than any wireless I was told.

Which one should i get?

More about : router port

October 23, 2006 12:26:03 AM

Don't make things more complicated than they need to be. If what you are trying to do is connect your computer to the router, you need an adaptor, not a bridge.

Unless your computer is older, you probably already have a 10/100 ethernet adaptor built in. Look on the back for it. It will be where an Rj45 connector plugs in.

Yes, wired ethernet is faster than wireless. 11g wireless runs at a claimed 54Mbps, but actual throughput is more like 20Mbps or so. Your 10/100 ethernet interface will run at 100Mbps (if the wired connection to your router is also 100Mbps - it almost certainly is). But, you would have to run Cat5e cable from your computer to the router.

If running cable is not possible (or too much trouble), get a 802.11g wireless adaptor. A PCI adaptor is best if you have an empty PCI slot. Otherwise, one that connects to one of your USB 2.0 ports will work fine. Don't waste your money on an 802.11g adaptor to connect to a USB1.1 port, since it will not run any faster than the 11b adaptor you have now.

Make sure your 802.11g adaptor you buy supports WPA security, in case you ever want to enable that.
October 23, 2006 5:00:22 AM

Iceblue,

Thanks for replying. I was recently talking to someone, and figured out what to do.

At first, I thought an Ethernet Bridge was like an adaptor, except you use an ethernet cable to connect it to your computer! Boy, was I wrong!

I have a fairly new computer, although I got ripped off of it. [I built a socket 939 in May this year]. I'm upgrading my Wireless Router, and my Adapter. My adapter is running Wireless B, and this new one is 54 mb/s running wireless G.

Now, my new options are:

Should I get

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E1683...

or:

http://www.netgear.com/Products/Adapters/RangeMaxAdapte...
Related resources
October 23, 2006 7:37:07 PM

I'm not a big fan of the various range-enhancing adaptors. I don't think they are worth the money or the time in getting them to work. Plus, they really only meet the manufacturer's claims if you are using all same-brand equipment in your network, including the router and all other computer client adaptors.

Look at those two you have linked to: $70 to $80 for a PCI wireless adaptor. You can get a perfectly good 802.11g PCI adaptor without the "rangebooster" or whatever name it is called for less than $20. If you need to spend more for signal strength, put your money into high-gain antennas and/or signal amps.

But, that is just me. YMMV.
October 30, 2006 11:30:20 AM

Rangeboosters/MIMO/anything else companies wanna use them don't work. They onlytuse technical terms used for rubbish (MIMO has an acclaimed range of 250,000m2!!!! That's impossible for a home-user router/adaptor, if it's incorrect, this is all from memory and it ain't that good...On the much more larger, commercial networks)
Only 3 companies in the worl make them and they all have a different name for them (unsure what they're called, will have to have a look)

Would always go for a wired network, more secure, less hassle and it's alot quicker.

11b works up a max bandwidth (this is the BEST conditions possible) of 27mbps, with traffic and security it drops 30-65% (about 16-12mbps)
Network security is laughable on a wi-fi network, some good hacking tools, a very long antenna and anybody can access your network from a 5 mile radius...
October 30, 2006 2:20:27 PM

Quote:
Would always go for a wired network, more secure, less hassle and it's alot quicker.
Agreed, wired is preferred, and much faster. However, sometimes not possible or at least very inconvenient.
Quote:
11b works up a max bandwidth (this is the BEST conditions possible) of 27mbps, with traffic and security it drops 30-65% (about 16-12mbps)
Network security is laughable on a wi-fi network, some good hacking tools, a very long antenna and anybody can access your network from a 5 mile radius...
I think you meant 11g. 11b is only spec'ed at 11mbps, with similar "real world" performance factors as you list, reducing it down to the 1-5mbps range.

I disagree on security for 11g, though. Even WPA-TKIP (the weakest of the 11g and up security measures) is not easily cracked at all; sure, a password cracking scheme might work if you use an easily guessed initial phrase for generating the key. And WPA2 is very secure, indeed.

Even the much lambasted WEP security will send packing those only looking for an open signal to steal.
October 31, 2006 8:21:27 AM

Really wish the world was wired, but just so impractical, due to cost/ease of use and the general feasibility study of the project.

Thanks, always get those two mixed up...Thought it was a, b, g, pre-n and then n. Really should of checked, but was in at work...

Security is poor for wi-fi, have produced many test wi-fi networks with seciruty (both 3rd party and in-built security that came with the devices) and it take about 40-90 minutes to hack into it. Granted and you can say this, but it was my network that was being tested and not some network that I wanted to hack, thought it would be wrong finding a network and than hacking it, that's just nasty! (yes, have qualifications within networking and experience)

The lack of people that don't install security on a nework is quite scary (deal on two levels of the fence within networking - one is working within retail and the other is network analyst, the level you have to go when you talk to different people is shocking, sometime talk too complex for the user!)
October 31, 2006 1:11:27 PM

Quote:
Thanks, always get those two mixed up...Thought it was a, b, g, pre-n and then n.
You're right wrt dates, but not data rate. 11a is still the fastest standard wireless protocol (since 11n does not actually exist yet, marketing literature to the contrary). 11a is fast and on a higher frequency band.

Protocol.. Release Date.. Op. Frequency.. Data Rate (Typ).. Data Rate (Max)
Legacy........ 1997........... 2.4 -2.5 GHz .........1 Mbit/s ............2 Mbit/s
802.11a...... 1999 ........... 5.15-5.875 GHz .....25 Mbit/s ........54 Mbit/s
802.11b ......1999 ...........2.4-2.5 GHz ...........6.5 Mbit/s .......11 Mbit/s
802.11g ......2003 ...........2.4-2.5 GHz ............11 Mbit/s .......54 Mbit/s
802.11n ....2006 (draft)... 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz .. 200 Mbit/s ......540 Mbit/s
Quote:
Security is poor for wi-fi, have produced many test wi-fi networks with seciruty (both 3rd party and in-built security that came with the devices) and it take about 40-90 minutes to hack into it.
I seriously question this claim for any WPA encryption (short of a dictionary attack on the TKIP passphrase), but especially for WPA2.
October 31, 2006 2:23:22 PM

Will have to find link, but their was a japanese confrence that proved one business man cracked into a wi-fi network in something stupid like 4 minutes (that's talking up a bit, but it was lightning fast...This is extremly rought details, due to (A) not having best memory in the world and (B) had a quick read through, but it does exist...Promise, determined to find link)

Can buy Pre-n stuff, but the money you have to spend is such a waste. Can get a good, old fashioned wired network (sorry, just like a wired network. Wi-fi has real advantges over cables though and if it's a large-variable subnetted network then it REALLY does help. You can't beat wires...Would love to play with a fibre optic network...Not just for the router, but fibre optic for the WHOLE network...Imagine the speeds...Well wouldn't be that impressive, but would be good for just being fibre optic)
October 31, 2006 2:29:08 PM

I think you might be remembering a demonstration of cracking into a WEP encrypted wifi. You're right - that can be done quickly if you know how.

And, here is how.
November 1, 2006 1:47:52 PM

At this point of time can't remember! So will look for it and then inform you...Don't get me wrong, not disrespecting you, you're probably right (you've prob had many years experiance...I've had 5 months of networking...temping! Previous to that I was cradled at college during my cisco years...Would of been better to go out and actually do it, unlike college environment...College really is out of date :? ...Live in UK)

Now gonna be honest, this place is filled with some clever, specailised people. It's quite inspiring the amount of information people actually know and what they tinker with...Saying that while going to the toilet (amazing what you think about while being 'busy') I still tinker aroung with networks. Don't know, still young so everything is still everywhere and the world is still slightly happy (about 10 happy, 90 alone and mean, full of broken promises and lies...Like Zoe Ball)
Anyway, yeah, clever people, it's quite cool, forums, people who are unaware of something can gain valuable knowledge of something that they would other wise not know about...
!