Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

60GHz Channel Band to Enable Super Fast 7 Gbps Wi-Fi

By - Source: Marvell | B 23 comments

Wilocity will add a third 60 GHz channel to Marvell's Wi-Fi networking chipset.

On Monday, Marvell announced that it has teamed up with Wilocity to bring tri-band Wi-Fi solutions enabled with 802.11ad to the market. Wilocity will supply its 60 GHz multi-gigabit wireless technology, adding a third channel to the existing 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz channels supplied in Marvell's WiGig-compliant wireless silicon.

"Wilocity and Marvell's partnership will deliver highly mobile, thin, light platforms that do not sacrifice performance and functionality with the first truly wireless bus extension (WBE) -- eliminating the need for cables and freeing devices from physical size constraints," the duo stated. "When combined with Marvell's market-leading Avastar devices, the WiGig solution enables advanced applications like wireless docking, high-speed synch and low latency wireless connections to displays."

So what does this mean to the consumer? The 60 GHz band is the spectrum used by the 802.11ad Wi-Fi standard promises up to 7 Gbps in peak download speeds -- today's 5 GHz Wi-Fi can work as fast as 600 Mbps. With this kind of download speeds, constant buffering because someone is hogging all the wireless bandwidth by streaming movies should be a thing of the past.

"We are honored to be teaming with an industry leader like Marvell to accelerate the momentum of 60 GHz in the market," said Dror Meiri, vice president of business development for Wilocity. "Together we will continue to lead the way to set new standards in truly wireless and ultra high-speed wireless connectivity and display solutions."

"60 GHz wireless is an exciting in-room multi-gigabit Wi-Fi technology that enhances end users' wireless experience and has the potential to eliminate more wires from consumers' homes," said Sameer Bidichandani, senior director of technology strategy at Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. "We look forward to collaborating with Wilocity to deliver cutting-edge WiGig products to the market that maintain compatibility with hundreds of millions of existing Wi-Fi devices."

According to EE Times, Beam Networks and Peraso Technologies also said they will announce their 60 GHz chips within the next six to nine months. However currently OEMs are focused on moving away from 802.11n, and adopting 802.11ac which promises download speeds up to 1 Gbps on the 5 GHz band. That said, until OEMs begin to integrate 802.11ad technology, a market will need to be created in order to introduce the consumer market to the new high-speed standard.

"[Currently] the easiest way to get [60 GHz] to market is going into the [notebook] docking station because the PC maker can bundle [the dock]," said Mark Grodzinsky, vice president of marketing of Wilocity. "Users won’t spend more money on a high performance wireless upgrade [for notebooks] if there is nothing to connect to."


Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Discuss
Display all 23 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 19 Hide
    phamhlam , July 24, 2012 7:34 PM
    2.4 Ghz can give me 200+ feet range
    5 Ghz gives me about 100+ feet range
    60 Ghz ---> 8ft??
    Can they start putting 10Gbps ports on routers now?
  • 16 Hide
    Thunderfox , July 24, 2012 7:12 PM
    60ghz? Don't they already have range problems with 5ghz?
Other Comments
  • 9 Hide
    icepick314 , July 24, 2012 7:08 PM
    damm...

    I haven't even started looking into 802.11ac and there's 802.11ad?

    now I'm not sure if i want to upgrade to 802.11ac knowing there's faster 802.11ad just right around the corner....
  • 16 Hide
    Thunderfox , July 24, 2012 7:12 PM
    60ghz? Don't they already have range problems with 5ghz?
  • 19 Hide
    phamhlam , July 24, 2012 7:34 PM
    2.4 Ghz can give me 200+ feet range
    5 Ghz gives me about 100+ feet range
    60 Ghz ---> 8ft??
    Can they start putting 10Gbps ports on routers now?
  • -2 Hide
    sync_nine , July 24, 2012 7:45 PM
    phamhlam2.4 Ghz can give me 200+ feet range5 Ghz gives me about 100+ feet range60 Ghz ---> 8ft??Can they start putting 10Gbps ports on routers now?

    They will just have to deploy more repeaters to amplify the signal over longer ranges.
  • 0 Hide
    chazbeaver , July 24, 2012 8:30 PM
    Guessing this would be more used for streaming HD content/transferring a lot of data to devices that are nearby, like between computers, phones, and TVs. Not so much for setting up a large wireless network for lots of people to connect to the internet.
  • 2 Hide
    PhoneyVirus , July 24, 2012 8:30 PM
    Maybe they should let 802.11ac be in the market a little more then a few months before they talk about any new 802.11xx.
  • 2 Hide
    Uberragen21 , July 24, 2012 8:31 PM
    The way I see it, this would be best employed on very close devices or within a computer tower. Rather than connect a HDD with a SATA cable, you'll just attach the drive and it'll pickup the wifi signal. Something like this could be very interesting.
  • -5 Hide
    aicom , July 24, 2012 8:48 PM
    80,211 AD :p 
  • 0 Hide
    azgard , July 24, 2012 9:10 PM
    The 802.11ac standard is useful as a general purpose wireless access medium, it is designed for decent range, bitrate, and multiple use support. This 802.11ad I see being useful for highly specialized situations that require high data bitrates and immunity to noise. When this come's out though that will be real interesting the applications of that kind of throughput with a P2P wireless link are awesome.
  • 5 Hide
    Anonymous , July 24, 2012 11:44 PM
    Unless you have some internal local network need for that speed what good is it? I have been so disappointed in all of the new WiFi standards so far. The 5Ghz band is flawed because of hardware clients not supporting it. Plus its throughput and signal range fall off very fast. At 30 ft my 2.4ghz is faster then my 5Ghz connection? Quality is another problem as all of these combined WiFi chips in routers and hardware are weak in either one band or both. The other gorilla in the room is that every house in my neighborhood has a WiFi router. Signal corruption is really bad at times. Wireless has always had issues and always will. On any band!
  • 3 Hide
    A Bad Day , July 24, 2012 11:54 PM
    jescott418Unless you have some internal local network need for that speed what good is it? I have been so disappointed in all of the new WiFi standards so far. The 5Ghz band is flawed because of hardware clients not supporting it. Plus its throughput and signal range fall off very fast. At 30 ft my 2.4ghz is faster then my 5Ghz connection? Quality is another problem as all of these combined WiFi chips in routers and hardware are weak in either one band or both. The other gorilla in the room is that every house in my neighborhood has a WiFi router. Signal corruption is really bad at times. Wireless has always had issues and always will. On any band!


    And don't forget about the flaky routers. We have an old Treadnet G router that doesn't support encryption without being overloaded and constantly dropping connection, and a new Belkin N router that has also been dropping connections.
  • 2 Hide
    CaedenV , July 25, 2012 12:14 AM
    A Bad DayAnd don't forget about the flaky routers. We have an old Treadnet G router that doesn't support encryption without being overloaded and constantly dropping connection, and a new Belkin N router that has also been dropping connections.

    why on earth would you purchase either of those units? Linksys was the King of Wireless G, and they were not expensive. ASUS seems to be the king of Wireless N, and they are also not expensive. Do a little more research next time, there is a huge range of quality out there, and very few good ones.
  • -2 Hide
    CaedenV , July 25, 2012 12:15 AM
    I don't care about faster wireless, Wireless G/N is more than fast enough for a home network for media consumption. I want faster wired internet so that I can have a real file server to offload video editing projects to, and still be as quick as an internal drive. All I need is 4Gbps, and 10 would be awesome.
  • 2 Hide
    John1969 , July 25, 2012 1:05 AM
    fenix1186They are really slacking I see... 10/100/1000 Mbps... now 7000Mbps?? Slackers couldn't even get it up to 10Gbps before releasing it?


    apples and oranges

    10/100/1000 Mbps are speeds of wired networks, 7000Mbps is wireless
  • -2 Hide
    aaron88_7 , July 25, 2012 1:51 AM
    phamhlamCan they start putting 10Gbps ports on routers now?

    What for? No home user needs that much bandwidth for anything other than bragging rights. 1Gbps is more than most people would ever need, and I doubt even most people running their own home servers are saturating those links much at all.

    Besides, the majority of people don't want to be connected by a cable, they want wireless. Adding 10Gb switch ports to a home router would just be an unnecessary expense that few would ever need or use. If you really do need that much bandwidth you're probably running a business and there are enterprise switches for that.
  • 1 Hide
    A Bad Day , July 25, 2012 2:43 AM
    CaedenVwhy on earth would you purchase either of those units? Linksys was the King of Wireless G, and they were not expensive. ASUS seems to be the king of Wireless N, and they are also not expensive. Do a little more research next time, there is a huge range of quality out there, and very few good ones.


    Customer reviews can be misleading.

    aaron88_7What for? No home user needs that much bandwidth for anything other than bragging rights. 1Gbps is more than most people would ever need, and I doubt even most people running their own home servers are saturating those links much at all.Besides, the majority of people don't want to be connected by a cable, they want wireless. Adding 10Gb switch ports to a home router would just be an unnecessary expense that few would ever need or use. If you really do need that much bandwidth you're probably running a business and there are enterprise switches for that.


    Marketing. There are 5400 RPM HDDs that have SATA III, and they cost more than the same model that have SATA II or I.
  • -2 Hide
    razor512 , July 25, 2012 3:53 AM
    instead of making a wifi standard that wont make it through a wall and probably may only do like less than 10 feet line of sightwhy not work on fixing 802.11n or 802.11ac

    why is it acceptable for a company to advertise nearly 1800Mbit 802.11ac but only benchmark around 150mbit/s in a best case



    and in the mean time, also bring us 2gbit or 10gbit Ethernet at an affordable price.
  • -1 Hide
    banem78 , July 25, 2012 7:27 AM
    Signals in the 57–64 GHz region are subject to a resonance of the oxygen molecule and are severely attenuated. Even over relatively short distances, rain fade is a serious problem, caused when absorption by rain reduces signal strength. In climates other than deserts absorption due to humidity also has an impact on propagation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_high_frequency

    Even air is a problem for 60GHz.
  • 0 Hide
    daeros , July 25, 2012 12:30 PM
    aaron88_7What for? No home user needs that much bandwidth for anything other than bragging rights. 1Gbps is more than most people would ever need, and I doubt even most people running their own home servers are saturating those links much at all.


    Then you have never used a file/media server. I have a pretty tame setup as far as servers go, but I cannot wait for 10GoE comes down to the "expensive but still affordable" level. Remember, minimum read speeds for a stream on a modern disk are in the area of 70MB/s, and that gigabit ethernet is only good up to about 95MB/s... so anyone with a server that has a raid in it will saturate the link quickly.
Display more comments