Benchmark Results: PerformanceTest, 5.0 GHz
Now let’s check out the same PerformanceTest data in the 5.0 GHz band and see if we still get results similar to those in our transfer tests.
Sure enough. Go back to our transfer tests and you’ll see that Intel took a header there, as well. As the transfer and PerformanceTest groups were conducted days apart, we can rule out any sort of short-term environmental fluctuation. The 6300 simply falls flat in this band. Conversely, the Cisco adapter holds up surprisingly well, even in Location 3.
Once again, performance in the UDP set gets slaughtered at Location 3, but watch Qualcomm make Cisco and Intel into its little tennis ball boys. It’s not even funny. Let’s check out the x-ray view in this case at Location 2.
If you look at the amount of variance above and below the average line as a percentage of the total throughput, Intel is weaving drunkenly across 50% of the road. In comparison, Cisco looks like an old lady out for a Sunday roll down the interstate and Qualcomm, after accidentally hitting the nitrous out of the gate, immediately settles into an unbeatable rhythm around the racetrack. Keep the varying x-axes in mind and realize that Killer’s average line is roughly 18x higher than Intel’s.
I still think I will be waiting for 802.11ac before upgrading from G though.
Thanks for this nice article.
I own an Alienware M17xR3, with the Killer 1103.
Upon installation, the driver was causing me issues (nothing big tho), and I decided to follow a forum recommendation and install the Atheros Osprey driver instead of Killer's.
It seems the two card are identical apart from the name on it. (Maybe I am misleaded)
It could be interesting to see if the Killer 1103 gets any improvement using the Killer driver vs. the vanilla Atheros drivers, and see if "years of working with the windows tcp stack" pays off. Or if your performance improvement is due to a good, but still normal card.