Intel formally launched the Wi-Fi 6 AX200 client-segment WLAN card for notebooks and PC motherboards in the M.2-2230 and M.2-1216 form-factors, based on the "Cyclone Peak" PHY powering the
Wireless AX-22260 NIC family. The card interfaces with its host over PCI-Express 3.0 x1 and USB 2.0, for the Wi-Fi and integrated Bluetooth interfaces, respectively. As a Wi-Fi 6 adapter, it supports 802.11ax over 2x2 MU-MIMO antennae, and peak bandwidth of 2.4 Gbps, with support for both the 5 GHz and 2.4 GHz bands. The Bluetooth interface is version 5.0.
21 Comments on Intel Unveils Wi-Fi 6 AX200 "Cyclone Peak" WLAN NIC
With WLAN your CPU spends a lot of its resources encrypting/decrypting your network traffic (WPA2).
Yes, Ethernet will always be faster and we'll always have people saying that they can totally feel that 1ns advantage (like the 144Hz vs 120Hz discussion). But ax, if properly implemented, should make LAN and WAN hard to distinguish.
I agree they will be indistinguishable for most users, but so is 802.11ac or even 802.11n for this type of people. And I fail to see a point of using wireless communication in stationary workstations (only place where ethernet is commonly used and, as such, replacing it is actually viable - most laptops these days don't even have ethernet). It's nice to see progress, but judging from abysmal adoption of 802.11ac among general population, I wouldn't consider ax important at all outside of niche use cases. In my area more than 3/4 of WiFi networks are still 802.11g, two or three are n(2.4GHz), and there is just one 5GHz 802.11ac network, which is mine.
In reality it is always different. Obstacles, congestion , interference. It will not take off so easy.
If you have obstacles, use a range extender. Or a mesh. It's a problem that has been solved.
No offense, but mentioning obstacles as a problem of radio connection in comparison to a cable looks at least weird...
Care to explain?
edit: You have a single PC standing next to the router? :-) Actually, communication by light in vacuum is the best thing we can have, so it's not exactly "physical". We only need the cable to hold the vacuum and make it change direction.
Prototypes have already been built, so your statement is false. :) I don't understand this argument. I own a CPU to be able to do stuff. If that stuff consumes some of CPU performance - good. It means I spent money for a reason.
I honestly don't know how you live and why you need 8 cores. You watch the load graph and get pleasure from low %?
WiFi is such an enormous comfort. I'm astonished this discussion is happening. :eek:
I shouldn't want 30% of my CPU time spent on the freaking network stack in the year 2019.