TheLostSwedeYes, that's what I'm talking about as well.

sure, that's why you mention tech forum users speeds, but disregard Ookla :)
Because tech forum users are the average home consumer user :)

TheLostSwede4x4 = router/AP, please see the meaning of the two different blue colour on the provided diagram.

is 4x4 MIMO a part of the Wifi 4 standard or is it part of the later STANDARD?

TheLostSwedeHow is the router SoC unrelated? If the SoC is lacking, the router is lacking, which equals poor performance. Do you even know how a router works?

How in the flying fuck is the SoC relevant to the standard?
Do the standard in WiFi define SoC?
Do the the newer Wifi (7) define minimum speed capabilities?
I've been (trying) to specifically only mention standard needs, so I don't know why you are pulling in SoC. So please point me to where in the standard they define the SoC speed, power and modem capabilities! well, your probably gonna pull some obscure "need to use certain BW and freq" idiocy

TheLostSwedeI'm sorry you live in a country with slow internet, but I can get Gigabit speed if I want to pay for it, as can most people in the Nordics and Asia, despite what you've provided as "proof".

is this trolling? My proof is literally the average speed. and given your obscene lack of knowledge, this is Ookla, ookla is used by ISP's to brag and is considered one of the important metrics to check with (at least in EU/Nordics) by the ISPs
How is this considered "proof" when you post a tech forum posts as "proof" that people have higher?

oh wow, I can also show higher than average speeds. How is that relevant? How is your single (not average) users experience relevant? especially since you used speedtest(ookla) which you "lol'ed" away

here is my Sec-GW speed. It's more than enough for me and my housemate.

TheLostSwedeThe data from Speedtest is an average from everyone that has tested their connection and really doesn't mean much, except possibly that most people don't want to spend too much on their internet connection.

Bruv....? you gotta be trolling. right?
it shows that the average home consumer don't need the higher wifi standards (standards not SoC quality)

TheLostSwedeWhat's the point of your angry rant though?

Im not angry on the new standard. I'm just saying it is not useful for the majority of consumers currently. You still haven't pointed to one thing that wifi7 brings as a major positive point for consumers :)
what's the point of your lies and allegations (guessing you gonna give me a mod mail for this, but your trolling is OK :) )?

TheLostSwedeHave a look at the Speedtest thread here and you'll see that there are plenty people with a fast internet connection.

You gotta be trolling at this point.
Are any of those the average home consumer? spoiler, they aren't.
but I do love how your pulling a pathetic 2k posts (any dup'es and non-speed related posts too perhaps?) on a tech forum vs 3 proper sourced links calling them "proof" :roll:especially since one of them is from speedtest(ookla)


Again. Point me to CONCRETE things in the Wifi7 STANDARD that is applicable for the AVERAGE home consumer!
half your post has been trolling or tried to shit on me because you think I'm somewhere with shit internet.

MLO will be huge for the average consumer, unless you live in a small apartment and do not benefit from those improvements.
Improved 2.4GHz performance is good for pretty much the same reason. A single router will be able to cover an entire home in more situations, instead of needing mesh/range extenders.
One benefit with Multi-RU Puncturing is improved latency. A significant portion of the average consumers use their internet for some sort of gaming. And lag is not an uncommon complaint. Which Multi-RU Puncturing should help with that. To a less degree it can also help with streaming, if buffering is an issue today. Assuming the buffering is caused locally. Which is not unheard of when every member of an average family are trying to access %streaming service% simultaneously.

big_glassesAgain. Point me to CONCRETE things in the Wifi7 STANDARD that is applicable for the AVERAGE home consumer!
half your post has been trolling or tried to shit on me because you think I'm somewhere with shit internet.

You really need to take a chill pill and put your keyboard warrior gloves down. You're doing yourself no favours while trying to have a serious discussion.

Oh and no concrete is used in the manufacturing of a wifi standard :roll:

Stick to the topic.
Stop the insults.
And, discuss civilly.

good comment, gonna spit it a bit and add my opinion to the relevant bits

CalenhadMLO will be huge for the average consumer, unless you live in a small apartment and do not benefit from those improvements.

I disagree with the MLO, it is (together with QAM) just a carrier for higher speed, and thus I don't think it is an improvement that the average consumer will notice. (or have the network speed to notice) .
I'm curious why you think it's going to be huge? From what I see it is just intra-band carrier aggregation, in which most users will already be limited by the "best" band their on already.

Netflix UHD is 15Mbps, HD is 5Mbps, YT 4k is 20Mbps.
To my understanding, wifi4 5Ghz. MCS 0: BPSK 1/2, 1 stream with 20MHz channel can (theoritcal) handle 6.5 down (no SGI)
MCS 7 (highest 1 stream) can theoretical reach 65 Mbps with 20MHz channel and no SGI, and to both cases you can do a wide channel and SGI to get higher tput. MSC7, 40MHz and SGI is 150

Is there a max amount 1x1 streams for Wifi 4( and 5) standard(or is it just HW) I'm missing? Please do add if there is a limitation on amount of streams. because if not, that should be enough for multiple streaming services at the same time
and MU-MIMO is in wifi 5 standard anyhow, and should "fix" 1x1 issues.

CalenhadImproved 2.4GHz performance is good for pretty much the same reason. A single router will be able to cover an entire home in more situations, instead of needing mesh/range extenders.

I'm having issues finding anything on range increase. I am seeing speed perf, but that's mostly in form of QAM. Increase in QAM and width will result in lower range/stability though.
Wikipedia lists wifi7 as lower range, but doesn't mention frequency en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11be I assume it's the 6GHz freq though.

CalenhadOne benefit with Multi-RU Puncturing is improved latency. A significant portion of the average consumers use their internet for some sort of gaming. And lag is not an uncommon complaint. Which Multi-RU Puncturing should help with that. To a less degree it can also help with streaming, if buffering is an issue today. Assuming the buffering is caused locally. Which is not unheard of when every member of an average family are trying to access %streaming service% simultaneously.

Most people I game with is on cable. I'm on wifi 6 currently. Haven't gotten my ass to drill a hole and make a cable. But never had any lag issue related to the wifi part.
I had complete wrong on M-RU, I'm too used to RU meaning something else.
It's a small improvment, but I don't think it's a massive one. (for home use). The difference in latency between "half a symbol" and a full one should very extremely hard to notice for home users.
Wi-Fi 5 should be able to handle multiple users in a 451us window... (mediatek shows 4), wifi 6 406us and wifi 7 302 us (for presumably same amount of data and users) MediaTek whitepaper



multi AP coordination is a great addition though.

I did mention the WPA3 upgrade being good, but that was wifi6 upgrade

CalenhadYou really need to take a chill pill and put your keyboard warrior gloves down. You're doing yourself no favours while trying to have a serious discussion.

What in??? I've tried to be respectful except for I think 2 lines (where I called ignoring speedtest/Ookla average as trolling, which I still believe it is. You can't be working at a place/site where one of the main selling points is average's (average fps) and then come with one data-point)

I'm not the one trying to drag AVERAGE from one single point of data. I'm not the one trying to insult based on network gear, network speed and presumed home location. That is the mod...
I'm not the one that used ookla speedtest to show my speed, but also calling it a bad proof of average speed... How is using 1 data-point and claim average being serious in a discussion? Please answer me that?
I'm not the one that dragged in SoC/modem (HW) in a specification discussion. Is the SoC specified in the IEEE standard?
I'm not the one that added use case for average consumers being regularly transferring data (wireless) between multiple NAS, to the level of multi-Gbps speed being relevant.

I'm not the one that claimed the other part is angry about a new WiFi standard coming. I do think it's cool. lots of cool stuff there, though multiple things that's a bit pathetic wasn't there before. Just because I think it has low/none usage for average home users doesn't mean I think it's not cool or good progress. That's just putting words in my mouth.
Saying that someone is not average was never meant to be an insult (ie tech enthusiast), just that your not average. I wouldn't say that's being "above" the average populace, since that's a nasty conotation

I do not think Wi-fi 7 is going to be relevant by usage for the average home user for a very long time. It's enhancement over the other standards is very little

CalenhadOh and no concrete is used in the manufacturing of a wifi standard :roll:

I'm certain concrete is very important to the buildings where the manufacturing happens ;) but might be wrong there, maybe they all wood and steel ;)