Why is wireless slower than wired?

[bill ball]

I don't understand why when using 802.11g the wireless connections on my network are so much slower than wired when performing relatively low speed tasks. Specifically, I have cable modem with service throughput of 3Mb/sec. It tests about 2.8 on a PC that accesses it wired into a G-router. All well and good. If I switch that PC to wireless G, the same modem speed test shows only 1.2Mb/sec.

With a theoretical throughput of 54Mb/sec, is wireless G really so limited in practice that it cannot exceed 1.2Mb/sec? Diagnostics show excellent signal strength and low noise. The router is only 15 feet from the client PC. I mistakenly presumed with a G wireless system that the cable modem would be the bottleneck in Internet access, not the wireless network.

How can I get a wireless network that can access the Net over a cable modem as fast as if it were wired to the router? I'd like to get rid of the wires, but the speed hit is disapppointing.

Bill

[JackMDS]

Welcome to the Network Forum.

In general Wireless is slower because propagation through the air is affected by environmental electrical noise and it is not very stable. To make sure that it works it needs additional work of protocol encryption etc.

If the Source (like a Router) and the Client (like a laptop are few feet away.

The 802.11b rated 11Mb/sec. would provide about 5-7Mb/sec.

801.11g rated 54Mb/sec. would provide 18-22Mb/sec.

The further you move the client from the source the “Speed” would degrade.

If your client is 15’ away but in the same room as the source than something is wrong with your system.

If it is beyond a wall, and or the Antennae are obstructed, and or there is electrical noise (like 2.4GHz Tel. etc.) it might be that you get only 1.2Mb/sec.

May be this can Help: Extending the Distance of Entry Level Wireless Network. (http://www.ezlan.net/Distance.html)

:cool:

[bill ball]

Thank you for the reply. It helps quite a bit. There are two room walls in between the PC and router, so that probably accounts for the low performance, as you explain it. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but the spec is rather unrealistic then for home applications where PC are in different rooms. I didn't expect 54 or even 18-22Mb/sec, but 3 seemed reasonable. Thanks for the extending range link!