Is the 1900AC MU-Mimo? If not then its still normal Airtime limitations, unless you consider concurrent 2x2 2.4GHz and 3x3 5GHz as a MU setup. Also there are very few devices with builtin 3x3 ac client. From the top of my head I can not think of one. Pedro On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:55 AM, David Lang wrote: > looking at the 1900ac vs the 1200ac, one question. what is needed to > benefit from the 3x3 vs the 2x2? > > In theory the 3x3 can transmit to three clients at the same time while the > 2x2 can transmit to two clients at the same time. > > But does the client need specific support for this? (mimo or -ac) Or will > this work for 802.11n clients as well? > > David Lang > > > On Sat, 23 May 2015, Aaron Wood wrote: > > Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 23:19:19 -0700 >> From: Aaron Wood >> To: bloat , >> cerowrt-devel , >> Dave Taht >> Subject: Re: [Bloat] sqm-scripts on WRT1900AC >> >> >> After more tweaking, and after Comcast's network settled down some, I have >> some rather quite nice results: >> >> >> http://burntchrome.blogspot.com/2015/05/sqm-scripts-on-linksys-wrt1900ac-part-1.html >> >> >> >> So it looks like the WRT1900AC is a definite contender for our faster >> cable >> services. I'm not sure if it will hold out to the 300Mbps that you want, >> Dave, but it's got plenty for what Comcast is selling right now. >> >> -Aaron >> >> P.S. Broken wifi to the MacBook was a MacBook issue, not a router issue >> (sorted itself out after I put the laptop into monitor mode to capture >> packets). >> >> On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Aaron Wood wrote: >> >> All, >>> >>> I've been lurking on the OpenWRT forum, looking to see when the CC builds >>> for the WRT1900AC stabilized, and they seem to be so (for a very >>> "beta"-ish >>> version of stable). >>> >>> So I went ahead and loaded up the daily ( CHAOS CALMER (Bleeding Edge, >>> r45715)). >>> >>> After getting Luci and sqm-scripts installed, I did a few baseline tests. >>> Wifi to the MacBook Pro is... broken. 30Mbps vs. 90+ on the stock >>> firmware. iPhone is fine (80-90Mbps download speed from the internet). >>> >>> After some rrul runs, this is what I ended up with: >>> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/538967 >>> >>> sqm-scripts are set for: >>> 100Mbps download >>> 10Mbps upload >>> fq_codel >>> ECN >>> no-squash >>> don't ignore >>> >>> Here's a before run, with the stock firmware: >>> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/337392 >>> >>> So, unfortunately, it's still leaving 50Mbps on the table. >>> >>> However, if I set the ingress limit higher (130Mbps), buffering is still >>> controlled. Not as well, though. from +5ms to +10ms, with lots of >>> jitter. But it still looks great to the dslreports test: >>> http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/538990 >>> >>> But the upside? load is practically nil. The WRT1900AC, with it's >>> dual-core processor is more than enough to keep up with this (from a load >>> point of view), but it seems like the bottleneck isn't the raw CPU power >>> (cache?). >>> >>> I'll get a writeup with graphs on the blog tomorrow (I hope). >>> >>> -Aaron >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > > -- Best regards / Mvh Jan Pedro Tumusok