This page has been translated from Italian

After the article the other day about the excellent performance of Cisco Linksys WRT120N today I propose a brief comparison between the coverage of this already excellent model and the model of the upper band WRT320N.

The appearance of the WRT320N is identical to that of his brother WRT120N What changes is certainly the engine inside, if only because the WRT320N also has the possibility to become an access point to 5Ghz.

But what was interesting to see if the party was at 2.4Ghz was identical between the two models that feature or if the municipality had obvious performance differences.

The test plan to place simultaneously both the access point on the roof of my house with two SSID differtenti, one and a LinksysWRT120N LinksysWRT320N. All other settings were left default.

So with my usual laptop , although already in the reserve battery, I took the place of the previous test at about 500 meters from home

to verify whether there were indeed differences in the performance of the two 2.4Ghz radio equipment.

Not having much time, I used monitoring software to wireless networks to highlight the signal quality of the two access points.

We see from the photo but little

Whereas the devices listed are sorted by the received signal quality, stands out particularly well as the performance of the WRT320N model are much higher, but compared to all other access points in the area.

In particular, while the WRT120N is confirmed, as seen in the previous article, the limit of sensitivity of-89dBm radio signal, the WRT320N shows a signal of-75dBm which is still almost 32 times greater.

At this point I decided to move to a point farther

and here, as evidenced by the photo below

the signal from the WRT320N is gone now at the limit of sensitivity of the radio that at-89dBm while the WRT120N is far beyond this threshold at-93dBm, but we are talking about almost 750 meters.

Unfortunately I could not do the ultimate test to see if it was possible at that distance, to join the WRT320N as a few seconds after the photo above, the laptop battery has breathed his last breath and then I was forced to abandon test.

If I were to do this I will give further evidence into account but the fact remains that surely the radio WRT320N is certainly much more powerful than the little brother.

This, together with the presence of the 5Ghz radio, although in this model, not usable simultaneously with the 2.4Ghz joined to the port Gigabit Ethernet on the WRT120N version only Fast Ethernet makes the product very attractive even if the price is practically twice the WRT120N.

  • Share
Print this article
This article has been viewed 243 times

One Response to "Comparison between the WiFi coverage WRT120N and WRT320N"

Leave a comment

/ Me runs