TJ, No difference between the 3 different frequencies bands (other than NLOS range) as far as the product itself they are all the same animal. 2.4ghz NLOS is slightly better than 3.65ghhz. They all function the same and have the same expected throughputs per channel width. They all use the same firmware and i love the interface being the same across all 3. The only major difference is the 5ghz is V/H versus slant on the other two. That just translates to the 5ghz omni being ALOT smaller and lighter. There are some places that i wish the 2.4ghz woulda been V/H because of the omni size but overall I am still very happy with the 2.4ghz 450.
Kurt Fankhauser Wavelinc Communications P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 http://www.wavelinc.com tel. 419-562-6405 fax. 419-617-0110 On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 4:57 AM, TJ Trout via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > Kurt, > > Any pros and cons on 450 between 2ghz, 3.65 and 5? Any differences at > all? Range vs throughput? Obviously 2ghz penetrates better, 3 is licensed > and 5 has more spectrum but anything else? All bands are open for me > > Thanks > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Kurt Fankhauser via Af <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I started the spring deploying 450 in 2.4ghz, 5ghz, and 3.65ghz and then >> middle of the summer deciding i had to"try" some ePMP because the cost was >> so low I couldn't resist.... I can say now that I am fairly certain I will >> probably stick with the 450. There are many small reasons that when I >> considered them all i came to this conclusion. Here are my reasons: >> >> 1. ePMP latency starts to go up quickly once you have more than 10 >> clients on an AP. Once you get over 20 clients the latency is pretty much >> 25-30 ms. Cambium was honest about this at the road tour and they noted if >> you want the best latency to stick with the 450. >> 2. Sync between the two platforms is not there yet. If you have adjacent >> towers on the different platforms that can see each other you won't have >> sync. >> 3. No remote spectrum analyzer for clients. This is HUGE for when the >> clients fire up their wireless camera and baby monitors and trash the whole >> spectrum. >> 4.No burst bucket on CPE's >> 5.EPMP Interface is SLOWWW. Cambium explained at the tour they were >> offloading alot of processing power to the PC you are viewing the interface >> with and i can't be taking a quad core machine up a tower to work on these >> radios and do site surveys. I am working with a Panasonic Toughbook and >> takes FOREVER to log into the EPMP radios. >> 6. Fore some reason site surveys are a PITA with ePMP. Think its a >> combination of many factors here... slow interface one of them... >> 7. EPMP in 5ghz DFS band has really low power output. Something like >> 13-14db. When using an omni antenna you can't get maximum legal EIRP out of >> the ePMP. >> 8. 450 link tests and SM modulation is pretty stable and predictable. >> EPMP seems like its all over the place. I don't think I have yet seen EPMP >> linktest get full up or down outside of a lab environment. >> >> There might be other reasons but I'm pretty tired and was heading for bed. >> >> >> Kurt Fankhauser >> >> Wavelinc Communications >> >> P.O. Box 126 >> >> Bucyrus, OH 44820 >> >> http://www.wavelinc.com >> >> tel. 419-562-6405 >> >> fax. 419-617-0110 >> >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:05 PM, TJ Trout via Af <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I haven't been keeping real up to date on current generation ptmp >>> offerings but we have a new site going up and I need to decide pretty >>> quickly on some equipment. For the guys who have been using both 450 and >>> epmp do you have any pros and cons ? Any reason to spend the extra money >>> when epmp seems to have the same if not better performance , sync, etc? >>> >>> My gut says 450 is going to be my best long term solution but with all >>> of the positive epmp feedback it's hard to justify the extra money? >>> >> >> >
