Was it only certain areas that were worse or any areas better (indicating antenna pattern differences) or across the board worse?
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Colin Stanners" <cstann...@gmail.com> To: af@afmug.com Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2016 8:28:39 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP This is very interesting. How different were the antenna gains at the APs and clients? For those clients that didn't work after the swap, did it seem more due to lower signal level or just bad linktests / reconnections? On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Jerry Head < li...@blountbroadband.com > wrote: It absolutely does perform worse on the same link, we just helped a friend move an entire site from UBNT to epmp to make use of the sync capabilities. We actually had to transfer about 15% of the customers to 900 because they would not work at all on epmp. On 6/2/2016 4:31 PM, Mathew Howard wrote: <blockquote> But does it actually perform worse that UBNT 2.4ghz on the same link, or is it maybe just differences in how they calculate signal levels? It doesn't make any sense that two different radios running on the same frequency putting the same amount of power into the same antennas would give significantly different signal levels... The closest thing I've done to a comparison was playing with a Force 200 2.4ghz in wifi mode... there didn't seem to be a significant difference between it and a PowerBeam connecting to the same AP. On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > wrote: <blockquote> And I've tried IT Elite dual pol panels, Force 200 2.4, integrated + reflector for CPEs. Continues to suck. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: <blockquote> I’m thinking more the CPE antennas. From: CBB - Jay Fuller Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:59 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP hmm, i will check into that. Pretty sure with ubnt we're using kp performance. With epmp, i think it is bundled antennas... <blockquote> ----- Original Message ----- From: Ken Hohhof To: af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:50 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP Jay, I suspect the difference you are seeing may be mainly in the antennas. 2.4 GHz from any vendor should penetrate the same, the radio waves don’t care what brand radio launched them. And I think the difference between the platforms will be most evident in low interference environment where they can achieve their full modulation and throughput. With low SNR, I think it’s kind of like arguing Ferrari vs Porsche for off road racing, neither will be able to show off its capabilities. Receiver sensitivity and bits/sec/Hz won’t matter. From: CBB - Jay Fuller Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:28 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP Also interested in interference rejection of the pmp450 - is there any (in 2.4) we are getting better foliage penetration with ubnt 2.4 than epmp 2.4 - - and from the performance of the epmp 2.4 i wish wish wish it penetrated better! <blockquote> ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt To: af@afmug.com Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 2:25 PM Subject: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP We have mostly PMP100 and PMP450 deployed. Some Ubiquiti we tried and some we inherited as well. Have some ePMP we have tested but so far have not deployed more then couple test links. For those who have tried both ePMP and PMP450 what are the differences you have seen in performance? Interference tolerance among others? For those that have gone with PMP450 over ePMP what was the reasoning? </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote>
