Same antennas at the AP, just removed the Rockets and installed the Epmp
radios. As for the CPE side All Nanobeams to Force 200. Both lower
signal level and dropped links, in at lease one case the epmp NEVER made
a link.
On 6/5/2016 8:28 AM, Colin Stanners wrote:
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
<mailto: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:
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
<mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
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 <tel:937-552-2340>
Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel: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
<mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
I’m thinking more the CPE antennas.
*From:* CBB - Jay Fuller <mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>
*Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:59 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto: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...
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Ken Hohhof <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto: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
<mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net>
*Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:28 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto: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!
----- Original Message -----
*From:* Matt <mailto:matt.mailingli...@gmail.com>
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto: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?
