"if im running 75/25, epmp is roughly 87mb capacity, 450 93mb capacity"
is this correct? or have I looked at the wrong spec sheets? we run 450 3ghz, we like it, but still are burned on the 320 promises and lack of delivery and have less than zero trust in cambium sales people. As far as 5ghz goes, we are pretty lucky, so there is alot of spectrum outside 5.8 and so many channels across the band, so we are uniquish in that respect. Im just having a hard time justifying a 4x cost increase for 6mb more throughput. We also arent dense, 40-50 subs is a heavily loaded AP to us, we want to offer 25x5, and over-subscription ratios are so low now thats a hard ball to carry without hiding behind "up to" when the budget only allows 1/4 the Access points. Im not arguing, just thinking out loud, Im approved for 450, I just dont know that its a cost effective choice for our particular market On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists <[email protected]> wrote: > With ePMP you are limited to (IIRC) 75/25 and 50/50 for the up/ down > ratio. With 450 you can slice and dice the bandwidth anyway you want. > > Jeff Broadwick > ConVergence Technologies, Inc. > 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office > 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell > [email protected] > > On Jan 5, 2017, at 9:21 AM, Trey Scarborough <[email protected]> wrote: > > Your biggest difference is your throughput per MHZ your epmp will do less > bandwidth in a 20mhz channel than a 450. he other big difference is > subscriber density. It is not recommended to go over 20-30 subs per AP on > epmp without loss of performance. I regularly see 450 APs with 70+ subs per > AP. With Medusa I have seen over 130. As far as the Medusa not being field > proven you may not have field tested it yet, but I know for a fact it has > been tested and running on networks for some time now and a viable solution. > > If you have any more questions feel free to hit me up off list. > > On 1/5/2017 7:36 AM, David Milholen wrote: > > The radios on these 2 are entirely different. One is using std based > > radio and the other completely proprietary. > > > Since framing will be slightly different and so will processing delay. > > The stds based radio gets close to mimicking the > > > 450 series but thats strictly based on Cambium magic. Capacity and > > sustained rates per VC is the where you will see a difference. > > > Latency will be very consistent from ap to sub. PMP450i is where its at. > > > > > On 1/4/2017 2:55 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote: > > if im running 75/25, epmp is roughly 87mb capacity, 450 93mb capacity > > is this correct? > > > are efficiencies batter on 450 if installation is the same? ie, if I > > forlifted one AP with 17 epmps to 450, where would my gains be > > assuming everything stays installed in the same spot. Its not like the > > FCC gives 450 any more power than epmp, so path loss should be the same. > > Im looking at this epmp 1000 sector thats running overall about 64-7% > > efficient with 17 subscribers and wondering what the gain is to move > > to 450 (exclude medusa, as its not field proven) > > > -- > > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your > > team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > > > -- > > > > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
