If all you can get on a particular path is a theoretical single 40 MHz wide FDD channel pair, one polarity, I don't see how the 1024QAM bps/Hz efficiency would be significantly worse than a competing single polarity product (SAF Integra, etc) running in the same channel size. Unless you are counting more expensive competing products that advertise header compression and very different Mbps rates for 64-byte vs much larger packet sizes.
It's very cost effective so I will forgive it many things, my main problem is that it can't actually *use* near the full width of an 80 MHz channel. On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 6:26 PM, George Skorup <george.sko...@cbcast.com> wrote: > Yeah. Cost is one thing, but if all you can get is a single polarity on a > particular path, the AF11 is probably one of the last things I'd look at. > Congestion is a problem around here. > > > On 5/25/2017 8:21 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> On 5/25/17 18:12, Mathew Howard wrote: >> >>> >>> We're running the full 56mhz/MIMO... I haven't been able to get them to >>> run at 1024qam yet (antennas still need to be fine tuned, it wasn't ideal >>> weather conditions when we put them up, so I'm hoping we'll be able to get >>> a bit more out them), so they're only at around 550Mbps capacity (and I've >>> verified the link will do around 500Mbps with real traffic). >>> >>> >> >> Only 500 meg with two channels? Crap, I have an old Exalt that can do >> that with only one channel at 256QAM. >> > >
