Upgrading WiFi card, help?

I have just upgraded my home broadband to 100mb, with the stock 1520 half minicard that came with my R2 i can't get much above 50mb.

So looking to upgrade and looking for options what & where to buy and maybe some links or pointer in the right direction. Just want to be able to get the full speed of my broadband wirelessly

thanks in advance

 

The best cards are the Intel 6300 or the Bigfoot Killer which is even better. Shop around on different sites for the best price. I plan to get the Bigfoot Killer when I need an upgrade.

 

Whats model numbers of bigfoot killer?

 

Try finding it her. Bigfoot Killer

 

ok, I've ordered a bigfoot killer 1102, could somebody point me in the direction of drivers for M17x-r2, Win 7 x64

 

I didn't realize you were ordering for an R2. I don't know if there is driver support for the Bigfoot Killer with the R2.

 

Gulp!! first post did say lol......

Bought and paid for now....... erm, hope i can find some drivers lol

 

Should matter. If it'll fit. Which it will. The drivers are made for the Operating system (Windows) not the actual computer. And I doubt Dell/AW has wrote something in the BIOS to keep it from using the Bigfoot. You should be fine. Buuuuuuuut, if it don't workout, lemme know and we can work a trade for my Intel 6300.

 

There seems to be some generic drivers on bigfoots website, I'll be trying those when it arrives, should be ok

 

Just noticed something when looking at the picture of the 1102 (2 antenna version) since I cant seem to find the 1103 anywhere.

If you look at the picture here:
BIGFOOT NETWORKS Killer Wireless-N 1102 Wireless Card, IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n, Internal PCIe Half Mini Card : AVADirect Custom Computer Component

You'll notice the spot on the board is there for the third antenna, but the connector is not.

I did some searching on digikey, and if someone is very handy with a soldering iron, you could probably plop the third antenna header on there and make it the same device as the 1103. Or if not the same device, possibly increase the range and reception of the 1102. Especially considering our M17x laptops have 3 antenna wires.

Here's the connectors on digikey that I believe are correct:
(couple of different options)
Digi-Key - A36237CT-ND (Manufacturer - 1566230-1)
Digi-Key - J983CT-ND (Manufacturer - 128-0711-201)

 

The bigfoot come with 3 antenas is this

 

Can be preordered here

also check here if you like.

 

I know which one has 3 antennas, was simply speculating. Anyways, I wouldnt touch a vendor that charged $30 to ship an item that weighs 3 ounces.

The Intel 6300 that I bought for $35 with free shipping works quite well.

 

Same here I bought this on Ebay for AUD$32.96 free shipping, it works great.

 

Agreed, bought mine here:

Buy.com - Intel Ultimate N 633ANHMW IEEE 802.11n (draft) - Wi-Fi Adapter

 

I just want to confirm (sry if this is a noob question). If I order the Bigfoot 1103 card it will work with the m17xr3?

ok I'm dumb, I see that the 1103 is the one that dell offers with it, thought it was the 1102 for some reason. nvm

 

Think the only difference is 300mb for 1102 and 450mb for the 1103, due to the antennas.

Mine should be here this week so will post up some results (1102)

 

So this week I received my Maximum PC magazine where they directly compared the Killer-N 1102 and the Intel 6300.

While 'technically' the Killer-N did win more tests, most of the margins were extremely small, and all of the tests were expressly in a LAN/WLAN environment, which would make a far far smaller difference versus the same function on an Internet connection. The benefits gained on a WLAN/LAN environment would be unnoticeable when compared to a much slower Internet connection speed.

Also, the Intel 6300 actually outperformed the Killer on a 2.4GHz network (3/5 benchmarks), whereas the Killer outperformed the Intel on a 5GHz network (4/5 benchmarks).

I'd recommend everyone taking a look at the article that is interested in the card.

Bottom line: Yes, the Killer-N 1102 is decent, but as I mentioned in an earlier post, most of the benefit is gained in a WLAN/LAN setting. The overall difference is negligible when you really consider it (we're talking <10ms overall, and in file transfers, mere seconds).

So it really comes down to personal preference, availability and cost. If the Killer-N is what you want, then go for it, but the 6300 is not a bad choice either, especially if you plan on taking advantage of some Intel-only technologies like WiDi.

 

^ + Rep. Do you have a link to the article or is it print only.

Good info thanks.

 

It is print only right now, I dont know if it'd be against some sort of copyright laws to scan and post it, so I'm hesitant to do so.

 

I wouldn't post print either. I'll see if I can see it next time I'm at the grocery.

 

Alrighty, its the Dream Machine 2011 Issue (has a yellow Corsair case on the front)

 

I have yet to read the article, but do they touch on the Bigfoot's traffic management software at all? To me, that's really where you might be able to gain some advantage over the Intel cards in being able to control Quality of Service of different packet types. You could increase the priority given to whatever video game you are playing to reduce lag time to server, and throttle back on less important things.

We do this all the time from a network management capacity in increasing QoS scheduling for voice over IP and video over IP to take priority over other packet data. Can make a noticable difference.

If measured straight up, card for card, well... they both have to conform to the same standards as set out by the standards bodies, so I expect them to perform largely similarly. It's what Bigfoot claims to do over and above that which makes it attractive.

 

It does mention reduced latencies but it does not directly say they used the QoS software, although they did mention they used the Bigfoot benchmarks for one of the tests (they were skeptical as well at using a bundled benchmark, but Bigfoot has released the source code so they gave it the benefit of the doubt).

I'm aware of how QoS works, but the issue is this, unless your router is also configured properly for QoS then much of the gain made by the software for the killer will be lost unless you're the only wireless client on the network. If not then you're still subject to the shared medium issues and the fact that the router is probably not set up (or likely not capable) of prioritizing traffic. Likely the router would ignore any tagging or shaping that is concurring.

I will admit though, the Killer's performance in a 5GHz network basically stomped the Intel's. Its the 2.4GHz spectrum where the differences were largely negligible, though leaning towards Intel. But most people still only have a 2.4GHz implementation anyways.

 

I wonder how much a Killer would help me anyway. I never have multiple tasks occuring while I'm gaming, meaning I don't download movies and game simultaneously. If I am gaming my laptop isn't doing anything else Internet related (unless windows is doing it in the background). Given that, would a killer even benifit me? If I'm only playing a game, how can it prioritize my gaming if nothing else is happening (it would be the priority by default)? Am I wrong about this?

 

If you really only have gaming or music or video traffic going one at a time, then it would really only benefit you if you were on a router that was being used by more than one person and was configured for QoS (some of the higher end ones are, my DIR-655 understands QoS) and it understood the tagged packets and frames sent by the Killer network card. If it didnt, then it likely wouldnt make that big of a difference.

One of the bigger surprises though was on their test they labeled 'patio' (because they were outside with it on the patio, the point of the test was putting 1 inside wall and 1 outside wall between the laptop and the router). It actually maintained higher throughput. But again this was mostly beneficial to on-LAN file copying.

Not to mention they didnt make any comments on the power adjustment for either card, and if I recall, my Intel defaulted to a less-than-max power setting which could account for lower transfer rates.

One of the largest benefits that the Killer wired NICs had over a standard onboard NIC was the presence of a Network Processor. It allowed the network processing to be offloaded to the NIC rather than going through the CPU. The issue with this now is that our processors are so powerful that there is almost no benefit from a separate network processor. Back in the days of the Pentium MMX/Pro/II/III and such, it made a difference. Now, its almost irrelevant. That's actually why most onboard sound solutions are considered so good now, because the processing required for them is negligible compared to what it used to be that required a separate 'sound card'. (Even some sound card makers sell software only solutions, See: Creative). The point of this aside is this: The Killer-N wireless NICs do not have a network processor, so even that small amount of benefit is lost since it doesnt exist.

 

You will be fine. A member here already tested the 1102 in their R2 he posted about it in the M18x forum.

 

Fine isnt the question really. Someone with a plain 'wireless b' card would be 'fine'. Its whether or not the cost outweighs the benefit. Or if there is really any benefit in a certain implementation.

 

50m/s is not bad by any standards considering file transfers on a wifi network are usually not much more than 2.5mbs

 

Hmmm, wonder which drivers he used..... think mine has arrived at home, but sadly I am at work....

 

I obviously was talking about whether it would even work in the R2.
I will let you know how it compares to the 6300 for GAMING, and if there is a difference in web browsing when I receive my 1103.

He had to use the drivers from Bigfoots website, because the M18x ones wouldn't work. I will make a review when I receive mine Let me know how yours is so far.