Bigfoot 1103 vs. Intel 6300 Speedtest.net Results

Guys,

I stumbled across a free Bigfoot 1103 Wireless card, and having heard of such praises of the wireless card, decided to do a speedtest run in the exact same environment to help you guys out.

Note that this is at the exact same location, using the exact same laptop, so this should be an accurate measure of the performance of these cards.



Bigfoot 1103



Intel 6300-n

I've recently had some issues regarding the 6300-n, as I was assigned a dormitory room in the basement, and reception wasn't as perfect as I had imagined, and I would experience slight hangs in Internet browsing.

But with the 1103, I am not experiencing any hangs, lags, or anything. Rather, I feel that the browsing is quicker and more efficient.

I wish I could have done more tests, but there are only a handful of ways to check the reception and speed of wireless cards.

It looks like the bigfoot is the winner here, and I am going to use the Bigfoot instead of the Intel.

 

That's some speedy connection! Did you do the test multiple times at the same server? Try clearing the cache first before testing again and test each card at least 3 times then get the average from it.

 

Thanks for the comparison! This will really be helpful for anyone on the fence.

 

Thanks Ryan for the comparison!
_

 

I am sure its somewhat better as you are noticing less issues but those speed tests can be iffy sometimes, especially considering you are on a university campus.

I manage about 60 college and university networks remotely world wide (not alone, on-site staff also lol) but at any given second (yup, seconds) the speeds can go from full speed, to tank down to nothing and anything in between. Got all these people torrenting, steaming etc.

The Intel cards may not be the best but they are more than able to handle bandwidth well above that.

What you might be seeing though is better reception due to different chipsets on wireless cards, which will results in better performance.

For example I rather have Atheros chipset, followed by Intel, and last broadcom.

Atheros seems to give best range and performance. Broadcomes tend to be more compatible.

If you ask me though the quality of the Intel cards seems to have went down after the 5xxx series.

 

Yes, these are the values in between about ~5 runs I did.

They did not differ by much though. (Manually set it to Sherby, NC)

I would go with the Killer 1103, they just have better speeds at the same location, or which would translate to farther range, maybe.

 

Thats good stuff thanks for the info,....

 

I'm most interested in a range test. Walk from router and measure distance until connection drops. Repeat a few times.

Then try with other wireless card. Repeat a few times.

 

I wanted to do this but remember I am at a university.

I cant really help you there because it will just pick up another router.

 

That's not entirely true. Windows is set up to connect to a specific ESSID, which means you'll lack that granularity. However, I believe the Intel software and possibly the Bigfoot software along with some expensive testing software (Wildpackets Omnipeek, Linkferret) will let you join a specific access point.

That said, the easiest way would be to use something like inSSIDer to test signal strength:

inSSIDer | MetaGeek

It records in dB rather than just speeds, which is the standard metric used for checking signal and range. It watches for specific access points on specific channels, instead of hopping you between AP's on the ESSID like Windows does.

 

Thanks I will try that some time tomorrow!

Maybe if I go back to my dorm earlier...

 

If you've run your tests multiple times and are getting similar results it would seem to be reasonably conclusive - but I still have some difficulty accepting that one kind of network card (which makes a 150-300Mb connection to your router) can actually throughput double the amount of data through a 20-30Mb internet feed when compared with another card that also connects at 150-300Mb. Something about this sounds to me like trying to compare the performance of a Ferrari versus a Lamborghini - when both are locked in bumper to bumper traffic.

I can accept that one chipset might have a better range when connecting to certain models of chipset in wireless routers, but I thought the actual broadcast power was limited so unless they operate on different frequencies, it should be a small difference.

I've read the marketing literature on the Bigfoot cards when they first came out and they claimed to be just a small amount better than Intel products - aimed at the elite gamer who had a high-end system. Now it seems the claims are of an absolute night and day difference, double the throughput, further range, you look more attractive to women, and it'll regrow your hair. Some of these just seem too good to be true?!

 

Can I put this BigFoot card in my laptop ? I don't see any reason why it shouldn't work.

 

Do you have the 3 antenna wires there to attach to it?

If you can run the Intel 6300 card you can run this one.
_

 

I have no idea if I can run the 6300 agn but I do have 3 antennas.

 

^ You're good then.

 

Anantech's numbers for Bigfoot 1102 vs. Intel 6230/6300:
AnandTech - Bigfoot?s Killer-N 1102 Wireless Networking vs. the World

 

Not really a fair test, since they're testing a 2 antenna WLAN card against a 3 antenna WLAN card, although you can see the giant latency reduce with the Bigfoot card

 

Yeah, I would have to agree. I have skimmed that article and I would have preferred seeing the N-6300 compared to the N-1103 card rather than the N-1102 for a proper comparison.

 

N-1102 and Intel 6300 don't have the same number of antennas but the router they used only has 2 antennas which somewhat cuts the 6300's advantage and squares a bit the benchmarks.
N-1103 should do better than N-1102 with either 2 antenna routers or 3 antenna routers which would further break any close ties between N-1102/N-1103 vs. Intel 6300 from Anandtech's analysis.

 

I tested the bigfoot 1102 vs 6200 and 1103 vs 6300 in a G73JH in the past and found that both killer cards could get higher throughtput and lower latency BUT the link wasnt really stable so sometimes speed would just drop to a crawl and latency would spike up to tripple digits. Overall i prefer the stability of Intel cards myself.
I also hated the software the killer cards come with. Cant comment on signal strength as i honestly dont remember anymore.

 

1103 is a beast, you can get very good signal with it. most of them are worried about signal strenght.

 

this little adapter could help install the newer bigfoot and intel wifi cards in laptops that have only full sized mini pci-express slots:
Half size to Full size Mini PCI-E PCI Express Adapter | eBay

 

I bought an killer 1103 , but dont have 3 antenna's will it effect the range, im mostly dependend on range. I have an intel 6230 ,il do some bench and compare both.

 

How come you didn't buy the 1102? Can't really see a point to buying something you can use

 

I thought it would have nice range , where can I install the 3rd antenna?

 

3rd antenna can be placed anywhere.

I personally have installed it over a ODD Caddy for my Vaio Z, and it works fine. 5GHz Band, signal 100% according to the Bigfoot Networks utility.

 

Thanks dude, but I have a dvd rom there , can I hook the 3rd antenna on the side of screen , I mean to the screw that holds the screen in place,
one more question: without 3rd antenna , will the range be reduced?

 

Range is reduced, naturally is strength given a distance.

But technically 5GHz bands have more range than 2.4GHz, but keep in mind that 2.4GHz bands are less likely to lose signal in a wall.

Given your distance to the router / obstacles between the router, you can choose which band to operate on.

--

I used a tyco antenna with a plate at the end, so I could not fit in inside the bezel of the screen. I insulated the antenna and placed it above the caddy, and it seems to work fine. Keep in mind to fully isolate from conductors/semiconductors as they introduce noise into the antenna.

 

I added 3rd antenna with tyco on my dv6 (back on the screen). The tyco i got was just a flat sheet(1.5inch x 1.5inch?).

The 90cm antenna is 2 long so I order the hitachi 30cm one, thinking to place it farther from the other 2 when I get it. I read putting them more isolate is better?
The antenna is from HK, probably take forever to get here though.

 

+1 rep ryan , thanks for the info, im very far from the router, and the wifi signals come passing several walls, but actually its not my wifi , Its my neighbours wifi , I have an dongle but , I cant game with it , my ping goes over 500. my neighbour hasnt set an password though , lucky me.

@baii did you buy it from HK , omg , if I were you il be making the antenna my self for that time\, lol
I have ordered and had enough of those guys, they charged me 10$ to ship a very small item which arrived after 45 days can you belive it. lol , but it was free for me
can you tell me where can I buy one of those tyco antenna?

 

I got the tyco off ebay for like 2-3 bucks, US seller. It come in a pair so you got 2. They also have it on amazon I believe but ebay generally is cheaper for those stuff.

 

thanks dude, I should order one now.