Range of R300 vs R500?

[patrick_kelecy]

I have an R300 AP (which has worked well) but would like a little more range.  Would an R500 provide that?  Thanks!

[patrick_kelecy]

Right now it's just sitting (flat) on a short book case.  I'm sure I could improve the situation by wall mounting it, but that would not look particularly attractive, with the cable hanging down and all (a consideration in a residence).  So at some point I'll just ceiling mount it.  There I'll be able to run the cable through an attic space, and the unit will more or less look like an unobtrusive smoke detector.

[robert_lowe_722]

Ok the unit is designed to be mounted horizontally facing the floor. Wall mounting the AP will change the coverage provided by the AP in a negative manor from how it is now. 

[patrick_kelecy]

Thanks Robert.  Looks like ceiling mounting it is the way to go then.  

[john_d]

I mostly agree with Robert's assessment here. I've got an R500, R600, R700, and R710, and I would say the first 3 have almost the same coverage despite having widely different beamflex  and spatial stream configurations, and being separated by a few hundred bucks price-wise too....

The R710 truly does seem to provide better coverage, but I would only say it's maybe a 10-20% improvement in range vs speed, and I mostly attribute that to its far superior receive sensitivity compared to the other APs.


Bottom line, especially given the great price point of the R300 vs the R500, I think it's unlikely that it's more cost effective to replace with a R500 vs deploying more R300's. I also agree with Robert on mounting position, but I will additionally add: Wall mounting is almost never something you want to do with the Ruckus APs unless your goal is vertical coverage (e.g. if it's a townhome with a lot of stories but not very wide rooms). For a more traditional house, you probably want the AP in the flat orientation. And in my experience, flat on a book case vs dome-down from the ceiling doesn't make a huge difference, UNLESS something is obstructing the book case mounting position that makes the ceiling position provide a better line of sight.


However, one point that hasn't been made here is that you've got an 802.11n AP, and the R310/R500 and above are all 802.11ac. With 80MHz channel bonding and 256QAM rates, I've observed a substantial performance improvement at ALL ranges when switching a residential AP from 802.11n to 802.11ac, as long as the client devices support it. So that might effectively improve video streaming range and give you the equivalent effect of improved coverage.

[robert_lowe_722]

Hey John, I had considered the AC element but dismissed it as the OP stated clients were mainly iPad's. To my knowledge only the Pro supports AC. 

Agreed that AC AP will utilize more efficient MCS rates but at the distances the OP is talking about 256QAM wouldn't be achievable. Also I was always of the impression larger channel widths required higher SNR to achieve the same MSC rate as smaller widths therefore giving the illusion of smaller coverage areas.