[Tfug] Intel vs. Atheros WiFi driver performance/stability?

[John L. Sackett]

In the 'Doze world, I have the opposite experience. The Intel Drivers 
-especially 2-3 years ago (intel pro set) were and are terrible, BSOD's 
and Hardware and Memory faults.
In addition under M/S products, the Intel drivers are chatty, and set 
off our IDS due to a high amount of association probes. That's the 2200, 
and latest Intel ABG nic.  Transfers of large files are impossible to 
accomplish >500MB (CD ISO's).  Outdoor use is horrible due to limited 
range.
We just got some Atheros 5800 series NIC's and it's like night and day 
outdoor range.  We are using Cisco AP's - Cisco uses Atheros.
At home I use a Dlink 520 PCI card as an AP with FreeBSD. Works great.  
TKIP and WPA. Old Cisco 350b/abg nics are Atheros and use the same 
driver/Utility as Atheros with a Cisco logo.




Jim March wrote:
> Big question off the bat: on a Mini-PCI WiFi card, there's "main" and
> "aux" antenna inputs.  In the laptop there's white and black cables.
> Anybody got a clue which is which?
>
> :)
>
> As most of you know, my Atheros-based factory WiFi Mini-PCI card in my
> low-end Acer laptop was the victim of cruel circumstance at a TFUG
> meet.  It's sad demise was determined at autopsy to be "death by coke
> drowning" :).
>
> I've been running since on a decent little $30 PCMCIA Atheros-based
> Taiwanese card from SWS.  Works OK, but doesn't have the range of the
> late mini-PCI card with it's plug-in antenna connections heading off
> towards the screen.
>
> Well today I was selling a fellow TFUGer the carcass of my old Fujitsu
> laptop for cheap.  He needed a 15.4" 1280x800 screen and the old Fuji
> died of motherboard issues.
>
> In showing him how the Fuji came apart, we found I had an Intel-based
> Mini-PCI card in the Fuji.  And since his HP laptop had the same
> thing, we had no problem dropping the price on the Fuji carcass by $10
> (down to $40 <grin>) so I could pull the Intel WiFi card - a
> PRO/Wireless 2200BG.
>
> Just got it working.  Signal strength bars, performance under
> speedtest.net and general "feel" are all improved over the Atheros
> chipset - either the original Mini-PCI or the PCMCIA replacement.
> With the original internal Atheros card, signal strength 1 foot from
> my router was about 68%, with the PCMCIA it was worse, with Intel it
> reads 99%.  And it feels noticeably faster as well.
>
> I know the "MadWiFi" driver project for the Atheros chipset is a bit
> of a mess (shows up under Ubuntu under "Restricted Drivers" for
> example) but seeing it side-by-side with the Intel driver, the
> difference is almost startling.
>
> Remember, I'm plugging the Intel card into the factory-original
> in-the-screen-shell antennas...so performance shouldn't be a big jump
> like I'm seeing.
>
> What else...the dead Fujitsu this came out of was new as of...April
> '05 I think.  The Intel card is supporting WPA no problem.  I assume
> it's a 54b/g type.  A quick EBay search:
>
> http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=PRO%2FWireless+2200BG&category0=
>
> ...shows cards like this are going for less than $20 "buy now" - I
> think I'm going to score an Intel card for my buddy's Toshiba -
> another MiniPCI Atheros card right now.
>
> So.  Upshot from that coke spill so far: for $40 total I have a spare
> Atheros-based PCMCIA card I can use for diagnostics, etc. and an
> upgraded internal WiFi setup.  I can cope with that :).  Worth it just
> to see the difference the Intel card seemed to make.
>
> Very interesting.
>
> Jim
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>
>
>