Answered Can Orbi replace my wired/wireless network?

RayP

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
5,222
Reaction score
1,745
Points
1,040
Location
Cheshire, England
I am looking to improve the signal strength of Wi-fi in my lounge. i have a home network that comprises the following:-

BT Master socket entry point in upstairs bedroom of 3 bed semi.
Two Windows 7 desktop PCs currently wired via Ethernet and gigabit switching box to BT HomeHub 5 in that room.
Network Ethernet HP laser printer.
Synology NAS box.

In the downstairs lounge I have the following:-
Smart TV
UHD Blu-ray player
Sky Q
Yamaha AVR (Ethernet only to a homeplug)
Two Windows laptop PCs, both Wi-fi.

Additionally I have an iPad used throughout the house.

Home-plug isn’t the solution as upstairs and downstairs are on separate ring mains. It’s okay for the AVR but nothing else.

I am considering the Netgear Orbi but the important thing is I need all devices (wired and wireless) to be visible on a single network as they are with the BT HH5. I know I need to disable Wi-fi on the HH5 but is that all I need to do for the Orbi to become my new router?

Anything currently connected to the HH5 via Ethernet would instead be connected to the Orbi using the gigabit switching box. The HH5 reverts to a modem only.
 
First I should make clear that I haven't used the Netgear Orbi (although I have used similar systems). AFAIK the Orbi is a managed WiFi system (it's just a set of managed WIFi Access Points). It doesn't replace your router, you don't even need to disable the WiFi on your existing router (However, if you want to avail yourself of the superior hand-over between the access points it would be best to).

You should NOT disconnect wired devices from the HH5 - connections are always better with wires (rather than WiFi) and the fewer WiFi connected devices, the better the system will perform. They'll all appear as part of the same logical network.
 
Many of these mesh systems issue a completely different address space to clients and thus function as a router for it to work.
 
Many of these mesh systems issue a completely different address space to clients and thus function as a router for it to work.
So would that be a Yes to my question? And if so, are there any advantages going with a separate modem to utilising the one in the HH5 which presumably reverts to modem status only?
 
What you have already indicated is the same as I had. BT HH5 but with the BT Wholehome Wi-FI mesh solution. All set-up as described above, well not bad. But when I meshed the Dishes (3) but connected to Ethernet ports I now have a great Wi-Fi set-up and can not fault it even right down the garden. Bottom-line line if you want brilliant speeds to devices use cables, there is no substitute.
 
@Andy98765 , are you saying you only got great speeds when using wired connections? But the whole point of mesh systems the Wi-fi signal is as good as wired. You go on to say “great Wi-fi... even right down the garden”.

The router resides near the BT master socket entry point and broadcasts a 5Ghz signal to the satellite. That would be in my lounge within a few feet of the wireless kit. The signal would be as strong as if the kit was right next to the router and as fast as a wired connection. That’s why the Orbi is so expensive.
 
But the whole point of mesh systems the Wi-fi signal is as good as wired.

Thats never going to happen.
These systems can help in a home with deadspots.
They can even in some cases improve on speeds that you get over existing wi fi installations, but they never match the speeds capable over wired.

Quoted performances are theoretical maximums only and home environments will always have issues or conditions that ensure you never hit those maximums.
 
@Andy98765 But the whole point of mesh systems the Wi-fi signal is as good as wired. You go on to say “great Wi-fi... even right down the garden”.

The signal would be as strong as if the kit was right next to the router and as fast as a wired connection. That’s why the Orbi is so expensive.
I didn’t know snake oil was so widely available that it’s penetrated the networking market so well!

802.11whatever operates in unlicensed radio spectrums and is governed by maximum transmission strengths. Beyond these maximums can lead manufacturers to incur penalties. And nevertheless standards are defined to get devices to interoperate which would be infinitely more difficult without.

And regardless, WiFi is more akin to an Ethernet Hub, and we junked those years ago. I’ve also read AC wave 2 is faster than gigabit. Yeah in theory, but have you tried it? In practice it never seems to hold performance when any real world distances from AP to device are involved and it quickly dive bombs. Gigabit Ethernet over CATegory cable is just that, no matter the distance as long as it’s within specification.

@cjed was right, keep cabled devices on wired Ethernet. By all means deploy Orbi, but don’t replace your wired LAN, please. In fact we use a cabling backbone to deploy WiFi professionally. Meshing is just there for domestic convenience, nothing more, and commercially WiFi bridging is used as a last resort or for similar ‘can’t mess around with the landlord’s building’ type restrictions.
 
Wired Ethernet downstairs is NOT an option. I’m looking for the next best. Isn’t mesh Wi-fi just that?

It’s not a large house. 3 bed semi built in 1960. I will run Speedtest tomorrow over Ethernet, Wi-fi via a laptop within 5ft of the router and then downstairs. I’ll post the results.

What you’re telling me is even the latest technology cannot beat wired Ethernet. It if that is not feasible then???

The whole point of mesh is that very little of the broadcast signal is lost over distances of 50ft. Unlike conventional Wi-fi where it is.
 
No the mesh is to extend coverage by repeating the signal via a different backbone channel/frequency. You do get the benefit of multiple centres of broadcast so that can increase performance, but pass-the-parcel, or packet can only increase latency.

Try a continuous ping test over WiFi, then move along to an area that’s further along the mesh, and the same test over the wired LAN. Quite different eh?

All of this might not matter one bit, because the only thing that does is that the objectives for your applications are met. In short if it works for you, great. But be aware that this situation in a 3 bed semi with neighbour’s competing WiFi, et al, makes performance quite dynamic rather than constant.
 
Wired Ethernet? Mmm, well 100GbE is reasonably accessible commercially now. OK, over fibre! You can do 10GbBase-T over CAT6a. WiFi? Nah!
 
The whole point of mesh is that very little of the broadcast signal is lost over distances of 50ft. Unlike conventional Wi-fi where it is.

Depending on building construction some or all of that signal will be attenuated.

Some rooms can have enough metal running in the walls that the room acts like a faraday cage and no wi fi signal can get in or out.
In a situation like this the only option for wi fi is a wired access point in the room.

Wi fi varies in performance depending on the environment , always.

You see a lot of threads about people trying different routers, but as chester says, they are mostly all the same/ similar transmit strength and its usually the environment thats the real problem, not the router.
 
In a typical 3 bed semi, you may well get better results with one very high quality access point than a mesh network, but as Andy says, no two scenarios will be the same.

But Orbi is not good value for money - it costs more than high end commercial units from the likes of Ubiquiti.

If you're willing to put a small amount of graft in, personally, I would by one of these...

Ubiquiti UAP-AC-LR UniFi Long Range AC1300 Simultaneous Dual-Band WiFi PoE Access Point (1300Mbps AC)

... and place it by your existing router. See if it solves your problems. If it does not, then you can add another one. Even buying two of those separately is still less than the cost of the Orbi twin pack.
 
Thanks Steve. I'm by no means firmly in the mesh camp. I just want to improve the connection speed of those devices in my lounge listed in my first post.

Using Wi-fi Analyser on my smartphone the signal is -55 to 60 dBm in the lounge which isn't too bad but when I place it 1 metre from the router upstairs it records -38dBm. That seems like a much stronger signal and I'm guessing if I could get that sort of signal in the lounge it would significantly improve connection speeds.

When I download a UHD movie off Sky I want to minimise the time it takes to download. And watching some 4K material on YT the resolution can drop to XHD levels. Whether that's my wi-fi or YT I'm not sure.

I've placed the BT HH5 on top of a small subwoofer roughly in the middle of the upstairs bedroom so there are no walls between it and the kit in the lounge, just a ceiling. The distance is around 18ft.

LATER: I've just realised what you mean by putting in some graft. Looks like these need fixing to a ceiling. My DIY skills are non-existent so it's not something I want to pursue.
 
Last edited:
They're absolutely fine sat on a flat surface. The graft I was referring to is that you need to install a bit of software on your PC to initially set them up.
 
They're absolutely fine sat on a flat surface. The graft I was referring to is that you need to install a bit of software on your PC to initially set them up.

Ah that's okay. I'm comfortable with computers. So do these send a stronger signal than the BT HH router? I know there are laws about maximum signal strength so if positioned next to the HH would it be more efficient?

I did a quick 'n dirty speed test with my laptop downstairs in the lounge (-56dBm) and another with it close to the router upstairs (-35dBm) and the download speed wasn't significantly better. Maybe that's a bit of a red herring.

But if I monitor the connection speed on YT using the Nerds option it rarely exceeds 30Mbps whereas my laptop in the same room can often connect to SpeedTest at 50-60mBps. That's the bit I don't understand. Maybe YT is throttling connection speed.

It seems it could be a bit of a lottery buying this kit. Pity there isn't a sale or return option. I'll do some speed tests later with Ethernet connected PCs.
 
I'm watching a YT 4K video on my laptop (downscaled to FullHD) on one side of the lounge and the connection speed is 32Kbps whereas on my smart TV on the other side of the room it's only 20.5kBps and the current res is 2560*1440, not 4K as advertised.

No dropped frames and reasonable network activity. Buffer health is 44s on the TV. I can't watch in 4K on the laptop as it's only a FullHD display.

Does that signify a less than perfect wi-fi signal to the TV that a Wi-fi access point could fix?
 
Re: Sale or Return.

I'm not necessarily advocating this, but you are entitled under consumer law to return mail order goods within 14 days.

Re: Different behaviour of your TV and laptop - you're comparing apples to oranges. There are just too many variables unfortunately.
 
Thanks Steve, appreciate the advice.

I've just finished conducting some tests using SpeedTest website using wired ethernet and wireless at a few different places in the house. The results may help decide how best to proceed. All tests were run three times and values are Mbps.

PC Wired Ethernet - 66.65 / 66.9 / 66.62
PC Laptop on sofa. Dist from router=16ft - 52.3 / 40.8 / 48.35
PC Laptop by TV. Dist=18ft - 51.6 / 49.5 / 44.3
PC Laptop in lounge directly under router. Dist 8ft - 63.6 / 65.1 / 65.7
PC Laptop 5ft from router in same room - 65.1 / 64.8 / 64.0

Wired speed is more consistent but so is wi-fi when closer than 10ft from router. For this reason I think any additional kit needs to be in the lounge within 10ft of the TV, Sky Q box etc.

If a wi-fi access point is more powerful than my BT HH5 that may be an option. But if it isn't then I need something with a satellite in the lounge. Are there any alternatives to the Mesh system?

Which? has just rated the Netgear Orbi Best Buy despite its high cost.
 
Lay people do tend to tie themselves in knots "worrying" about Wi-Fi signal, so let's bust the myths again:

There is no such thing as "Wi-Fi" signal as most people conceive it. It's not some ethereal energy field like The Force or Ley Lines emitted by your router that permeates the ether and has a "field strength" that can be measured. Wi-Fi is like sound, only with radio waves instead of sound waves. Just as there is no "audio signal" wherever you may happen to be reading this post, there is not "Wi-Fi signal" (energy field.)

Wi-Fi is two-way radio like walkie-talkies, not one-way radio like television. All Wi-Fi devices (phones, tablets, laptops, router, Access Points, etc) are both transmitters and receivers. Wi-Fi is a conversation between the communicating peers, not a one way "lecture" delivered from the podium (router.) Thusly, any two communicating devices need to be able to "hear" each other to hold a useful conversation. It's no use just simply making one side "louder" (hence it's not allowed.) If signalling conditions are poor, then the only solution is to get the communicating peers closer together. Again, think of it in terms of sound: If you want to have a conversation with someone, if you can't hear them (and/or they can't hear you,) and "shouting louder" is not allowed, all you can do is move closer together.

Even in free space, 5GHz signal attenuation falls off quicker then 2.4GHz. Again think about sound - when walking up to a night club you can hear them wump of the kick drum and the bass (low frequency) from miles away but it's only when you open the door that the treble (high frequency) hits you.

In each Wi-Fi hotspot, "only one thing at a time an transmit." The more things there are, the more they need to transmit, the more competition (it's anything but "fair") there is for some "air time."

Wi-Fi transmit power is limited by law: Most kit is, and always has been, at or close to the permitted max. There's mo magic "uber-router" (or anything else) out there with "much more signal" than everyone elses. They are all much of a muchness. In any case, more power from your router isn't the solution (for reasons given previously.) Getting the peers closer together (or strictly speaking improving signalling conditions) is. It's not for nothing that on big sites we put up hundreds of AP's and cable them all together,

"Mesh" systems, as the other have have said, is a way to create multi-hotspot systems like we do on big sites in the home, but without having to lay in cables for the "backhaul" links between the hotspots. They certainly have their use case, but they are not the silver bullets the advertising BS might have you believe.

Watch out for those little "bar" meters in your phones et al. Don't presume they all report signal "strength" (RSSI in the jargon) - increasingly they report signal "quality" which is not at all the same thing.

Also, I don't have one, but I'm not sure a HH5 offers "modem mode." In SOHO routers, modem mode is a distinct operating state: One does not turn a SOHO router into "modem mode" just by "saying so" - it needs to be enabled in the settings (and you'll need to provide another "router" elsewhere) and not all SOHO routers offer "modem mode."
 
Last edited:
I’ve personally been very pleased with the Netgear Orbi twin pack in my home, (10 year old, 3 floor, 3 bed semi detached). They aren’t cheap (currently £256 on amazon) but they are easy to set up and work well (for my usage). I have one connected to the router at the master socket on the bottom floor of the house, and the satellite placed in the middle floor lounge on the other side of the house, this has been enough to give us full coverage.

They’ve sorted out the issues I was having with Sky Q over wifi and meant I could do away with homeplugs completely within the house (which sky Q didn’t work correctly with either). They’ve improved the connection to my PS4 which is now connected via wifi rather than Ethernet and we now get our full speed on the top floor of the house where the office is based.

Whether they work as well for you I can’t confirm obviously ( I don’t have a NAS, and my house is a new build with thin walls), and there are (as other have stated) other options which require more work to set up. I’d say it’s worth a try with the Orbi and if they don’t live up to your expectations, return them and try a different solution.
 
What I would do is temporarily run a long Ethernet cable to the TV and see if it solves the problem.

If it does, then continue exploring solutions.

If it doesn’t then you’re wasting your time.
 
@mickevh, many thanks for that very informative reply. I'm sorry for 'polluting' the forum with my very basic understanding of wi-fi. :D

The communication between kit and router being a two-way process confirms my suspicion that I need some form of satellite in the same room as my TV et al. It isn't possible to buy a 'louder' router since their signal strength is limited by law as you say.

The Orbi is a tri-band wi-fi system. Probably why it is more expensive than my existing HH5 which I guess is duel-band. In fact it sounds very similar to my wireless Davis VP2 weather console which receives a wireless signal from the station in the garden. It's a robust signal with 98% + signal quality. I previously had a cheap 'n cheerful Oregon Scientific system and the wireless signal would often be lost. The Davis kit was expensive but is nearly 10 years old and still working well. Money well spent!

Going back to the Orbi perhaps its tri-band wi-fi uses the same robust signal so strength stays high for longer distances. My cheap 'n cheerful BT HH5 seems to lose it quite quickly.

It is possible to turn off wi-fi on the HH5 and if I remove all Ethernet connections it reverts to modem status. I'll just need a cable to connect it to the Orbi for internet access. I can plug my gigabit switching box into a Orbi Ethernet port and that should give me the same single network as I have now for wired and wireless kit.

Whilst expensive it does seem to offer what I need. I'm fortunate in that I can afford it.

@Inked , thank you very much for that post. It gives me reassurance that the kit does what it claims to do. My house setup is simpler, just two floors and the router is upstairs so firing a signal through a ceiling keeps more of the signal that through walls.
 
What I would do is temporarily run a long Ethernet cable to the TV and see if it solves the problem.

If it does, then continue exploring solutions.

If it doesn’t then you’re wasting your time.

I have nothing remotely long enough. It was previously connected via a powerline adaptor but after the house rewire with two circuits the signal quality is dreadful. I switched to wi-fi and moved the HH5 into the middle of the bedroom so its signal could reach the TV. Reception is much improved but still a long way off what is possible.

I can still return the Orbi should it not give me the solution but given its signal quality that seems unlikely.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom