Feeds

Broadcom blames Atheros for bad WLAN performance

Not our fault, Wi-Fi chip maker responds

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

Broadcom last week fired a broadside against Wi-Fi chipset maker Atheros, alleging the latter's proprietary performance and range-boosting Super G technology slows down nearby standards-based wireless networks.

According to Broadcom, Super G, which doubles 802.11g's 54Mbps raw data rate (but only if you have two products containing Atheros chipsets at either end of the link), interferes with nearby networks, sometimes dragging data rates down to 1Mbps - even when they operate on a different channel.

Broadcom said it would detail its research this week, to allow independent verification of its findings. Atheros reckons no one will be able to do so. It denies the claim, saying its system causes no more network degradation than any other Wi-Fi product.

D-Link, which makes WLAN kit based on Atheros technology follows the chipmaker's line, PC World reports.

At issue is Super G's Turbo mode, which simultaneously runs data across channels five and six of the 11 22MHz-wide segments into which the Wi-Fi specification subdivides the 2.4GHz band. Because all but three channels overlap there is inevitably some interference with adjacent channels, but this is an issue with almost all Wi-Fi products. By choosing channels five and six, says Atheros, it has ensured that channels one and 11 remain clear.

Not so, alleges Broadcom. It says Turbo cross-channel interference stretches further than the IEEE standard 'allows', causing problems with networks that have flipped to channel one or 11. As a result, Wi-Fi networks utilising these bands slow down by dropping their data rate in order to reduce the number of errors induced by the interference.

This sort of thing has happened before, particularly with Bluetooth and Wi-Fi getting in each other's way, though Bluetooth's ability to hop around the 79 1MHz channels it splits the 2.4GHz band into generally ensures that interference is kept to a minimum.

That hasn't stopped Broadcom, for one, touting proprietary co-existence technology. Today it unveiled InConcert, which allows Bluetooth and Wi-Fi to "intelligently share" the 2.4GHz band - but again, only if you have Broadcom Bluetooth and Wi-Fi chips in all the relevant clients and access points. Essentially, InConcert forces both radios to synchronise their transmissions to avoid interference. ®

Related Stories

Intel blasts proprietary Wi-Fi tweaks
Atheros triples Wi-Fi range to 1km
Proxim doubles 802.11a wirefree bandwidth to 108Mbps

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
FCC, Google cast eye over millimetre wireless
The smaller the wave, the bigger 5G's chances of success
It's even GRIMMER up North after MEGA SKY BROADBAND OUTAGE
By 'eck! Eccles cake production thrown into jeopardy
Mobile coverage on trains really is pants
You thought it was just *insert your provider here*, but now we have numbers
Don't mess with Texas ('cos it's getting Google Fiber and you're not)
A bit late, but company says 1Gbps Austin network almost ready to compete with AT&T
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.