To test only the speed of the Wi-Fi connection between the client and the AP, my iPerf server was connected over gigabit Ethernet to my Switch Lite 8. I primarily used my dedicated pfSense box for this, but I also used my PC and laptop depending on what I was testing. The most interesting comparison for Instant On APs is the AP22 vs the AP12 and AP15. I was disappointed in the performance of the AP12 and AP15 when using wider channels. The charts above only capture single-client tests, which is not the best way to show the AP12 and AP15’s strengths. Still, they weren’t able to match up against the (much more expensive) AC-HD. I wouldn’t generally recommend the AP12 or AP15 unless you’re deploying them in a dense area with a lot of devices. If you’re considering a new Instant On network, I have no issues recommending the AP22. The AP12 or AP15 should be better for high-density networks, but I still think the AP22 is the best overall. When the Wi-Fi 6 replacements for the AP12 and AP15 arrive, I’ll be testing those. I’m also excited to test out the UniFi U6-Pro, which is currently in early access. The one thing you won’t find is a large range of Wi-Fi configuration options. Aruba handles all of this behind the scenes and the only Wi-Fi 6 setting in the dashboard is a toggle to turn it off if legacy clients are having trouble connecting to the network – which in our experience is a rare issue that you’re unlikely to encounter. You should also be aware that ultrawide 160MHz channels aren’t available, but this isn’t a deal-breaker for SMBs as few clients support it anyway.

The materials and construction of the AP22U Bosch Wipers are quite outstanding. Bosch wipers are far more durable than their inferior equivalents, giving them an incredible value. Features & Benefits: The AP22 clearly offers the best 2.4 GHz performance. 5 GHz performance depends on a lot of factors, but the U6-LR and the AC-HD performed the best overall. The AC-Pro, AP12, and AP15 all struggled with 80 MHz channels to a single client. I don’t have a reliable way to test multi-client performance yet, but they should offer more performance in multi-client tests and realistic use. Hospitality: Whether it’s a small B&B or the hottest boutique hotel in town, fast, secure, and reliable network access is the key to delivering an exceptional experience to guests and employees. The Aruba Instant On AP11D, AP12, AP22 and AP17 are great for spaces that require seamless indoor and outdoor access and coverage that provides a smooth in-room Wi-Fi experience. To specify which AP and which band was being used, I used the settings offered in the UniFi network controller or Instant On portal, and swapped them in and out as needed. I then stepped through the different channel widths and bands, letting the connection stabilize before beginning my tests. Of these six access points, the AP22 is the only one that supports Wi-Fi 6 on it’s 2.4 GHz radio. The Wi-Fi 5 standard only applied to the 5 GHz band, and the U6-Lite and U6-LR both stayed with older 2.4 GHz radios that support Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n). The results are as you’d expect, and it’s not a very close competition.Beyond Wi-Fi 6, there’s also the promise of Wi-Fi 6E on the horizon, which is a more meaningful upgrade than the 10-20% speed improvement you can expect from upgrading from a good Wi-Fi 5 AP. Wi-Fi 6 and 6E are only relevant when you have clients that support them. Wi-Fi 6E devices are just starting to roll out in 2021, and it will be a while until it’s common for most home users. If you are happy with your Wi-Fi network, it could be a good idea to hold off on upgrading. If you’re looking for an upgrade now, the AP11 and AP22 are great options. The Instant On cloud portal offers easy setup and remote access, but it is limited in the number of settings it offers. For Wi-Fi radio settings, all you’re able to control is channel width, transmit power range, and channel selection. This is both good and bad. The things you can’t control are handled automatically for you, and Aruba’s engineering and software do a good job of handling things behind the scene. With every foot of free space and every obstruction, a Wi-Fi signal attenuates and gets weaker. 5 GHz signals attenuate faster, and provide around half the range of 2.4 GHz. When deciding on how many access points you need, a good general rule is don’t expect 5 GHz coverage to extend further than 2 walls or 30 feet away. 2.4 GHz signals extend this circle out a bit, but with a few walls in the way, getting low SNR links and slow performance is likely. If there is clear line of sight AP range can extend much further, but every wall imposes a dBm penalty. Wall material and quantity are usually more important than distance in a home or small business network. In all the speed test charts that follow, the numbers I’m showing are throughput in Mbps, averaged over five or more minute-long local iPerf TCP tests. I went over these numbers multiple times, and I tried to make them as accurate as possible. You won’t necessarily see the same results on your network with your devices, but it should give you a general idea of expected performance. Keep in mind that these numbers represent averages rather than exact measurements. I cover my testing setup at the end of the article if you’re interested in more details about how and why I test this way. Today, that is changing as Aruba introduces a new Wi-Fi 6 (802.11 ax) Access Point (AP) designed specifically with the needs of smaller organizations in mind.

The first few tests cover an ideal scenario, with a nearby client on a clean channel. In typical use you’ll see less throughput. This is a test of the APs capability in an ideal scenario, and how much data they can deliver to a single client. I couldn’t get my MacBook Pro to associate to a 40 MHz channel on any of these APs, so I excluded those results from this test. I believe Apple uses the “ fat channel intolerant” setting on their devices. As always, 5 GHz is the best option for speed, and 40 MHz channels on 2.4 GHz should be avoided in most situations.consumption, extending the battery life of clients. Multiuser, Multiple Input, Multiple Output (MU-MIMO) For the next test, I switched over to my MacBook Pro and it’s 3 spatial stream Wi-Fi 5 radio. This is an interesting test because it shows the impact of an additional spatial stream, and removes the highest-end modulation (1024-QAM) and longer symbol duration of Wi-Fi 6. This is a more even playing field, and a chance for the 3x3 and 4x4 APs to show their strength. Of these nine access points, the AP22 is the only one that supports Wi-Fi 6 on it’s 2.4 GHz radio. The Wi-Fi 5 standard only applied to the 5 GHz band, and the U6-Lite and U6-LR both stayed with older 2.4 GHz radios that support Wi-Fi 4 (802.11n). The results are as you’d expect, and it’s not a very close competition. I expected the 3x3 AP12, 4x4 AP15, and 3x3 AC-Pro to perform better here. Their high end performance was less than I expected, and the AC-Pro actually achieved the worst 80 MHz result of the group. At smaller channel widths, these APs leverage the additional spatial stream well. At 80 MHz, they can’t compete with the U6-LR and AC-HD.