Netgear WG511v2 doesn't measure up to WG511 v1

So much for new and improved.

A bit of math in antenna gain, tx power, and rx sensitivity. Rounding off a bit. 12dB is 25% of your range. 6dB is 50% 3dB is 75%

1.5dB is 87.5% Therefore, for you 20% loss in range, there is about a 1dB difference between the v1 and v2 incantation. I have no way to tell if it's in receive sensitivity, transmit power, or antenna gain. My guess(tm) would be antenna gain. 1-3 dB variations in product lots are all too common.

Different chipsets have different algorithms for dealing with reflections. If the weak signal is the result of going through walls or floors, you're really measuring how well the receiver can handle multipath. How well does it work in a line of sight and minimal reflective environment?

The v1 to v2 transition suggests a change of vendor so that two cards may be completely different inside. Could I trouble you for the FCC ID numbers so I can look at the inside photos on the FCC web pile?

Ouch. Now, that's bad. When that happens, check whatever utility is supplied with the card for the connection speed. If it has slowed down to 1-2Mbit/sec, then the card and/or it's driver is doing a very bad job of handling interference. They're suppose to slow down or stop in the presence of interference, then speed back up when it goes away. Some drivers do not recover very gracefully. If the speed stays fairly high, then that's not the problem.

What access points or wireless routers were you using? Just curious if you're mixing chipsets.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann
Loading thread data ...

The original Netgear WG511 (v1) PC Card is one of the best 802.11g products I've ever used or tested. It has remarkably good range (better than most other 802.11b and 802.11g products I've used and tested), very good stability (better able to hold a difficult connection than other products), and very good speed (particularly in less than optimal conditions).

I recently needed an additional 802.11g PC Card, and when I couldn't readily find an original WG511 (v1) PC Card, I went with the WG511v2 (which is a different design). My expectation was that it would be at least as good as the original WG511 (v1), and perhaps better. Unfortunately, it isn't even as good:

  • Range is significantly worse than the original WG511 (v1), on the order of
10-20% less. In some locations where the original WG511 (v1) can connect and hold a weak signal, the WG511v2 is too unstable to be usable

  • Stability of the WG511v2 is much worse than the original WG511 (v1), to the point of losing connections even in strong signal conditions.

These observations are based on extensive careful testing of more than one sample of both types of cards in multiple locations with the latest Netgear drivers under Windows XP SP2 on an IBM ThinkPad T30.

Accordingly, my recommendation is for the original WG511 (v1) over the WG511v2, which didn't even perform as well as other (non-Netgear) 802.11g cards I've used and tested. Easy way to tell them apart:

  • The original WG511 (v1) has a silver antenna bulge.
  • The WG511v2 has a black antenna bulge.

See also .

Although the original WG511 (v1) may be hard to find new, good used ones are readily available on eBay (as of this writing) at bargain prices.

Reply to
John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

My guess is new and cheaper (in the negative sense of the word).

These results were consistent with two different samples of each card. (That's not statistically valid, but better than just one of each.)

These results are consistent over multiple environments, both with and without walls and floors.

The cards I currently have: v1: PY3WG511-F v2: PY3WG511V2H1

Google suggests that there are at least 5 versions of this card: PY3WG511 Intersil PY3WG511-F Intersil PY3WG511V2H1 Marvell PY3WG511V3 Atheros PY3WG511TV1H3 Atheros That last is probably the WG511T, a distinctly different Netgear product, and I'm thinking the prior one may be as well, leaving the first three as members of the base WG511 family, with two chip vendors. My guess is that the Marvell implementation is cheaper but not as good as the Intersil implementation.

The speed stays fairly high (36+). Signal strength at the PC Card is 6-8 balls out of 8 on the Netgear monitor.

There are two access points in the area (inside a public library) with overlapping coverage, roughly the same signal strength, and the same SSID. There are no other obvious sources of interference, not even any other apparent wireless clients when I was testing. My guess is that the card is sporadically trying unsuccessfully to switch access points (roam).

Other than the D-Link home network, all the others are unknown hotspot hardware.

Reply to
John Navas
[Netgear WG511 v1 and v2]

|

formatting link
'PY3WG511-F'|
formatting link
Looks like a clone of the Intersil/Harris ISL38001C Prism GT Cardbus32 reference design. It was formerly type certified by Rockwell/Intersil/Conexant as OSZ38001C at: |
formatting link
'OSZ38001C'Looks exactly the same as the Netgear WG511v1. I can't tell who manufactured it.

|

formatting link
'PY3WG511V2H1'|
formatting link
Marvell chipset. Made by Cameo Communications Inc in Taiwan. |
formatting link
Note the color of the circuit board materials. The yellow color of the Intersil version is low loss polysulfone. The green of the Cameo version is G10/FR4 which has considerably higher loss. There's where the RF got lost in the v2 version.

Incidentally, the reason they don't change the part number is to avoid having massive dealer returns for obsolete stock. If the new version is "functionally identical" to the original, with the same part number, then the dealer is stuck with the "old" stock. Usually, the new version is better in some way, but this time, it's the other way around.

I agree. The v1 Intersil looks like a much better and substantially more expensive to produce. Polysulfone falls apart when overheated and is a pain to solder.

Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

That sounds like a small anecdotal observation.

Reply to
dold

As I wrote. Notwithstanding a great deal of testing and documentation. So do you have anything substantive to add (e.g., evidence one way or the other), or (with apologies to Peggy Lee) is that all there is? ;)

Reply to
John Navas

I just wonder why your commentary is substantial, and other sources are considered anecdotal.

Reply to
dold

I've had a couple of the WG511, I presume they are V1, since they don't say v2. These are very good cards, and are often very cheap on Amazon. I bought the first because it was only $19 after rebates. I bought the second after I found out how good the first was. I think it is a bit better than an Orinoco Silver Classic.

Netgear uses their own FCC-ID range, so it's difficult to pinpoint the original manufacturer, but could you post the new FCCID?

Mine is FCC ID PY3WG511-F. I identified it as an Intersil chipset.

Reply to
dold

Amazon (where I bought mine), still shows the gray antenna bulge. Today it's $29.99 after rebates. Fry's Outpost.com shows the gray bulge for $49.99 after rebates.

Actually, I can't find an online source that shows the black bulge. Maybe the photos aren't updated when the version changes.

The commentary in some different postings about the v2 speaks of a Marvel chip or a Broadcom chip. One even laments that the v2 is being sold without distinction from the v1, but doesn't say where that purchase was made.

Where did you get yours? Was it obvious it was a v2 when you bought it?

Reply to
dold

I think that's obvious, but then again, YMMV. ;)

Reply to
John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

As someone who has worked in the industry I'm familiar with the practice, but I likewise know that there are tradeoffs (in such things as WIP, scrap, support confusion), and other ways to manage the issue. Worse, I see another motive in the sleazy, misleading way the naming is being exploited: Netgear touts the WG511 as CNET Editors' Choice and PC World Best Buy (see ), yet those awards were earned by the v1 design, not the current v2 design, which is really a different product. I'm guessing this may well violate the terms of those awards.

Reply to
John Navas

From my first post to this thread:

From one of my later posts to this thread:

The cards I currently have: v1: PY3WG511-F v2: PY3WG511V2H1

Google suggests that there are at least 5 versions of this card: PY3WG511 Intersil PY3WG511-F Intersil PY3WG511V2H1 Marvell PY3WG511V3 Atheros PY3WG511TV1H3 Atheros That last is probably the WG511T, a distinctly different Netgear product, and I'm thinking the prior one may be as well, leaving the first three as members of the base WG511 family, with two chip vendors. My guess is that the Marvell implementation is cheaper but not as good as the Intersil implementation.

Reply to
John Navas

Indeed, pictures often don't get updated to match running changes in actual stock, and I haven't found any dealers that actually have the v1 in stock.

Marvell.

As I wrote in an earlier post to this thread, I see another motive in the sleazy, misleading way the naming is being exploited: Netgear touts the WG511 as CNET Editors' Choice and PC World Best Buy (see ), yet those awards were earned by the v1 design, not the current v2 design, which is really a different product. I'm guessing this may well violate the terms of those awards.

Circuit City.

Only in that the picture on the box had a black rather than a silver antenna, which would only be meaningful to those that understood the difference.

Reply to
John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

My apologies for being snippy -- I was tired and cranky when I wrote that. Better answer: I think if you look at the kind of report that's typically posted, and the level of expertise (or lack of it) reflected in the post, against the kind of careful testing and documentation that I performed under fairly well controlled conditions, then you'll see the difference.

Reply to
John Navas
[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

My apologies for being snippy -- I was tired and cranky when I wrote that.

Reply to
John Navas

Netgear isn't the only one. The silliness is obvious on several of the support sites where you have to look at pictures and serial numbers to know which "v" you have, and they all have different firmware/chipsets/actual manufacturers. Netgear says there is no external appearance difference between the two. Either they are color blind, or some of the v1 had black plastic.

Too bad about this one. I liked the Netgear. The v2 seesm to have been out for almost a year, so I guess it's a keeper as far as Netgear is concerned, or they bought so many in one shipment that they have little choice.

Reply to
dold

Indeed, it's all too common practice, and an unfortunate and shortsighted way for these companies to be treating their customers.

Reply to
John Navas

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.