Anyone know where I can see published a comparative study of the signal strength of various routers?
I am having what I suspect are everyone's problems with transmitting a signal through a few thin walls in an 80s building and (for example) Buffalo tells me that I may have a problem with those thin walls and a virtual line of sight between my router and my NIC. I keep on getting a high signal and a low signal a few minutes later switching between those reports for no reason at will. Curiously it doesnt seem to switch between a low signal and a high one, always the other way around. At the moment I am getting no signal at all and want to try some other routers
No interference shows on NetStumbler at all. No I haven't got a 2.4HGx phone or microwave and I HAVE made sure that my signal on channel 6 isn't interfered with by my neighbour's one which is on channel 11 through a thick concrete floor but which nevertheless shows up as an excellent signal whenever I (accidentally or am forced to) connect to it. What is more baffling is that a scan in my area shows networks which are up to a block away from me through numerous walls whereas my own router wont RETAIN a signal through those few thin walls for more than a few hours at all.
Buffalo says that if I get even a low signal, I will get good throughput which is true. However weak the signal, I get the same throughput. So I suspect that throughput isn't what counts and wonder why no manufacturer quotes signal strength.
Has anyone done output tests showing signal strength comparison on Netgear, Buffalo, Siemens, and ultimately SWC routers? I know that magazines are starting to take signal strength seriously as they are starting to cite
802.11n machines which have a HIGHER signal strength and up to three aerials on the router