New install recommendation
Last summer I installed about 60 eap225s in a school in Pennsylvania. This year I have an install in a warehouse. I was wondering if it was worth the extra money to go with the eap245s instead of the eap225?
Thank you in advance
Scott
- Copy Link
- Subscribe
- Bookmark
- Report Inappropriate Content
stpracer wrote
I was wondering if it was worth the extra money to go with the eap245s instead of the eap225?
Depends on the throughput and/or number of clients per area. The covered area of both EAPs is nearly the same, but EAP225 is an AC1350 device which can serve 60-80 client devices, while EAP245 is an AC1750 device which can serve 80-100 clients on the same area. EAP245 could be better for a warehouse IMO.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
stpracer wrote
I was wondering if it was worth the extra money to go with the eap245s instead of the eap225?
Depends on the throughput and/or number of clients per area. The covered area of both EAPs is nearly the same, but EAP225 is an AC1350 device which can serve 60-80 client devices, while EAP245 is an AC1750 device which can serve 80-100 clients on the same area. EAP245 could be better for a warehouse IMO.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @stpracer,
How many wireless clients do you anticipate in the warehouse area? How many AP's will be serving them? Very few clients (only a few high powered laptops) have 3x3 Wifi adapters. Most mobile phones / tablets are 2x2 or 1x1.
So the EAP245 probably won't be any faster for the majority/all of your clients. If MU-MIMO is working well (on the AP and your clients -- this is a new and fairly buggy technology across multiple vendor platforms) in theory the EAP245 might support more concurrent users given that it has 3x3 radios and could "multi-task" some STA communications (e.g. one 1x1 client concurrently with one 2x2 client).
But, in reality, I doubt you'll see much if any difference. If you have a super high density of clients (like in an auditorium, stadium, large AV classroom) your money would be better spent adding more (225) AP's per area and reducing their channel width to 40MHz or even 20MHz on the 5.8GHz side. (always use 20MHz for 2.4). so that few STA's are associated with each AP. But as R1D2 said, the EAP's (225 & 245) can easily handle 50+ clients per AP.
That said, if your only expecting 10-20 AP's, the $30 extra per AP probably won't break the bank.
-Jonathan
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
JSchnee21 wrote
If MU-MIMO is working well (on the AP and your clients -- this is a new and fairly buggy technology across multiple vendor platforms) in theory the EAP245 might support more concurrent users given that it has 3x3 radios and could "multi-task" some STA communications (e.g. one 1x1 client concurrently with one 2x2 client).
The EAP225 has also 3×3 MU-MIMO for the 2.4 GHz radio, only the 5 GHz radio is 2×2 MU-MIMO and thus different to EAP245's 3×3 MU-MIMO radios for both frequency bands.
But for a warehouse the 3 spatial streams are not meant to be used by one client only. The main goal in a warehouse is to minimize the number of APs and to increase their goodput per AP. Thus, we prefer a smaller number of EAP245 rather than more EAP225 for overcrowded areas and a reasonable number of EAP225 for locations with smaller amount of client devices per WiFi cell.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
@stpracer The warehouse is about 50,000 sq ft so not large. The number of concurrent users will be approximately 15 using mostly "older cell phone" technology. The issue that I saw was the floor to ceiling double-stacked boxes of candy, nuts, and coffee. It knocks a test signal down pretty well. The school was easy, one per room on low power works perfectly there. Thank you for all of the insight. I learn new stuff all the time and asking this question was no exception.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Information
Helpful: 0
Views: 832
Replies: 4
Voters 0
No one has voted for it yet.