Since 3k has higher PPS and "half the latency" vs N series ePMP, one could assume that a 3000L AP with only N clients will add some capacity vs the N AP, but how much...
This is a tricky one... because the 3000L is currently limited to 32 subs, doesn't support a BSA, MU-MIMO or have the dynamic filtering of the e2k or e3k AP's. If you're deploying in a high noise environment, you will probably see better performance out of the e2k AP (due to filtering and optional BSA). All things being equal however, you may see very nominal gains using the 3000L with legacy clients (up to +10%) due to short GI and LDPC optimizations.
The 3000L is most closely related to an AC replacement for the original e1k GPS and it's positioned for small PtMP POP's or as a high performance PtP radio that allows for 3rd party antennas.
I agree with Eric. The ePMP3000L is meant more as a micropop solution and the gains in perofmance may be negligible relative to ePMP2k. With ePMP3000 it has additional chains and the beamforming adds 3dB of array factor gain. On the DL it still has to respect EIRP limits, but on the UL this will manifest itself as a 3dB system gain and can improve UL traffic including ACK's to DL data, improving DL performance.
The pps improvements will only be noticeable if you have lots of small packets that would otherwise throttle a slower AP due to CPU overload. For most internet traffic the average packet size is large enough that it doesn't push the processors to thir limits.
I would say that ePMP 3000L should replace ePMP 1000 GPS Sync due to high pps and modulation QAM256 5/6. It should allow (as we suppose ) in 40 MHz to increase multipoint sector throughput from 110-130 Mbps ( that ePMP 1000 GPS Sync has due to low pps, average real packet size is 700-800 bytes ) to 150-160 Mbps with 802.11n CPE (10-15 Mbps service plan) and alow to offer 20-30Mbps service plan for 802.11 ac CPE at ePMP 3000L in mix mode.
Most popular ePMP 1000 GPS Sync installation has 50-70 CPEs per sector. So 32 CPEs limitation per ePMP 3000L sector is not acceptable. It shout be at least 64. It is very very important for starting to use ePMP 3000L in real existing ePMP networks.
Also micropop networks ( up to 32 CPEs) is ubnt nishe with low cost BS and CPE. Most popular Rocket M5 installation has 30-35 CPEs per sector. Cambium for competition in this nishe with Rocket 5AC (as replacement of Rocket M5 for ubnt users) should offer them first of all scalability - possibility growing CPEs per sector up to 64 with ubnt CPE Elevate.
Main key idea to start to use ePMP 3000L with Force 300-16/300-25 CPEs in new micropops installation possibly somewhere will take place , but it will not be popular with 32 CPE per BS limitation.
Using ePMP 3000L for point to point will not be polular also. Force 300 CSM is the same for this purpose, only without sync.
Most popular ePMP 1000 GPS Sync installation has 50-70 CPEs per sector. So 32 CPEs limitation per ePMP 3000L sector is not acceptable. It shout be at least 64.
Someone mentioned that this 32 cap was going to be quickly increased to 64 subs and possibly beyond, but I have not heard an official statement from Cambium. ALSO... just FYI... the post I was replying to was asking about legacy N client performance when using the e3kL as an AP. As you've cited, there will be much great gains over legacy N radios by deploying a greenfield AC site.
One of the techs mentioned they are working on the firmware to hopefully get it to 64, but no guarantee it will go higher. I think they said possibly in the 4.4 firmware. I cant seem to find that post though
The ePMP 3000L subscriber count limit will move to 64. It was limited to 32 in the initial release but subsequent testing and some modifications to memory allocation have allowed us to move to 64. This will be fully supported in release 4.4.
Hi. I wish I could confirm this for you, but I've been trying to buy from StreakWave and they keep saying soon, but they don't seem to have stock yet. :) So, I'm still in a holding pattern on the 3000L. However, YES, it should have the same lower latency benefits, plus the same 'short GI' benefits as it's big brother. It won't have MU-MIMO and it won't have the extra 3dBi recieve gain of the 4x4, and it won't have the dynamic filtering - but it should have the lower latency benefits.
The 3000L has been working just fine in high noise enviroments without the active filtering using RF elements Horns. WISP is runing 6 APs using only 2x 40MHz channels in ABAB config with GPS sync, no problems. Not sure you need Active Filtering or Beam Stearing antennas when you use noise rejecting Horns. In UNI-1 and 30* Horns he's delivering 140-200meg speeds to clients. Here is the link to the RF elements TwistPort adapter for the 3000L and the 3000 CSM radios: https://rfelements.com/products/wireless-broadband/twistport-adaptor-for-epmp/twistport-adaptor-3/
We are currently looking at evaluating the 3000L's and Force 300's for a new location. We would like to be able to use the zero touch provisioning tools that you have developed. Could you tell me about the network topology (what it looks like / what is required) while using these devices, and zero touch provisioning? Since we are designing from the ground up I would like to make sure we build a compatible network to use your tools with the new hardware.
Hey… I’m newbie here. Can i ask?? About the Ch0 and Ch1 at the device. Ch0 is Vertical / Horizontal. Or Ch1 is Vertical or Horizontal?? I’m confused. And for this case i’m using external antenna
