Ok, everybody has heard Cambium saying future ePMP 3000 is gonna be backwards compatible with current ePMP CPEs, but what about elevated CPEs (UBNT and MikroTik)?
Are elevated CPEs going to work with ePMP 3000 APs?
This is a key point for me as I select an upgrade path for our network, because the possibility to reuse both UBNT and MikroTik CPEs from customers is one of most significant advantages for me when comparing ePMP (3000, specially) to UBNT 5AC.
Thanks.
On several occasions they said it would support elevated devices !
YES, legacy devices will be supported but there will be a slight performance hit using legacy mode, and stations won't be able to take advantage of 802.11ac features like 256QAM and MU-MIMO. You will need all new clients to take advantage of these advanced features.
What MU-MIMO do'nt work for ePMP200 ?
MU-MIMO is an AC-WAVE2 chipset thing. So, older N chipset devices, like older AirMax which have been Elevated, or an older ePMP1000 or Force200 type of 'N' chipset devices won't have MU-MIMO capability. The Force300-16 and Force300-25 SM's support MU-MIMO with an e3K AP, and the e3K AP is also working towards compatibility with older N chipset products so that you can connect your Force200's in place... but there is no magic to be able to retrofit MU-MIMO into an older UBNT NanaStation or into an older Force200.
That being said, that will be handled seamlessly by the e3K AP, so if you have 40 clients and some are a mix of ePMP1000 and Force200 and Force300, the e3K AP will pair stations for MU-MIMO where in can, it'll talk individually where it needs to, it'll be backwardsly compatible when possible... it'll be seamless.
ALSO, it's important to note that because the new e3K Sector is 4x4, that existing 'N' clients may see a 3db signal gain in place, so they may be able to modulate higher and may be able to have a better SNR without doing anything. So depending on your exact mix and match of clients, your existing 'N' clients may (or may not) actually see a performance boost from that 3dB extra signal too.
Just small addition to what has been already said:
1. the performance increase with 802.11n subs is expected @ 40MHz channel operation due to higher processing power on e3k.
2. to improve AP capacity (MUMIMO), providers might monitor and replace SMs to new ones for most active users. Some of the customers who only browse Internet, might stay with 802.11n SMs (elevate or Force 180/190/200).
Please let me know
What about possible of elevate that`s device?
@ooo-ntk wrote:Please let me know
What about possible of elevate that`s device?
Ubiquiti NanoStation 5AC Loco (NS-5ACL)
AC devices are not supported for elevate and there are no plans to AFAIK.
What performance degradation is expected connecting 802.11n devices on 3k AP?
Compared to Ac devices you have a loss of about 10%
Just by connecting N devices?
For each individual cpe you have a 10% degradation
@Tommaso wrote:
For each individual cpe you have a 10% degradation
10 x CPE = 100% degradation ?
We have made test Epmp3000 + Force300 x 1 + Elevated LHG x 1, when Elevated SM start download, Force300 lose 50% of DL speed ?
Hi,
I am doing some testing right now with new 3000AP 50/50 elevate/cambium n devices!
i am seeing beter signal 3-4 dbms and better overall throughput/lower frame time ut. so far so good!
But latency is avg. 25ms .. total frame time 10%.. no ac clients yet to test!
That is a lot, is that normal ?
The latency depends on the interference as well as the system load. In general you should have better results with 11ac clients comparing to 11n clients.
The main value that contributes to customer experience is usually jitter, but rather not latency itself. With ePMP we are trying to have consistent jitte while still have benefits of GPS sync.
Thanks,
Dmitry
Hi,
i don't mind higher latency long as jitter throughput stability is ok,but i am surprise because epmp2000 has avg. 8-9ms and 3000 has 20ms higher, I thought it will be little bit less then 2000
Do you have 2.5ms frame size on ePMP2000? ePMP3000 is running with 5ms frame size until we introduce 2.5ms frame size i nthe upcoming firmwares.
Thanks,
Dima M
@Makoto wrote:Hi,
i don't mind higher latency long as jitter throughput stability is ok,but i am surprise because epmp2000 has avg. 8-9ms and 3000 has 20ms higher, I thought it will be little bit less then 2000
Hi Makoto. I realize your question is about elevated clients, which are therefor "N" clients. I just wanted to mention that "AC2" clients like the Force300's have much lower latency (probably typically in the 3-6 ms range) with the ePMP3000 AP's. So, going forward, if you expand with new clients, each new Force300 will add efficiency, lower average latency, and use less airtime resources.
For us - we see an overall benefit moving from ePMP1000/2000 AP's to 3000 AP's - even with "N" clients. We probably see about 10% benefit in throughput, and much more packet potential. But the biggest benefit boost is with new clients, which are significantly better.
I have 2000 also on 5ms frame size, all is the same for now even long gard interval on 3000. So ac whill be 3-6 ms but legacy 25ms , that is normal behavior?
Hi. We aren't currently running Elevated UBNT N clients on any of our ePMP3000 APs, so I can't help you compare exactly. I just meant to clear up any misconception about ePMP3000 to Force300 clients, which have LOTS less latency than that. That's probably not very helpful for you - sorry. :)
