this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2026
24 points (85.3% liked)

Hardware

5647 readers
55 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.


Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:


Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.


Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] sexy_peach@feddit.org 15 points 5 days ago (1 children)

What I learned at uni is that because all wireless transmitters and receivers share the same "air" it's always only as good as a single cable basically. Means that having 100 senders and receivers wirelessly they need to share the airspace and thus share bandwidth. If you had 100 wires, they could all send and receive without interfering.

Wires almost always seem to show better performance and consistent reliability than wireless connections (irrespective of the rated specs).

I have a WiFi 6/AX router and clients and irrespective of the type of data being sent (lots of small files, large movie files), my desktop Gigabit Ethernet connection is always faster and more consistent.

This is with ~5m line of sight of the router. It gets even more funky when the connection has to pass through 2 thick walls.