How literal is a "1500 sq ft" range for wireless routers?

[paulri]

The two routers I'm looking at (Linksys AX1800 & Netgear AX3000) both advertise a 1500 sq ft range. My home is 1600 sq ft, rectangularish, although I've never had problems getting a signal around the house with earlier routers--in fact, I never even thought about any range for them. Given that these routers are more expensive than the ones I've bought before, with a stronger/newer wireless technology, I'm wondering about the range--does the published range assume that the router could be on one end of the house, and so 1600 ft2 is really an expected range from one side only of the router? In other words, as long as the router is in the middle of the house (mine is and will be), how hard is that 1500 ft2 range?

I live on a single story, if that matters.

 

[johnnydc]

We have a 1550 sf house that is a split level, Have the router upstairs approximately in the center of the house. Seems to work good.

 

[Skippy722]

I’d avoid the Netgear. Mine didn’t make it a year before it started giving me problems like no internet connectivity (verified internet connectivity by plugging a MacBook directly into the modem), refusing to accept device connections, and requiring daily reboots.

But the range on it was decent... it covered an entire1800sq ft tri level with the router on the lowest floor in a stairwell, about the worst place to put a router.

 

[PandaBear]

Power radiates away from the "side" of an antenna pole sitting up straight like a circle. So that 1500 sqft is the Pi * Radius square that in theory can receive the signal and do useful work with it. Going through the calculator means it is about 21.85 feet away from the router.

It is of course a theoretical value. If you have walls it would likely reduce that. There is no way to know until you buy it and test it out. A lot of things matter and typically the more expensive routers have multiple antennas that can beam form to increase ranges. Then you also have the antenna design and power output.

It is not all lost though, you can always add a mesh access point or repeater mid way to cover any dead spot.

 

[paulri]

That's useful to know. I was wondering what calculations went into determining an area of coverage.

Power radiates away from the "side" of an antenna pole sitting up straight like a circle. So that 1500 sqft is the Pi * Radius square that in theory can receive the signal and do useful work with it. Going through the calculator means it is about 21.85 feet away from the router.

It is of course a theoretical value. If you have walls it would likely reduce that. There is no way to know until you buy it and test it out. A lot of things matter and typically the more expensive routers have multiple antennas that can beam form to increase ranges. Then you also have the antenna design and power output.

It is not all lost though, you can always add a mesh access point or repeater mid way to cover any dead spot.

 

[wwillson]

Signal strength and throughput are highly affected by interference and attenuation caused by objects near the antennas and between the radios and many other factors. The promise of 1500² ft coverage is just marketing. The only way you'll know is when you turn it on and start using it in different places in your house.

 

[odie]

Linksys AC1600 should work for this . Under $60 . We paid $44.99 with $5 rebate , was $49.99 . I'd rather have less range . See this , https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/is-it-possible-to-lower-the-range-of-your-router.340377/ . https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/linksys-smart-wi-fi-router-ac1600-ea6400 and other good reviews . Works great with ROKU and can use internet outside .

 

[OVERKILL]

Signal strength and throughput are highly affected by interference and attenuation caused by objects near the antennas and between the radios and many other factors. The promise of 1500² ft coverage is just marketing. The only way you'll know is when you turn it on and start using it in different places in your house.

Exactly this. It's marketing and just an estimate based on a given scenario.

 

[Dennywires]

walls doors furniture and any other solid obstructions in the way can affect wifi coverage as well as router placement is key. i read routers in basements below tvs and even behind a tv can drastically knockdown your wifi coverage. when sq ft coverage is suggested i wouldn't take the numbers too literal. lab testing and real world scenarios must be the biggest factor to consider. probably why there's companies like eero and others that just blanket the area in coverage.

 

[Donald]

Best to get the WIFI router in middle of the house. Even better if your house is round.

But lots of variables. A mesh is a option if the single WIFI router does not do a good enough job.

Better yet is a couple of access points that are CAT6 cable attached to your main router.

 

[JC1]

Best to get the WIFI router in middle of the house. Even better if your house is round.

But lots of variables. A mesh is a option if the single WIFI router does not do a good enough job.

Better yet is a couple of access points that are CAT6 cable attached to your main router.

I had to get a mesh system in order to have wifi in the basement. Router is upstairs in a bedroom.

 

[Donald]

I had to get a mesh system in order to have wifi in the basement. Router is upstairs in a bedroom.

Mesh is good but it is a store & forward. If it can be done, all access points should be network connected by CAT6 cable.