Now that Unifi has its first Wi-Fi 6E compatible access point in early access store, those of us thinking Wi-Fi 6 experience with UniFi have some choices. Which one should you get?
Disclaimer: I only have UniFi 6 Pro and currently do not have U6 lite nor Enterprise.
The four primary units to compare are U6-Lite, U6-Pro, U6-LR and U6-Enterprise. Amongst these four, U6-Enterprise is currently in early access status.
Spec comparison are great for tech enthusiasts, but what does it really mean in daily use for most of us?
Below is practical max throughput comparison table.
There are a few assumptions for creating this table.
- 2×2 MIMO Client
Most Wi-Fi client devices are 2×2 MIMO compatible i.e. 3×3 and 4×4 are not utilized between a client to access points. - 70% Efficiency
Wi-Fi link speed, called PHY is a connection speed between a client and access point. The actual throughput of a client never reaches to this PHY. In general, Wi-Fi efficiency is 50-70% i.e. practical max throughput can be as low as half of PHY. Here I assumed, UniFi AP can reach top end 70% efficiency in good environment. - Channel Widths
Wider the channel width, proportional throughput gain can be achieved on paper for one device; however, too broad of channel width result in channel overlap and overall poor network performance.
So practically speaking, following are realistic channel width for each radio bands:
2.4 GHz: 20MHz
5GHz: 80MHz
6 GHz: 160 MHz
Using above 3 assumptions, you can see 5 GHz band show practically no difference amongst all 4 access points when looking at single client device practical max throughput.
The practical max throughput difference is the biggest in 2.4 GHz band. This has been confirmed on SmallNetBuilder site (ref).
Vs. Wave 2 Access Points
I own U6-Pro myself and using iPhone 12 in 5ft range, I get 700-800 Mbps local (iPerf3) as well as internet speed (UniFi WiFiman) tests. In contrast, UAP-SHD or HD, I got around 600 Mbps.
WiFi Man Internet Speed Test
Client Device: iPhone 12 Pro in 5ft distance
When compared to SHD (4×4 MIMO Wave 2), U6 Pro has 17% download throughput gain on this particular test. When I run another speed test through WiFiman using different U6 Pro, I got 630 Mbps download speed i.e. essentially identical to SHD.
iPerf Test
iPerf download test shows similar 15% speed improvement on download. Upload test results were asymmetrically slower in range of 500-600’s.
As far as WiFi efficiency, this is 58% of PHY for U6Pro while SHD had 70% efficiency. Both are within the expected normal range of 50-70%, but in this particular test SHD turned out to be more efficient than the U6Pro. This efficiency difference reduced theoretical max speed gain of Wi-Fi 6 over Wave 2 AC (40%) in my test. This could well be my current network setup/environment and/or firmware related. Alternatively, it may be due to hardware itself including possibility of client limitation rather than AP.
MU-MIMO
Third test I wanted to run was to test capability of MU-MIMO. Since I have iPhone 11 Pro and 12 Pro with both being Wi-Fi 6 capable, I thought sending data from one phone to another while both being connecting to the same Access point would in theory creates 2×2 MIMO UP and Down simultaneous connection. In another word, I have hypothesized, if a access point is capable of both up and down MU-MIMO, I would see max throughput performance on both end without a throttling i.e. hypothesized I will get 600-700 Mbps inter-device throughput.
The test result clearly shows my hypothesis is incorrect. The signifiant asymmetry of upload speed is peculiar on its own but SHD outperformed U6-Pro here in both down and up. At time of this writing, I don’t have good explanation for this result.
3 x 3 Client
Some of the highend laptops like MacBook Pro prior to 2019 (ref) has 3 x 3 MIMO. However, the latest MacBook Pro using Wi-Fi 6 chip has only 2 x 2 MIMO. This means from the maximum link speed point of view, older MacBook Pros had higher potential with the link speed of 1300 Mbps despite using Wave 2 AC standard.
What this means as a UniFi U6 Access Point user is 4×4 MIMO capable Pro or Enterprise has theoretically ~8% speed gain over 2×2 capped access points U6-Lite and U6-LR when such device is connected.
6 GHz band
There isn’t much Wi-Fi 6E capable client on the market at this time. If you are Apple ecosystem user, there isn’t any. Over the course, there will be growing library but it will take a while.
Does this mean U6-Enterprise irrelevant?
One main benefit I see immediately is potential for use in dedicated Wireless backhaul. Consumer high end mesh network system e.g. Eero Pro, Orbi etc. use triband technology. They use the best link as dedicated band for mesh link between access points (nodes).
So I surmise two U6-Enterprise can use 6 GHz band for dedicated link for this purpose. This allows theoretically uncompromised wirelessly linked (mesh) access point (node).
Recommendations
Consider U6-Lite
If you are budget conscious.
Alternatively, you might want to look into Ebay for Wave 2 access points for even cheaper. For instance, nanoHD.
nanoHD maybe purchased cheaper than the U6-Lite but also if you have 3 x 3 Wi-Fi 5 client, it could provide higher throughput than U6-Lite.
Consider U6-LR
If you need as few AP as possible.
From the specification point of view, U6-LR is inferior to U6-Pro despite it is $30 more expensive. Specifically, U6-LR 2.4 GHz radio is Wi-Fi 4 standard as in previous generation access points e.g nanoHD, HD etc.
So where is the extra $30 comes from?
The answer is the wider range. Looking at specs, it is immediately apparent that U6-LR has more max transmission power on 2.4 GHz band than the U6-Pro. Max power consumption is also higher on U6-LR. Additionally, range of radio could also vary based on the general design of the access point itself.
McCann Tech site performed detailed speed comparison amongst various UniFi access points. The tests confirmed that the U6-LR had superior throughput at distance (30ft + 2 walls) while on the closer range, U6-Pro were superior. On 2.4 GHz band, U6-LR showed double throughput improvement at such distance.
Now I would like to avoid going into technical detail here, but it is important that having distant connecting client will strain the access point i.e. it will have overall negative impact on the access point performance as a whole. How much that impact one is case by case.
Another thing to consider is that having more transmission power is not always positive. They can be major cause of co-channel or adjacent channel interference. So when designing multi-access point deployment, ensuring to set different channels, placing enough distance amongst access points and reducing transmission power are all part of Wi-Fi optimization. So in such circumstance, U6-LR’s distant coverage could affect negatively.
Consider U6-Pro
If you are looking for the best balance between cost and performance.
This is my current choice for Wi-Fi 6 access points. So far I have installed two, and another one on its way. In close range, this has the best performance on paper and testing. If multiple AP is planned to be deployed, lowering power and placing several of these should provide the best performance like UAP-HD/SHD in AC Wave-2 generation.
Consider U6-Enterprise
If you have 6E client device or planning to use two U6-Enterprise for mesh.
Majority of home users will not have sufficient number or perhaps any of 6E client device anytime soon. If you do not have 6E client or plan to have one anytime soon, this has no advantage over U6 Pro except in mesh potential.
As mentioned above, if you need best performance mesh setup in UniFi because you do not have a wired reach in particular area, having two U6-Enterprise could be an answer*.
*Not confirmed if two U6-Enterprise actually can set 6GHz as dedicated wired backhaul
When comparing U6-Pro to U6-Enterprise, there is $100 difference. However, one has to remember that to get U6 throughput benefit, you need 2.5 Gbps wired connection. If you do not own such switch device, that would cost additional a few hundred dollars.
Another caution here is that U6-Enterprise is still in early access, so hardware spec may change when it reaches to public release. There is always some chance, the device may never reach to public release.
We can always play the waiting game in technology; however, this one is safer. Wi-Fi 7 is already on the corner. It has been announced that Qualcomm has actually unveiled Wi-Fi 7 chip (ref). Some speculates consumers may skip Wi-Fi 6E due to component shortage.
My current decision despite being network hobbyist, I plan to wait until at least I own one Wi-Fi 6E client device. I believe Wi-Fi 7 performance and availability will be clear by then.