WiFi 6 (ax) adapter

I had to abandon 2.4 due to signal congestion in a densely populated area.

That aside, is the card just enough or doesn’t the antenna need to support ax as well, something to do with

  • the implementation of low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes in the IEEE 802.11ax physical layer
  • Orthogonal frequency division multiplexing multi-user multiple-input multiple-output (OFDM MU-MIMO)

Sure, that’s a good reason for trying it in the 5GHz band.
And yes, clients would need fully support on 2,4GHz. On 5GHz WAVE2 clients would be sufficient to take advantage of the card (better MU-MIMO handling).

1 Like

Not with the 2x2, least not worth to me to make the investment for that card.


Maybe I misunderstand you, though I did not consider that the clients of course have to support ax too (which I have none).
But what I meant will the antenna shipped with the TO suffice or does it require additional investment in ax capable antenna for the TO? Probably not, it is just piece of wire afterall, right?

That’s what I thought, too. Would be just something to play with, nothing for a productive environment.

They will suffice.
There’s a difference between 2,4GHz and 5GHz wires that defines the gain the antennas can reach (that’s why dedicated antennas will always beat mixed ones like those shipped with our dear TOs), but I think that will be irrelevant due to the sheer amount of antennas needed - have a look into the currently available ax-routers which are real antenna-beasts…

1 Like

There’s something else that came to my mind - even if there is a full blown card available, we will not be able to use the full bandwidth in the 5GHz band. The 1.1Gbps on 2.4 GHz will be no problem, but 4.8 Gbps on 5 GHz? Does anyone know how fast mPCIe is connected to CPU? Because that will limit the connection and thereby the possible bandwidth…

2 Likes

probably bears down to

mvebu-pcie soc:pcie: PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00
00:01.0 PCI bridge: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Device 6820 (rev 04)
00:02.0 PCI bridge: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Device 6820 (rev 04)
00:03.0 PCI bridge: Marvell Technology Group Ltd. Device 6820 (rev 04)

bus version 1.1 | 2.0 | 3.0 | 4.0 | 5.0 and number of lanes 1 | 4 | 8 | 16 and coding (ballast)


Theoretical gross bandwidth, practical net bandwidth potentially loss since transfer protocol takes its bite.
PCIe version bandwidth per link x1 x4 x8 x16 Coding (balast in %)
1 2.5 GT/s 2.5 Gbit/s 250 Mbyte/s 1 Gbyte/s 2 Gbyte/s 4 Gbyte/s 8b10b / 20%
2 5 GT/s 5 Gbit/s 500 Mbyte/s 2 Gbyte/s 4 Gbyte/s 8 Gbyte/s 8b10b / 20%
3 8 GT/s 10 Gbit/s 0.9846 Gbyte/s 3.938 Gbyte/s 7.877 Gbyte/s 15.754 GByte/s 128b/130b / <2%
4 16 GT/s 20 Gbit/s 1.969 GByte/s 7.877 Gbyte/s 15.754 Gbyte/s 31.508 GByte/s 128b/130b / <2%
5 32 GT/s 3.9 Gbyte/s 15.8 Gbyte/s 31.5 Gbyte/s 63 Gbyte/s 128b/130b / <2%

Not sure but seems that MV6820 provides PCIe 3 on the PHY Datapath Width Mode. Unclear the number of lanes, probably not 16 since that usually applies to GPUs.


The next bottleneck are then the 1GbE ethernet ports, upstream or downstream where the bandwidth gets throttled.

1 Like

Well, this one features a reasonably 4 antenna count (not pertinent to the thread - just saying)

@Pepe could you possibly give a hint on how fast each mPCIe-slot is connected to CPU?

connecting a UART console it shows (output depending on the hardware installed)

Detected Device ID 6820
board SerDes lanes topology details:

lane # speed type
0 6 SATA0
1 5 USB3 HOST0
2 5 PCIe1
3 5 USB3 HOST1
4 5 PCIe2
5 0 SGMII2

If that is any indication to go by it would seem to be single lane (x1) for each PCIe slot.

If it is indeed PCIe3 x1 for the slot with the Wlan card it would mean max. 0.9846 Gbyte/s (less protocol overhead) and thus render 5GHz ax superfluous in terms of expanding bandwidth on that spectrum.


deriving from

ahci-mvebu f10a8000.sata: AHCI 0001.0000 32 slots 2 ports 6 Gbps

it would seem that the speed tags listed in the above topology table are indicative of the PCIe link’s bandwidth in Gbps.


SGMII2 = Serial Gigabit MediaI Independent Interface and 2 likely indicating 2.5GBASE-T (over legacy Cat5e/6 cabling) according to IEEE 802.3bz
Thus the speed tag 0.

Further reading on IEEE 802.3bz for the interested

1 Like

If @Pepe or someone from Turris Team will read this they could also tell if it maybe would be possible to make mPCIe ax card to future-proof Omnia and Mox devices. I know that it’s very hard to do it and number of chips/cards must be high but it can be “solved” using Indiegogo. I would personally prefer at least two form factors/versions - half one for NB (1x1 2x2 or whatever could be packed in such size and reasonable price) and full for Omnia (3x3?)

1 Like

Don’t know about the M but the TO would require a new board and other hardware components if

is meant for w/lan bandwidth in excess of 1GByte/s.

But maybe I miscomprehended the meaning of future proof?

https://forum.openwrt.org/t/mt7621-hw-flow-offload-and-4x4-4-n-ac-wifi-router/40674


A bit off-topic perhaps - would reckon (roughly and rather speculative) that a soho cpe featuring:
  • 1 x SPF+ (single of combined with)
  • 1 x 10GbE WAN
  • 1 x switch with 5 x 10GbE
  • 3 x 3 6Ghz ax
  • 3 x 3 5GHz ax
  • 2 x 2 2.4GHz ax
  • SoC quad-core @ 2GHz
  • 2GB DDR3 (preferably though DDR4)
  • 8GB hard drive (preferably not eMMC)

could break even as of today’s pricing basket, after

  • r&d
  • design
  • engineering
  • procurement
  • manufacturing
  • quality assurance (& testing)
  • certification
  • shipping
  • insurance
  • warranty
  • marketing
  • manpower (software maintenance, repairs, support)

, at the equivalent of ~ USD 900K. Projecting that on serial production output of 1,000 pieces makes it ~ USD 900 a piece, that is non-profit.

1 Like
which may still be a good while

https://forum.openwrt.org/t/mt7621-hw-flow-offload-and-4x4-4-n-ac-wifi-router/40674/5

802.11ax does improve the situation again (even if you only have 802.11ac clients), but currently none of these devices/ targets are supported by OpenWrt (there seems to be some initial work on ipq807x and ath11k, but I wouldn’t expect that to become ready within the next couple of months).

1 Like

So after FTTH, now even DOCSIS https://www.marketscreener.com/SERCOMM-CORPORATION-6495319/news/Sercomm-Announced-the-World-s-First-Verified-for-Interoperability-DOCSIS-3-1-Device-with-2-5Gbps-E-29146482/ passed the 1 gig mark, and with that over 100 million customers that need faster routers.
Would be nice to have something from you guys, because your stuff is awesome and i miss it.

Sry to write this, but did you read what @anon50890781 wrote above? On Turris Omnia there is speedwise no option for WiFi6 (but maybe in far future with USB-WiFi6?). On MOX it might in theory be an option (modules are interconnected with 2,5GB/s - but that is shared ressources and MOX lacks 2,5GBE upstream connectivity), but the only available WiFi 6-card on the market by now is crippled 2×2 and necessary drivers are not available (but you may try and compile the Intel sourcecode yourself, I linked it somewhere above).

1 Like

That device is foremost a cable modem with added router capability, whilst TO provides router products without modem capability.

That aside the mentioned device does not look like to feature any Wlan capabilities, let alone WiFi6

i gave up on mox and omnia, they won’t handle the bandwidth i think. I look for a Omnia v2 with WAN 2,5 gig and atleast one LAN 2,5 gig port

That is only a modem no Router

So, why mention a cable modem without WiFi in this thread about WiFi 6? The TO is on par on the upstream WAN bandwidth with what that cable modem is capable of.

1 Like

Because you need a faster WAN port to feed the wifi, the TO does only have gigabit and the modem can provide 2,5 gig, how is that on par?
I just wanted to point out that the complete eco system is shifting beyond gigabit and that where are no real solutions beside using the router of the ISP or building something your own with x86 and Intel X550-T2 as router. I’m not a fan of both.

TO provides 2.5G in the SFP cage.


Perhaps you are lucky if such broadband capacity is provided at your location. Even in Europe there are a lot of places that not even get 100M, let alone less developed places.

But I am digressing from the WiFi6 topic.

Maybe you could collaborate with TO to get a new crowd funding campaign going for a new router device.