True.
It really depends on a lot of “what ifs”.
I’ve been through the cabling thing in multiple places since 1996…
Today I run cable as-needed. If wi-fingers it done, I’m not putting in the effort for cable.
If wifi isn’t getting it done, I’ll run a single cable for the location with issues, and drop in a gigabit switch (if needed).
The days of running cable “just in case” are in the past, for me.
I hesitate to say they are the same speed because there are more variables with wifi than Ethernet, many of them outside your control. With Ethernet, you get what you build. Period.
WiFi is more optimistic. It can theoretically be fast but you cannot rely on it to perform as you plan at any given moment.
WiFi is a convenience technology and it’s great but if it’s even remotely important, it should never rely on WiFi.
BartyDeCanter@piefed.social 1 week ago
Exactly, that’s the “in theory” part. In theory, 802.11ax (aka WiFi 6) can hit 1.1Gb, and 802.11be (WiFi 7) can hit 23Gb(!!), while most common cheap Ethernet devices support 1Gb, though fancier ones support 2.5 or 10. But you’re only going to hit those rates in an anechoic chamber with perfect antennas, placement and no other devices. And that speed is shared between all connected devices.
But a $20 Ethernet switch can support 8 devices getting a solid 1Gb connection simultaneously.
Related, I have a Roku TV that only has a 100Mb Ethernet connection but generally reports several hundred Mb over WiFi. I still only use the Ethernet connection because a 4k show only needs about 60Mb, and I never have had a problem with the Ethernet connection, while WiFi would drop out several times a week.