▲ 183 ▼ Wifi 15 gigabytes per second — Researchers demo invention (www.tomshardware.com) submitted 9 months ago by heyWhatsay@slrpnk.net to c/technology@lemmy.world 56 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 20 points 9 months ago (17 children) yeah but this wifi you can only use in one room .. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 17 child comments replies: [–] vinnymac@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago (6 children) I would use this for streaming games from a wired PC to a device that’s wireless. Not having to run a wire is magical. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] spiffpitt@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago (2 children) i imagine a use-case for vr headsets permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago Exactly. I also imagine access points in every room. Can't wait. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Well as long as you never turn around and put your body between the headset and it's wireless peer. Note that 802.11ay to get 20-40gb (approx 2GB to 3GB/s) is a thing, and it's ignored because going over 45 ghz is just impractical. This experiment would have to go even higher than that. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sxan@piefed.zip -5 points 9 months ago (2 children) I mean, no kidding. Þere are any number is use cases for getting rid of wires. Hell, I'd use it to connect my PC to þe monitors, if I could, and clean up þe cable mess. But streaming from þe home media server to a TV? No brainer. Also, even if þe single-room comment is accurate, daisy chain. Þe only real show stopper would be if it were line-of-sight. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) It pretty much would be line of sight only. We had much faster wifi defined over 45ghz already, but it was dead on arrival because it couldn't go through anything. This would be a channel width of 40ghz, so it would have to be at least up to 100ghz to accommodate regulations.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Sxan@piefed.zip 1 point 9 months ago Bummer. Still, I'd do a lot to reduce cabling. permalink fedilink source parent [–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago and cant be standing between the device and router... permalink fedilink source parent [–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (3 children) also don’t need 15 GBps (120gbps) for every day use, so some of that bandwidth can be sacrificed for better range. ultra high speed hdmi is 48gbps. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yeah I wonder if they can use the same configuration to improve bandwidth at frequencies that penetrate walls, people and things better permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Unfortunately, looks like the breakthrough is silicon that can credibly work with those frequencies at all with a reasonable power budget, by simplifying and reducing power draw. Maybe it could somehow reduce energy usage of wifi, but they seemed to be all in on being over 100ghz... So the tech won't be increasing the throughput of anything more practical. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago* Wireless 4k 120hz streaming from my PC to TV would be pretty sweet. I can run a cable if i really wanted... but this would be easier. It's still more than that, but getting that would be sweet. permalink fedilink source parent [–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) I'd shell out for a multi router array that would give me these insane speeds if my ISP would offer me those speeds. A router in every room isn't an impossibility if what you get out of it makes it worth it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jjlinux@lemmy.zip 1 point 9 months ago I would argue that even for local speeds it's well worth it. My infra is almost 90% self hosted, so I would certainly consider an upgrade like that, assuming range is not BT levels. permalink fedilink source parent [–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago (2 children) It's definitely a niche product. Most people don't even need gig speeds. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago They hint at their goals by mentioning fiber in a datacenter, where they are now getting to 400/800gb speeds, so in the ballpark of this demo, but this would be a shared medium instead of a switched network, so it's DOA there as well. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 2 points 9 months ago I don't think this is a product yet .. more like a technical solution for building a power efficient modulation at high frequency. Gigabit speeds are great but the band they are sitting in is mostly useless unless you have line of sight. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] vinnymac@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago (6 children) I would use this for streaming games from a wired PC to a device that’s wireless. Not having to run a wire is magical. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] spiffpitt@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago (2 children) i imagine a use-case for vr headsets permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago Exactly. I also imagine access points in every room. Can't wait. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Well as long as you never turn around and put your body between the headset and it's wireless peer. Note that 802.11ay to get 20-40gb (approx 2GB to 3GB/s) is a thing, and it's ignored because going over 45 ghz is just impractical. This experiment would have to go even higher than that. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sxan@piefed.zip -5 points 9 months ago (2 children) I mean, no kidding. Þere are any number is use cases for getting rid of wires. Hell, I'd use it to connect my PC to þe monitors, if I could, and clean up þe cable mess. But streaming from þe home media server to a TV? No brainer. Also, even if þe single-room comment is accurate, daisy chain. Þe only real show stopper would be if it were line-of-sight. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) It pretty much would be line of sight only. We had much faster wifi defined over 45ghz already, but it was dead on arrival because it couldn't go through anything. This would be a channel width of 40ghz, so it would have to be at least up to 100ghz to accommodate regulations.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Sxan@piefed.zip 1 point 9 months ago Bummer. Still, I'd do a lot to reduce cabling. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] spiffpitt@lemmy.world 18 points 9 months ago (2 children) i imagine a use-case for vr headsets permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago Exactly. I also imagine access points in every room. Can't wait. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Well as long as you never turn around and put your body between the headset and it's wireless peer. Note that 802.11ay to get 20-40gb (approx 2GB to 3GB/s) is a thing, and it's ignored because going over 45 ghz is just impractical. This experiment would have to go even higher than that. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago Exactly. I also imagine access points in every room. Can't wait. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Well as long as you never turn around and put your body between the headset and it's wireless peer. Note that 802.11ay to get 20-40gb (approx 2GB to 3GB/s) is a thing, and it's ignored because going over 45 ghz is just impractical. This experiment would have to go even higher than that. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sxan@piefed.zip -5 points 9 months ago (2 children) I mean, no kidding. Þere are any number is use cases for getting rid of wires. Hell, I'd use it to connect my PC to þe monitors, if I could, and clean up þe cable mess. But streaming from þe home media server to a TV? No brainer. Also, even if þe single-room comment is accurate, daisy chain. Þe only real show stopper would be if it were line-of-sight. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) It pretty much would be line of sight only. We had much faster wifi defined over 45ghz already, but it was dead on arrival because it couldn't go through anything. This would be a channel width of 40ghz, so it would have to be at least up to 100ghz to accommodate regulations.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Sxan@piefed.zip 1 point 9 months ago Bummer. Still, I'd do a lot to reduce cabling. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) It pretty much would be line of sight only. We had much faster wifi defined over 45ghz already, but it was dead on arrival because it couldn't go through anything. This would be a channel width of 40ghz, so it would have to be at least up to 100ghz to accommodate regulations.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Sxan@piefed.zip 1 point 9 months ago Bummer. Still, I'd do a lot to reduce cabling. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sxan@piefed.zip 1 point 9 months ago Bummer. Still, I'd do a lot to reduce cabling. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago and cant be standing between the device and router... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (3 children) also don’t need 15 GBps (120gbps) for every day use, so some of that bandwidth can be sacrificed for better range. ultra high speed hdmi is 48gbps. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yeah I wonder if they can use the same configuration to improve bandwidth at frequencies that penetrate walls, people and things better permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Unfortunately, looks like the breakthrough is silicon that can credibly work with those frequencies at all with a reasonable power budget, by simplifying and reducing power draw. Maybe it could somehow reduce energy usage of wifi, but they seemed to be all in on being over 100ghz... So the tech won't be increasing the throughput of anything more practical. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago* Wireless 4k 120hz streaming from my PC to TV would be pretty sweet. I can run a cable if i really wanted... but this would be easier. It's still more than that, but getting that would be sweet. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 3 points 9 months ago (1 child) Yeah I wonder if they can use the same configuration to improve bandwidth at frequencies that penetrate walls, people and things better permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Unfortunately, looks like the breakthrough is silicon that can credibly work with those frequencies at all with a reasonable power budget, by simplifying and reducing power draw. Maybe it could somehow reduce energy usage of wifi, but they seemed to be all in on being over 100ghz... So the tech won't be increasing the throughput of anything more practical. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago Unfortunately, looks like the breakthrough is silicon that can credibly work with those frequencies at all with a reasonable power budget, by simplifying and reducing power draw. Maybe it could somehow reduce energy usage of wifi, but they seemed to be all in on being over 100ghz... So the tech won't be increasing the throughput of anything more practical. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago* Wireless 4k 120hz streaming from my PC to TV would be pretty sweet. I can run a cable if i really wanted... but this would be easier. It's still more than that, but getting that would be sweet. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 child) I'd shell out for a multi router array that would give me these insane speeds if my ISP would offer me those speeds. A router in every room isn't an impossibility if what you get out of it makes it worth it permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] jjlinux@lemmy.zip 1 point 9 months ago I would argue that even for local speeds it's well worth it. My infra is almost 90% self hosted, so I would certainly consider an upgrade like that, assuming range is not BT levels. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jjlinux@lemmy.zip 1 point 9 months ago I would argue that even for local speeds it's well worth it. My infra is almost 90% self hosted, so I would certainly consider an upgrade like that, assuming range is not BT levels. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago (2 children) It's definitely a niche product. Most people don't even need gig speeds. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago They hint at their goals by mentioning fiber in a datacenter, where they are now getting to 400/800gb speeds, so in the ballpark of this demo, but this would be a shared medium instead of a switched network, so it's DOA there as well. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 2 points 9 months ago I don't think this is a product yet .. more like a technical solution for building a power efficient modulation at high frequency. Gigabit speeds are great but the band they are sitting in is mostly useless unless you have line of sight. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago They hint at their goals by mentioning fiber in a datacenter, where they are now getting to 400/800gb speeds, so in the ballpark of this demo, but this would be a shared medium instead of a switched network, so it's DOA there as well. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 2 points 9 months ago I don't think this is a product yet .. more like a technical solution for building a power efficient modulation at high frequency. Gigabit speeds are great but the band they are sitting in is mostly useless unless you have line of sight. permalink fedilink source parent