Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 08:44:21 -0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> Cc: "freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org" <wireless@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Intel Pro/Wireless 2200BG iwi(4) card stopped working in 8-stable Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmonhe7fWU0YSOHa5kpMKTWfw2w-13=eqjCCEA96vGwVwbQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20150109095443.GA32913@regency.nsu.ru> References: <20121005123832.GA64777@regency.nsu.ru> <CAJ-VmonCQLaV4tYtS3cQ309vLhyamEzBtS-mvq1iZdCH1osgkg@mail.gmail.com> <20121005201258.GA44697@regency.nsu.ru> <20150109095443.GA32913@regency.nsu.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
just note: ar5416/ar9160 are 2x2, with three antennas. but definitely 2x2 (MCS0-15) 11n chips. -a On 9 January 2015 at 01:54, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 03:12:58AM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 07:02:26AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: >> > On 5 October 2012 05:38, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@nsu.ru> wrote: >> > > Since this card gave me lots of troubles over the past, any one can >> > > recommend a decent mini-pci replacement? It looks like ath(4) chips >> > > are currently best supported. [...] >> > >> > AR5416 or AR9220 will be fine. Even an AR9160 will be fine. >> >> OK, but shall I give predilection towards one of them, or they're all >> pretty much the same? > > Today I've revisited this old topic and found that similar question was > asked before on ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org [1]. I will quote some parts > of it here (and thus answer my own question) for the sake of history. > > Gen 1 - AR5008: > AR5416+AR5122 - 2x2 dual band, PCI > AR5416+AR5133 - 3x3 dual band, PCI > AR5418+AR5133 - 3x3 dual band, PCIe > > Gen 2 - AR9001: > AR9160+AR9104 - 2x2 dual band, PCI > AR9160+AR9106 - 3x3 dual band, PCI > > Gen 3 - AR9002: > AR9220 - 2x2, dual band, PCI > AR9280 - 2x2, dual band, PCIe > > [We know that] the AR9002 is a single chip solution, likely reducing cost, > power and size. But is there any improvement to radio functionality or > other features? > > Answer (by Luis R. Rodriguez): > > Having a single chip itself yields a lot more benefits than that. Since > things are closer together it also means less complexity on overall > programming. > > I recommend the single chip families, and specificaly AR9280 is a great > candidate as its dual band and uses PCI-E. From a software perspective > Atheros dedicates more of its own resources for testing our newer chipsets, > the newer gernation 802.11n chipsets. AR9001 didn't get formal testing > but the AR9002 did. Now its AR9002, in the near future it will be AR9003 > and so on. > > ./danfe > > [1] http://ath9k-devel.ath9k.narkive.com/GqjxAbUB/ar-chipset-differences > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-wireless > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-wireless-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmonhe7fWU0YSOHa5kpMKTWfw2w-13=eqjCCEA96vGwVwbQ>