built-in wifi card better range than add-on?

Message

wrybread · #1 Post by **wrybread** » Wed May 30, 2007 3:17 pm

I just got my first Thinkpad, a T30 that appears to be in great shape, $280. I still havn't tested out that 2nd RAM slot, but I'm not so concerned, a gig of RAM would be fine.

Anyway, mine doesn't have built-in wifi, though it is wired for it (the antenna wires leading to the monitor). I'm wondering if anyone can tell me whether the range would be better with a built-in card than with my Linksys PCMCIA card?

When I use my T30 next to my Gateway laptop with built-in wifi (Centrino), the Gateway whoops the T30's butt. But I realize Centrino is kind of a special case.

Tholek · #2 Post by **Tholek** » Wed May 30, 2007 4:36 pm

It might. It depends on the card. It might also have to be an IBM branded card for it to be compatible.

Website · #3 Post by **tfflivemb2** » Wed May 30, 2007 7:13 pm

Yes, the built in wireless range should be a lot better than the PCMCIA card. My R40 made a HUGE turnaround, after installing the Mini-PCI wireless card, over the Linksys PCMCIA card, which barely rec'd a signal in my basement.

dsigma6 · #4 Post by **dsigma6** » Thu May 31, 2007 7:31 am

The question has already been answered, but think about it. The card is tiny, with a tiny antenna. The built-in has wires going around the screen, with more distance covered.

#5 Post by **carbon_unit** » Thu May 31, 2007 8:17 am

The built in wireless has a much better antenna placement than a pcmcia card does. Other than that the radios are pretty similar.

Tholek · #6 Post by **Tholek** » Thu May 31, 2007 11:53 am

carbon_unit wrote:The built in wireless has a much better antenna placement than a pcmcia card does. Other than that the radios are pretty similar.

Well, radio quality can vary. I have an Intel 2200BG in my current laptop, and it SUCKS compared to the Atheros A/B/G pcmcia card I'm using. In general Atheros has Intel beat, but there's also antenna placement within the lcd assembly, and the cover material that can make a difference. (New T/R series have this fixed)

It is possible to have pcmcia cards outperform mini-pci/-e, but only when the chipset is better.

#7 Post by **carbon_unit** » Thu May 31, 2007 1:58 pm

Yes, I said pretty similar not identical.

That being said, I had a 2200bg in my T42 and it worked flawlessly. I bought an Atheros because everyone said they were better. It ended up having less range than the 2200bg so I switched back. I also have a couple old IBM High Rate Wireless LAN cards (32P9898) which are rebranded Orinoco gold cards which have an awesome range alone and even better with an external antenna but they are B only.
For most users the differences in the chipsets is relatively minor unless you are picking nits. Remember, quality control has a lot to do with it. You might get a good one and you might get a bad one no matter who the manufacturer is.

Tholek · #8 Post by **Tholek** » Thu May 31, 2007 3:48 pm

carbon_unit wrote:Yes, I said pretty similar not identical.
That being said, I had a 2200bg in my T42 and it worked flawlessly. I bought an Atheros because everyone said they were better. It ended up having less range than the 2200bg so I switched back.

Wow, so you're the guy.

Sorry, had to joke there. It's just that aside from my personal experience, the vast consensus I see on the internet, whether it be blog posts/comments, or other message boards, is that Atheros performs better on several levels. I even heard that before I got my 2200BG, but alas, I wasn't given a choice in the matter there.

carbon_unit wrote:I also have a couple old IBM High Rate Wireless LAN cards (32P9898) which are rebranded Orinoco gold cards which have an awesome range alone and even better with an external antenna but they are B only.

I longed for a Lucent Orinoco for soooo long back in the day. They were the ubercards before Senao's models came around. Now I long for a EnGenius, although they haven't gotten their s**t together insofar as mini-pci-e, and it seems they'll be waiting for N ratification before they go there.

carbon_unit wrote:For most users the differences in the chipsets is relatively minor unless you are picking nits. Remember, quality control has a lot to do with it. You might get a good one and you might get a bad one no matter who the manufacturer is.

Agreed, there can always be a bad card out there. However, while most may be dealing with home wi-fi routers, I, living in the city, take my notebook on the go, and that's where better sensitivity and performance comes into play. In my situation a Senao or Ubiquiti (just heard about those) would be best, but IMO the Atheros is the closer to that of the two in question here.

wrybread may not need that much out of his card though.

wrybread · #9 Post by **wrybread** » Thu May 31, 2007 10:22 pm

> wrybread may not need that much out of his card though

Actually I do need that much. I also do a lot of urban wifi hopping, so range is king. Very interesting about the Engenius, I'll look into it.

About those Orinocos, I've found their range to be pretty pathetic compared to modern cards. Even cheap ($15) usb cards seem to get better range than those now. Like another poster I used to chase those things all over ebay, and they're still useful if you need to put your wifi card into monitoring mode, but in general they're horribly outdated. I suppose the driver is still really solid though.

wrybread · #10 Post by **wrybread** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:38 am

I just bought one of the Atheros cards. I didn't want to take a chance on the bios issues so I found one that says it works with Thinkpads. I'll post my experiences.

This is the one I bought, he has more if anyone wants one:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 0115659488

Tholek · #11 Post by **Tholek** » Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:14 am

I'd ask that you check to see if the T30 could accommodate a third antenna lead in case N was an option, but I doubt Lenovo would update the T30 BIOS with a new whitelist that included N cards anyway.

Good card there anyhow. Enjoy.

fefrie · #12 Post by **fefrie** » Sat Jun 09, 2007 2:43 pm

I'll take an internal card with so so range instead of an external card I have to pop in and out constantly any day

#13 Post by **RealBlackStuff** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:40 am

wrybread wrote:I found one that says it works with Thinkpads.

It also says clearly: This card will not work in these models. T30, R32, R40, X30, X31

wrybread · #14 Post by **wrybread** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 5:32 am

Whoa, he added that text since I bought it. It used to say it works with the T30. What the....

Oh well, I'm still out of town, havn't tried the thing yet, hopefully he's wrong.

#15 Post by **RealBlackStuff** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 5:44 am

I suppose he's right, the IBM drivers do not support T30 either....

There's always the NO-1802 patch and if you're lucky, you can hit Esc to overcome the 01c9 error (like in my T30).

wrybread · #16 Post by **wrybread** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 6:03 am

RealBlackStuff-

I notice in your sig you have an Atheros card, does it work well with your T30?

#17 Post by **RealBlackStuff** » Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:46 am

Yes, my Atheros rocks!
Upon installation I had the 1802 eror (gone after no-1802) but the 01c9 error remains. Just pressing Esc at bootup and there is no problem whatsoever.

You should read up here as well: NO-1802 and NO-01C9 boot CD
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=20365
and here:
http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Problem_w ... s#Solution

built-in wifi card better range than add-on?

built-in wifi card better range than add-on?

Who is online