Intel® Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN

Message

stephenaron · #1 Post by **stephenaron** » Wed May 16, 2007 11:18 am

Anyone upgrade the 3945 card in the T60p to the new Intel® Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN? Any issues?

Jay_Z · #2 Post by **Jay_Z** » Wed May 16, 2007 2:15 pm

stephenaron wrote:Anyone upgrade the 3945 card in the T60p to the new Intel® Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN? Any issues?

Can this be (user) upgraded?? I just ordered a T60P (Intel 3945) but would like to eventually add N, especially since it seems by year end this will be much more common.

Don't want to be the guy at the coffee shop who appears to be on dial up

jkahng · #3 Post by **jkahng** » Wed May 16, 2007 8:59 pm

the n cards need 3 antennas instead of the standard 2.
this is not a simple swap and involves taking apart the LCD.

kulivontot · #4 Post by **kulivontot** » Thu May 17, 2007 1:04 am

has anyone actually attempted this yet?

jkahng · #5 Post by **jkahng** » Thu May 17, 2007 1:54 am

the prices on the cards and antennas(card => 150 off the interent, 400 from ibm, 3rd antenna => 55) are still too high right now.
my intel abg card works fine and don't want to shell out cash for something that's not broken

i'll wait until router and card prices are more realistic for the upgrade.

pls note that some models have the antenna preinstalled (the CTO models) you should do a parts look up to check...

John

rek · #6 Post by **rek** » Thu May 17, 2007 2:47 am

One other point to note; at least on the local Lenovo Australia pages, where they list T61s with the 4965ABGN adapter, it mentions that the "N" has been disabled

I too am waiting until they get the "proper" certified draft-n-2.0 products out the door, before shelling out the cash for new cards and routers. (Bad memories of the X2 vs. K56flex compatibility rubbish with 56k modems about 10 years ago, before v.90 was fully standardised.) I read something in Ars Technica today, that this will be happen mid-year:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20 ... -gear.html

FRiC · #7 Post by **FRiC** » Thu May 17, 2007 4:31 am

rek wrote:One other point to note; at least on the local Lenovo Australia pages, where they list T61s with the 4965ABGN adapter, it mentions that the "N" has been disabled

Is "N" normally available in Australia? Because where I live, "A" is banned so we have our special A-disabled cards.

kulivontot · #8 Post by **kulivontot** » Sat May 19, 2007 8:36 am

A uses 5 Ghz... N uses either 5 Ghz or 2.4 Ghz, the latter of which is used by B/G cards too... So it's unlikely they'd disable N unless they were to ban B and G too.

Tholek · #9 Post by **Tholek** » Sun May 20, 2007 5:40 am

The USA site configurator also allowed the choice between the 4965 and 4965 (Disabled) adapters, the latter costing less.

It could be two things:

A. Like some Wi-Fi cards, Orinoco for instance, the cards could be exactly the same but for some versions having "crippled" firmware which, in this case, literally disables 802.11n functionality. (This may mean it could be flashed/hacked to the full version later on)

B. The third antenna lead just isn't installed.

C. Both A + B

I'd think "B" is most likely, which also means one might be able to snake up a lead through the lcd frame if they feel so adventurous.

Just my opinion...

Dbruyere · #10 Post by **Dbruyere** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:18 pm

I just received a 4965agn in the mail for my T60. I get an error, "1802: unauthorized pci card installed", or somthing to that effect. Had to take it out to start up again. I would like to find out how to edit the bios's whitelist to allow the card.

#11 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 3:48 pm

You might be able to prevent that with a BIOS updated (which includes the latest approved cards) -- or else locate the no-1802 boot CD, which sets a bit in the CMOS to skip the wireless card check.

#12 Post by **bill bolton** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 6:27 pm

rek wrote:One other point to note; at least on the local Lenovo Australia pages, where they list T61s with the 4965ABGN adapter, it mentions that the "N" has been disabled

It's possible that the Intel adapter does not yet A-Tick like approval for it 802.11(pre)n band usage as yet.

Cheers,

Bill B.

#13 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 7:01 pm

rek wrote:One other point to note; at least on the local Lenovo Australia pages, where they list T61s with the 4965ABGN adapter, it mentions that the "N" has been disabled

That's the same for the Canadian pages. Once my X61 arrives I should be able to figure out what that means (not that I have an 802.11n network, but ...).

bill bolton wrote:It's possible that the Intel adapter does not yet A-Tick like approval for it 802.11(pre)n band usage as yet.

But it's the same band as 802.11b and 802.11g, just using more of the frequencies within that band simultaneously.

wackydan · #14 Post by **wackydan** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 7:07 pm

Two points.

1. Remember that the 61 screen lid has been redesigned. It is not the same internally as the 60's. SO there is no default channel/path to route a third ant.

2. The N-Disabled card can not ever be "enabled" at any future date. Thank Intel for that. It is supplied at a lower cost, but for those who want the latest wireless chipset for ABG without the N capability.

#15 Post by **tomh009** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 7:15 pm

wackydan wrote:2. The N-Disabled card can not ever be "enabled" at any future date. Thank Intel for that. It is supplied at a lower cost, but for those who want the latest wireless chipset for ABG without the N capability.

If that's the case and the 4865AGN is not an "n"card at all (at least in Canada or Australia) ... then selling it as a "4965AGN" is pretty misleading; it should be a "4964.5ABG" or something like that.

wackydan · #16 Post by **wackydan** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:54 pm

If that's the case and the 4865AGN is not an "n"card at all (at least in Canada or Australia) ... then selling it as a "4965AGN" is pretty misleading; it should be a "4964.5ABG" or something like that.

[/quote]

I agree. But it looks like that is the Intel marketing stamp on it and that is what everyone is calling it ala boilerplate.

f.bazyk · #17 Post by **f.bazyk** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:25 am

As a many other newcomers i've ben lurking around for some time, and now I'm finally about to order T61p.
I have a question about WiFi cards that are available on the site.
These are:

ThinkPad 11a/b/g Wi-Fi wireless LAN Mini-PCIe US/EMEA/LA/ANZ
Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG
Intel Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN

So, the question is: If I don't have any inbound channel higher than 100mbit, does it worth to get an expencive AGN card at all? (in other words - what i get with WiFi N?)
And if not, wich card is better - ThinkPad or Intel Pro? and what's the difference?

Thanks

#18 Post by **tomh009** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:40 am

If all you are doing is connecting your ThinkPad to the Internet, you will not max out 802.11a or 802.11g -- they are 54 Mb/s theoretical, and in practice still probably 20 Mb/s.

If you need to copy files, video etc on a local network, you may find the performance insufficient. Here you can find benefit in 802.11n, which basically achieves higher performance by bonding multiple wireless channels together -- assuming that there are not too many other wireless access points in your vicinity, making the extra bandwidth unavailable. You will need an 802.11n access point or router, too. Finally, the 'n' standard is still in draft form so there are still some compatibility issues between different vendors' equipment.

As to which one of the three has the best performance, the Atheros "ThinkPad a/b/g" is what I currently use, and it is very popular on these forums. On the other hand, the new Intel 4965AGN has the lowest power consumption and will thus produce the least heat.

#19 Post by **bill bolton** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:00 am

tomh009 wrote:If all you are doing is connecting your ThinkPad to the Internet, you will not max out 802.11a or 802.11g -- they are 54 Mb/s theoretical, and in practice still probably 20 Mb/s.

It's easy in practice to "max out" 802.11g on even an 8Mbps ADSL1 Internet connection, let alone a 17MBps HFC cable or 24Mbps ADSL2+ Internet connection.

Cheers,

Bill B.

#20 Post by **tomh009** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:24 am

Are you actually getting less than 8 Mb/s from your 802.11g on a home network? A quick ad hoc sanity check shows me getting 25 Mb/s copying a file to my server on my home network (using 802.11a, but the data rate is the same). Now, on a busy office or public network, the situation will be quite different, but the question related (I presume) to home use. Unless, of course, you have interference from other access points near you, but then 802.11n isn't going to solve that, either.

Beyond that ... your home Internet connection is definitely fast. But how many sites can you actually connect to that will actually give you 8+ Mb/s of throughput?

#21 Post by **bill bolton** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 9:51 am

tomh009 wrote:A quick ad hoc sanity check shows me getting 25 Mb/s copying a file to my server on my home network

Thats not the same thing as accessing something on the public internet via HTTP or FTP etc.

But how many sites can you actually connect to that will actually give you 8+ Mb/s of throughput?

Locally, quite a lot.... here's what I get on a local wired Ethernet connection via router to a nominal ~8Mbps HFC cable service:

Download: 1,137 Kilobytes/s
Upload: 15.1 Kilobytes/s
QOS: 90%
RTT: 25 ms
MaxPause: 58 ms
Mirror location: Sydney (TPG)

Download: 1,091 Kilobytes/s
Upload: 15.1 Kilobytes/s
QOS: 99%
RTT: 11 ms
MaxPause: 24 ms
Test location: Sydney (BigPond)

Cheers,

Bill B.

f.bazyk · #22 Post by **f.bazyk** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:19 pm

Thanks a lot for the clear answer!

Guess, I'll stick with AGN card, as long as it's less energy-hungry, however, I'm still concerned about huge popularity of Atheros cards - are they so popular just because of smaller price or because they show better range or connection stability?

#23 Post by **tomh009** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:58 am

bill bolton wrote:
tomh009 wrote:A quick ad hoc sanity check shows me getting 25 Mb/s copying a file to my server on my home network
Thats not the same thing as accessing something on the public internet via HTTP or FTP etc.

Quite true. But the connection speed will be based on the slowest link (think water flowing through a series of pipes -- the smallest pipe will constrain the flow rate). So unless your Internet connection is faster than 25 Mb/s, a 25 Mb/s wireless connection won't slow you down.

bill bolton wrote:
But how many sites can you actually connect to that will actually give you 8+ Mb/s of throughput?
Locally, quite a lot.... here's what I get on a local wired Ethernet connection via router to a nominal ~8Mbps HFC cable service:

Download: 1,137 Kilobytes/s
Upload: 15.1 Kilobytes/s
Mirror location: Sydney (TPG)

Quite good -- and faster than my 6 Mb/s cable service (though the upload speed seems slow?). But if you want to connect beyond Sidney (and especially beyond Australia), I suspect that throughput will drop quite a bit -- it does for me, too, once I connect to real-world web and FTP sites.

rmendoza · #24 Post by **rmendoza** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:48 pm

pls note that some models have the antenna preinstalled (the CTO models) you should do a parts look up to check...

John

I have a CTO system, and did a parts lookup, but could not find anything related to the third antenna. How do you find out if you have the antenna? Thanks.

Intel® Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN

Intel® Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN

Re: Intel® Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN

Who is online