Thinkpads Forum

How is the signal strength of the intel 4965agn card compared to the thinkpad 11a/b/g card? Does anyone have experience with both?

The "Thinkpad" one, made by a Atheros, is supposed to be better, according to now three sources I trust. I am getting a "Thinkpad" one, but with the n.

I have used both on my T61. Atheros a/b/g can connect to networks that Intel 4965a/g/n can't see. This is on Windows XP both using WZC.

It was an exercise in pulling teeth, but Intel found a power spec on the a/b/g/n card for me. It only has a 25mW power output, making it one of the weakest radios on the market.

Very disappointing.

No idea how the other Lenovo options are rated, but 100-200mW are not uncommon and Engenius and others now make 600mW cards. (Obviously that's ignoring the power of the other hub and the receiver sensitivity.)

anyone getting a "Centrino" system knows that it's designed for low power, it makes sense the devices contained in such system is low power. People buying these systems care more about battery life than getting a wifi signal from uber far

Most homes aren't that big that a regular wifi router can't cover the whole house, even if the signal is weak you'll stil get great power. What would be a problem tho is if you're in good coverage and get less usage because of the wifi card and the system getting so hot.

My system runs nice and cool and i get good signals. I had an Atheros before and got the Intel one because i can get close to 4hrs on a new 6 Cell compared to almost 3 with the Atheros. I'm happy to see the card only using that much power yet still offers good performance, sure there are those other cards out there using gobs of power but it wouldn't benefit me 1 bit.

I'd have to disagree with the way you are translating Centrino. yes, a Centrino system is supposed to be able to conserve power. But you are saying a Centrino system is a low power system--and that's just not so.

I could put a 600mW radio in a Centrino system and still get it certified by Intel, because WiFi radios don't just run at full power. They are software-controlled radios and they are very much able to reduce power ot the minimum needed for communications, all by themselves. If a radio only needs 25mW to communicate, but it has 600mW available to it, it can use the same 25mW as a less powerful card.

That may also be per FCC regulations for WiFi, or by the WiFi working specs, or just good designers. Either way...My old IBM (predates Lenovo) WiFi a/b/g PCMCIA card offered clear choices in the driver setup. Max power, min power, adjustable power. Of course, IBM denies all knowledge that that card ever existed, even claims the part number stamped on it doesn't exist.

Having power available, is not at all the same thing as using full power all the time. Or by default.

Well probably couldn't since the whole idea of Centrino branding is the long battery life which is as a result of low power. Surely a 600mv capable card can run at a 25mv. You can say that about a 400hp car being able to run at lower speeds, would it use more gas tho even at lower RPMs than a 130hp engine would? Can they both go 100MPH? One probably gets to 100MPH faster but that's not the point.

So i'm sure they (OEMS) could all install 600mv adapters but how many people would actually benefit from that vs people that would complain? There are systems designed for "power users" but not the niche power users, the "general"power user. It's like designing a sports car with a larger trunk... who cares if you can fit 2 suitcases in there, you can get to the airport 30 seconds faster! There are lots of time you probably wish you had that power, but then how many times you wish you had more time (battery time) to use that power you have?

Actually, if you look at the plethora of docs on the Intel web site, you'll see that you've been misled. "since the whole idea of Centrino branding is the long battery life " That's just not correct. it wasn't when I got certified by Intel to sell the systems, and it isn't stated that way anyplace now by Intel.

The Centrino trademark exists to certify mobile systems for multiple purposes, including PERFORMANCE, stability, wireless connectivity, and battery life. It represents a moving target with multiple goals, initially satified with a Pentium M CPU and just 802.11b WiFi. A system like that wouldn't get a new Centrino certification today.

You're also still confusing POTENTIAL performance and POTENTIAL battery life with MAXIMUM POSSIBLE performance and maximum (or minimum) battery life. If you took any Centrino system, ran the drive spindles full time (i.e. copying or playing DVD to hard drive) and ran the CPU at full clock speed--it would suck power and die.

Is that an unrealistic way to test systems? You bet! But that's what you are saying about WiFi radios. Please note that I did not suggest IBM should have the 600mW cards--the most powerful ones available--for these computers. Just that they also should not have quietly slipped in the LEAST POWERFUL cards on the market.

I can use a typical 100mW card, as I've said, and still set it to use only 25wW of power. Having more power available--doesn't mean I need to use it, any more than you need to set every other function on the computer for "max power, least battery time" when you are on AC. It just means there's more power available--when and if I need it.

By concealing the power specs for all of the card choices, Lenovo (and Intel) are simply pu;ling off PTBarnum style advertising, forcing you to buy the sizzle not the steak--and that always means they're going to pass off an inferior steak cheap.

Or in this case, a WiFi card that will, sooner or later, cripple the user with the lowest power and smallest range of anything on the market. Do I need 600mW? No. But I also know that 25mW just isn't going to connect from the airport terminals where a 50mW card could't quite reach, and there are plenty of them.

And that's got noting to do with the Centrino brand trademark. Intel's legal department actually will take phone calls from their 800-line (if you ask nicely) and explain the trademarks, they're quite aggressive about protecting them from misuse. You should hear what they say when someone refers to a "Pentium class processor".<G> Ain't no such thing, and they WILL sue to stop the misuse of the mark. Centrino? A little more complicated, but it isn't at all just about how much power is available. If it was, the high power high speed Core Duo cpus wouldn't get certified either. As you might have noticed, there are some honking big power bricks to feed them too these days. Potential power isn't the issue. Being able to throttle down and SIP that power on command--that's the issue. Don't confuse the two.