T43 Intel vrs IBM wireless adapters?

[chphd]

I am spec'ing a T43 to purchase for myself so am drilling down to the details. Does anyone have experience or an opinion on the Intel 802.11a/b/g verses the IBM 54Mbps 802.11a/b/g adapters? I connect to different wireless ap's/routers at different times so need flexibility as well as performance and reliability.
Thanks very much.

[dr_st]

Most people will say that the Intel is known to be a bit more problematic than the IBM adapter. But that's not 100% confirmed. I wouldn't allow the Intel vs. IBM WiFi to be a decisive factor.

[hoya]

I had an IBM 11a/b/g II Atheros card on my previous 15" T42 and found that it worked very well. reception was much better than the Intel 2200bg and downloads were always faster. the downside was slightly higher temperatures, a bit more power usage (which makes sense since it was getting better reception than the Intel), and slightly less battery life.

I then switched to a 14" T42 and had nothing but problems with the IBM 11a/b/g card on that system. I got several blue screens and finally had 3 system boards replaced before obtaining a full refund from Lenovo. the most suspected culprit was the Atheros card, but I'm still not 100% posotive. I'm sure it was just a defect of some kind but it was enough to stear me back to Intel, but this time I'm using the 2915 a/b/g which seems MUCH better than the 2200bg.

also, take a look at this thread, where users are reporting problems while using the IBM a/b/g Atheros card:
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=16638

[bill bolton]

but this time I'm using the 2915 a/b/g which seems MUCH better than the 2200bg.

I am part of a business group of consultants who are using 2200BGs in T41s and 2915ABGs in T42s and T43s across a very wide variety of commercial and domestic grade access points, and we have been getting similarly good performance from both Intel wireless cards.

Cheers,

Bill

[christopher_wolf]

Using both with a variety of different access area on campus; I haven't noticed much of a difference between them, either in terms of how quickly they connect or whether or not you get dropped. After all, WiFi A/B/G are all standards that should give the same basic performance no matter what hardware you use. More advanced features depend on additional setup within the hardware, this isn't always documented though.

[hootpie]

For the love of all that is holy, stay away from the Intel wifi cards. I had a T43 with the IBM Atheros A/B/G card and had absolutely no problems. I exchanged the T43 for a T42 (fan was too loud on T43) and was forced into getting the Intel Pro Wireless 2200 B/G card...nothing but problems. I always have problems connecting to a wide variety of networks no matter how close or far I am...I also have problems with it randomly disconnecting me as well.

I'm in the process of convincing IBM to let me exchange my Intel for the IBM card.

[christopher_wolf]

For the love of all that is holy, stay away from the Intel wifi cards. I had a T43 with the IBM Atheros A/B/G card and had absolutely no problems. I exchanged the T43 for a T42 (fan was too loud on T43) and was forced into getting the Intel Pro Wireless 2200 B/G card...nothing but problems. I always have problems connecting to a wide variety of networks no matter how close or far I am...I also have problems with it randomly disconnecting me as well.

I'm in the process of convincing IBM to let me exchange my Intel for the IBM card.

Do you have any evidence to prove that this is the case on all systems, or indeed all T42s with the same model number as yours, that have the Intel 2200 B/G Card? Also, this is the 2200 and not the 2915ABG which is also an "Intel wifi card." Have you experienced any problems with that card?

[Kyocera]

I used to use my T42 (with the intel BG) for work and either driving around or walking near a building I could connect to all the networks in range, at home I use my neighbors wireless access point which is 100 or more feet away and I never loose connection anywhere in my house. The only thing I don't use is Access Connections. Windows configures my wireless networks and on both my machines it works great.

[GomJabbar]

For the love of all that is holy, stay away from the Intel wifi cards.

Pretty broad statement that.

I have the Intel 2200BG card in my T-42, and it works great. No problems for me.

I suspect you had a bad card, a disconnected or bad antenna, or some other hardware problem that was unique to you. It is also possible that you had some communication incompatibility between your laptop and your wireless AP/Router. It could even be a software issue such as running at low power, when it should have been running at medium or high power.

[3to4]

I would definitely go for an Atheros based card. With Intel 2915 a/b/g (or its drivers), there seem to be processes called EvtEng and Spectrum24 Event Monitor, and one or the other was giving me a warning in the event viewer on my X32. Then, I replaced it with an IBM b/g (atheros), the warning is gone and there are fewer processes running (and it seems that the atheros drivers are smaller in size), everything works very well, with a slightly better reception. I have an IBM a/b/g on my T42, and I have never had any sort of problems with it. Incidentally, I have a Toshiba Portege M100. It had an Intel "b" card, and it was always giving me a warning in the event viewer as well. So, I replaced it with an atheros based card, and the warning is gone. Of course, these are only warnings and I know I can just ignore them, but I prefer not having them.

[chphd]

Thanks for all the replies! For the record, according to the tabook, the Intel a/b/g is the "Intel PRO/Wireless 2915ABG, 82533 chipset."

[JHaislet]

No problems here with three different Intel 2915 wireless cards in three different computers (T43, Dell X300, Dell Inspiron 5100). I actually ripped out the 2200BG cards in both the Dell's and replaced them with 2915 cards ordered from Newegg.

I've used them constantly on both A & G networks, and on Negear WAG102's & Dlink DWL-2100AP's and they work great.

[Aroc]

the atheros card (ibm/atheros/philips) appears to be just a better quality part. This is a case of where you do get what you pay for. although the Intel parts are still very much functional. It just depends on what you want. Either is fine in most cases/uses.

[christopher_wolf]

That all depends on how you define quality; in actual reality, they are pretty much the same. I can't imagine a gain one card has over the other.

[asiafish]

I had an X32 with the Intel card and my T42p (I had one before also - same spec) has the Atheros. While both cards were absolutely reliable, I do get better (slightly) range from the Atheros in the T42p. Of course, it might just be that the T-series has a larger antenna or better antenna placement that is irrespective of the card itself.

I'll reiterate though that neither card was unreliable in any way, connections were always stable when within range, only the range is slightly longer on the T42p.

[danny_isr]

intel here , no problems. works very well.

[Aroc]

Christopher, perhaps you are new to network cards or don't have much experience supporting them. Some cards do in fact perform better than other in either optimal or suboptomal conditions. It's a combination of many things. I have a speculation that quality if the drivers come into play. Often but not always the more expensive device will have a better driver. But this is nowhere near a hard and fast rule.

It actually hurts me to speak of an intel card in this sort of light. I have always depended on and recommended their PCI NICs for workstation and server duties for ages.

Like I wrote, it's not that a basic product does not work. It does. Otherwise we would hear horror stories and case upon case of people crying foul because their NICs do not work. But this is not the case. It is just simply the better product will have less of those squirrelly issues that plague the basic products from time to time. And WiFi reception is sadly on of these problems.

But this is a very minor and subtle designation, do you understand?

[christopher_wolf]

Christopher, perhaps you are new to network cards or don't have much experience supporting them. Some cards do in fact perform better than other in either optimal or suboptomal conditions. It's a combination of many things. I have a speculation that quality if the drivers come into play. Often but not always the more expensive device will have a better driver. But this is nowhere near a hard and fast rule.

It actually hurts me to speak of an intel card in this sort of light. I have always depended on and recommended their PCI NICs for workstation and server duties for ages.

Like I wrote, it's not that a basic product does not work. It does. Otherwise we would hear horror stories and case upon case of people crying foul because their NICs do not work. But this is not the case. It is just simply the better product will have less of those squirrelly issues that plague the basic products from time to time. And WiFi reception is sadly on of these problems.

But this is a very minor and subtle designation, do you understand?

Perhaps you didn't understand what I said; I said I have noticed no difference between the two as far as I can see. This doesn't mean that there is or isn't, just what I experienced. I have tried the Intel and IBM/Atheros cards on no less than 10 Thinkpads...I couldn't find one shred of evidence pointing to one doing something different than the other.

Oh, and thanks alot there , I have had quite a bit of experience with networks (setup several lab networks,10Base2, 10Base5, 10Base100, experience with token rings, yup there are still some in use, Wireless,etc ) including a good majority of most network cards...True, there are differences; but in the majority case, if you get cards of comparable specs these differences are piddling. If it is crap, then you don't connect. Period. Most of the problems introduced into such situations are, surprise, user-related; either the software conflicts, the user messed up a setting, or decided to do some ill-advised fiddling

If it actually *hurts* you to speak of Intel cards, or any other cards like this, then (simple solution) don't . I just posted my experiences, you can take that whatever way you want for all I care.

[JHaislet]

For those of you with Intel wireless card problems, try DISABLING "Intel Throughput Enhancement". I've yet to find out what specifically this feature is except for some sort of packet bursting. However, I've read on a couple of the networking forums that this can cause issues with certain hardware.

[leegaard]

I have on T42 with a 2200 intel wireless and another T42 with Alteros.

Lately with the AC 4.x both has been rock solid in connection.

[blackomegax]

while the 2200 in my X40 worked perfectly with intel's generic drivers (which are always the MOST up to date and stable), and i LOVE intel proset for profile management, i upgraded to the IBM atheros card and it gets better range in general. i just dont like the driver situation with atheros, only good ones are IBM's and there's no atheros client utility included with those.

i HATE ibm's profile management software, for the record. too functional for simply switching around SSID's.

[chphd]

Lots of good info here. Looks like a close call, so decided to go with the Intel 2915. Mostly because of Proset.

My first wireless system was an Intel 5000 A and I've allways missed the management capabilities. Really don't like the dumbed-down software and we'll-think-for-you wizards which most devices come with these days.

Could be a good choice or not - time will tell. I'll post results.

[FRiC]

I don't have much experience with wireless networking, but we have both Intel and Atheros BG cards both at work and at home, and the problem with Intel cards is that whenever our cordless 2.4 GHz phones ring, the network connection gets interrupted.

Couldn't seem to find a solution and cordless 2.4 GHz phones doesn't seem to be very popular outside of Asia...