Wired vs. wireless home network connections

Factual Questions
1

My old laptop had a wireless card. I could plug it in when I wanted to use wi-fi and unplug it when I didn’t. Normally at my desk I kept the network cable plugged in, and only used the wireless card when I went to a different room in the house.

My new laptop has the wireless adapter built in, so it is on all the time. If I plug the cable from the router into the network port, I have 2 active network connections. Now, I know my way around computers, but I’m a little hazy on some of the TCP/IP and connectivity issues.

[ul]
[li]Is there a big enough difference in speed, reliability, etc. to justify using a “hard wired” connection rather than wireless (802.11g)?[/li][li]When two connections are active, which one “wins out” when I access the network or the internet?[/li][li]Is it possible (or desirable) to configure the system so that the wireless connection is active only when no direct connection is present?[/li][/ul]

Thanks.

2

I should have mentioned that the OS is Windows XP.

3

[QUOTE=FatBaldGuy]
[li]Is there a big enough difference in speed, reliability, etc. to justify using a “hard wired” connection rather than wireless (802.11g)?[/li][/quote]

Your G network will be ridiculously faster than your internet connection so there’s no worries there. Sometimes wireless networks can have interference issues(common causes: wireless(not cell) phones, leaky microwaves and other wireless networks). As long as your signal strength is always good you shouldn’t have problems.

[quote]
[li]When two connections are active, which one “wins out” when I access the network or the internet?[/li][/quote]

Good question. It probably depends on the configuration of your machine but I’d have no idea how to do this.

[quote]
[li]Is it possible (or desirable) to configure the system so that the wireless connection is active only when no direct connection is present?[/li][/quote]

I doubt that it’s possible on a Windows machine. I’m sure somebody could write a program to do it but I doubt that anybody’s bothered to take the time.

4

Windows XP uses automatic route metrics to determine the fastest available link if more than one interface is available.

That said, Rysto nailed it, the slowest link in the chain is your cable/dsl/whatever connection, so your connection method to the gateway won’t matter. The only time you’ll see a difference then is if you are accessing other machines on your own LAN, before the gateway.

However, I tend to disable wireless if I’m not using it, simply because any open wireless connection is potentially a wide open hole for someone to come in through, and there are plenty of open holes in windows to exploit to gain access to any data you may have on your laptop, or to compromise it for anything from a botnet to an illicit FTP site. Most laptops these days have a button on them to turn on/off the wireless radio, or simply go to network connections and disable the wireless interface when you don’t need it.

I always prefer hardwired, it’s a lot harder to tap a cat5 cable while sitting across the street.

5

[QUOTE=FatBaldGuy]
My old laptop had a wireless card. I could plug it in when I wanted to use wi-fi and unplug it when I didn’t. Normally at my desk I kept the network cable plugged in, and only used the wireless card when I went to a different room in the house.

My new laptop has the wireless adapter built in, so it is on all the time. If I plug the cable from the router into the network port, I have 2 active network connections. Now, I know my way around computers, but I’m a little hazy on some of the TCP/IP and connectivity issues.

[ul]
[li]Is there a big enough difference in speed, reliability, etc. to justify using a “hard wired” connection rather than wireless (802.11g)?[/li][li]When two connections are active, which one “wins out” when I access the network or the internet?[/li][li]Is it possible (or desirable) to configure the system so that the wireless connection is active only when no direct connection is present?[/li][/ul]

Thanks.
[/QUOTE]

Take this with a grain of salt since I am a lowly physician and not a techie, but here’s the Simple Man’s View:

You can manually disable your wireless, usually with a switch. Both the wireless and the wired LAN connections built into your laptop can be disabled with utilities.

Unless you manually configure your two NICs (the Wireless and the wired LAN adaptors) for your ethernet cable, Windows is going to choose the one with the faster link. That connection is going to reflect the potential speed between your computer and your router. On average the ethernet is going to be 100Mbps and the Wireless G will be closer to half that. Note that this speed is the speed at which data can be transmitted over the link, and not the actual amount of data you get. Your connection from the router to the Internet is the bottleneck there, so you will likely only get a few megabits per second as your maximum. Note that the configuration can be set to look at hop count between your computer and the far end server, as well as time delay, but I think on average the link speed itself is what governs the automatic choice by Windows. I assume, although I am not sure, that a wired ethernet to a router with a slow Internet connection would get chosen over a Wireless B going to a wireless Access Point with a fast Internet connection (unless manually configured to look at time delay).

If you leave your wireless enabled on your laptop (built-in or external doesn’t matter; they are both still Network Interface Cards separate from the LAN ethernet adoptor) Windows will try to pick the faster connection. Where this can cause an issue is when you are in a location (a hotel, say) where the Wireless is running off an Access Point that is completely separate from the wired connection into the wall. If one connection is dropped the other may pick up and you may experience more delay while your computer switches connections.

My 2 cents is that on average the ethernet hardwire is more stable at home and on the road, but wireless has become pretty stable as well, so it’s not a big deal. I keep my wireless off when I am using an ethernet cable because it’s one less thing to go wrong; not so much for speed issues. Both connectivity mechanisms are normally faster than the Internet pipe. You may prefer to never use the ethernet cable and be more mobile all the time.

6

There’s usually a hotkey to enable/disable the wireless adaptor - check the laptop’s manual, or look for a key that has an additional legend (usually blue) on it that looks like a radio transmitter - holding the Fn key and pressing this should toggle the adaptor.

7

“Your G network will be ridiculously faster than your internet connection so there’s no worries there.”

Not with faster connections. I get ~15mbit when I use wireless, and 25+mbit with my cable when I use 100mbit wired.

From wiki (I know I know) 802.11g
“operates at a maximum raw data rate of 54 Mbit/s, or about 19 Mbit/s net throughput”

So good quality ADSL2 and faster cable can be choked by 802.11g.

Also your ping increases which can have implications for overseas connections, particularly with games.

Easiest solution - test it. www.speedtest.net. will let you try each type and see if theres any practical difference.

Otara

8

Thanks, everyone for your replies. I think I will just leave the wireless connection disabled unless I need it.

9

[QUOTE=Otara]

Also your ping increases which can have implications for overseas connections, particularly with games.

[/QUOTE]

This is particularly an issue if you run Vista with a wireless connection and you do a lot of twitch gaming online. WLAN AutoConfig–just like XP’s Wireless Zero Configuration–causes serious lag spikes every 60 to 70 seconds. A ping -t reveals latency between the wireless card and router of 1200-1500ms on my Linksys WMP54G PCI adapter and WRT54G router. Apparently WLAN AutoConfig polls the network every minute or so, regardless of whether you have the “select a better network” (or whatever it’s called) option checked or not.

In XP, you could stop the WZC service (after connecting to the wireless network) but that isn’t an option in Vista. I’ve seen solutions that involved using netsh to disable wlan autoconfig, and maybe that worked for some but it broke my connection.

So, I would highly recommend that anyone who is a gamer and runs Vista go with a wired connection if at all possible. Wasn’t an option for me until I wire some new phone jacks in the new house.

(BTW, my solution to the wireless latency problem is a little utility called Vista Anti Lag. To get it working, I had to install XP drivers for the WMP54G. Roundabout solution, and not elegant, but it works.)

10

[QUOTE=FatBaldGuy]
Is there a big enough difference in speed, reliability, etc. to justify using a “hard wired” connection rather than wireless (802.11g)?

[/QUOTE]

There are two potential disadvantages to hard wired connections. One is that there is a limit to the number of physical connections to your router. Mine (and I think it’s typical) has just four ports, but I think it can handle 64,000 wireless connections.

Second, I believe the quality of the signal degrades if your cable is too long (ie, more than twenty feet).

11

[QUOTE=Otara]
Not with faster connections. I get ~15mbit when I use wireless, and 25+mbit with my cable when I use 100mbit wired.

From wiki (I know I know) 802.11g
“operates at a maximum raw data rate of 54 Mbit/s, or about 19 Mbit/s net throughput”
[/quote]

Hm. Here in Canada, the only way to get anything more than 8Mbps theoretical is to get fiber to the home and that’s very rare. That’s why I didn’t bother mentioning that possibility.

12

[QUOTE=anson2995]
There are two potential disadvantages to hard wired connections. One is that there is a limit to the number of physical connections to your router. Mine (and I think it’s typical) has just four ports, but I think it can handle 64,000 wireless connections.

Second, I believe the quality of the signal degrades if your cable is too long (ie, more than twenty feet).
[/QUOTE]

Ethernet is usually good for at least 100 feet, 100 yards is far from unheard of.

13

“Second, I believe the quality of the signal degrades if your cable is too long (ie, more than twenty feet).”

As stated, can go 100 feet or more, and you can use devices to extend it.

More an issue for wireless really. There are some that wont even make maximum speed at 10 feet.

Otara

14

In reality, the differences are trivial enough that there’s no real justification for plugging in the ethernet cable.

15

[QUOTE=drachillix]
Ethernet is usually good for at least 100 feet, 100 yards is far from unheard of.
[/QUOTE]

Consider my ignorance fought.

16

[QUOTE=Shalmanese]
In reality, the differences are trivial enough that there’s no real justification for plugging in the ethernet cable.
[/QUOTE]

Everyday surfing, I’d be inclined to agree - for jobs like downloading that ISO file of Ubuntu 7.10, the wired connection might make a small difference.

17

I notice the difference, even with surfing. But theres also printing, and backing up to a network drive or reading from it and the like, and thats where the difference can get fairly obvious.

But my main point was that it can be a chokepoint with newer connection types. A lot of people think 54mb is 54 mbit, when its nothing of the sort. N should take care of things for a while though.

Otara