 So I've been doing some testing with these devices. So I have a couple of unified devices here. I have a UAP-HD. I have a Unify APC-LR long range and I have the Unify Nano HD. Now you can look at specs all day and see what the marketing people put together, but I wanted to actually test the Wi-Fi any series of fixed positions. This has taken me longer than I expected to do. Changing Wi-Fi settings, going back, provisioning, and making my laptop reconnect each time in a fixed position took a little longer than expected. So I didn't feel like trying to edit together the hours it took to actually get all this experimenting done, but I am here to talk about the results of the experiment. But first we want to talk about the test scenario. We placed this handy little box sitting right here as a place to stack the Wi-Fi's on top of. Seemed like a good use for it. So each Wi-Fi was placed in exactly the same spot. No Wi-Fi is on in my office other than these. So we put one here. We would swap it out and put it here and swap it out and put it here. So on and so forth. And then we put the laptop in a fixed position. And then we'd run the speed test on the 2.4 and again on the 5. And the results were a little bit interesting. We're getting toes in just a second. But the aggravating part about this and why the experiment took a lot longer was running iPerf as a speed test just once wasn't quite enough, I realized, because the results seemed kind of staggered. So I decided to run it multiple times for 2.4 at each position. So this is about a two hour experiment of just testing Wi-Fi speeds. So I wanted to get a good accurate sample so I could understand this. And the thing that's puzzling me the most about Wi-Fi still is the little variances. When even when my first test was in the same office here, I would see little ups and downs and I don't know what's causing them at all. I can't, there's nothing turning on and off. The tests are only about 15 seconds apart. So test takes about 15 seconds, run the test again, get about a 2%, 3% variance. That seems to be even one I've tested with other Wi-Fi devices. So it's not a unified thing for those of you screaming, I don't get that with XYZ product. I actually got so curious that I spent then another after the testing playing with some other stuff for another video that's not out yet, could be related to the box sitting here. And I've seen the same thing. So Wi-Fi is a tricky thing to absolutely nail down unless you have a fair day cage to work in. I don't. I'm the only one here, so I eliminated human bodies passing between the Wi-Fi as a potential loss or signal. But that's why it took me longer and I got averages and let's talk about the results and what and the Wi-Fi testing. So let's dig real quick into a couple details of the access points themselves. The UAP-ACLR been around for a long time, supports up to about 250 clients. 5 gigahertz speed was 867 and 450. What is claimed in terms of what's on their marketing right here. Those are maximum perfect conditions. Set yourself in a fair day cage and have a Wi-Fi receiver that can support those speeds. One, my Wi-Fi receiver does not. So I was only able to achieve a little less than that. That is because I'm using an IBM X250 laptop for the testing. Good or bad, that's what I had available to me. And not everyone has the latest, so it is not what I had. So we'll at least qualify that for when we're doing the testing. The other unit assesses are the UAP Nano HD, which is very similar to the UAP HD, but it doesn't have the dual network interfaces. And it only supports a 2.4 radio rate of 300 versus the 800 supported on a UAP HD. But they both have the 5 gigahertz 1733 speed available, max. And the Unify Nano HD supports up to 200 clients versus a thousand. Now, the Unify Nano HD is a new product for people who really want the speed, but don't need that many clients connected to here, don't need quite as much density. So it's a really good choice. This is one of the reasons we chose it for our testing. Back to the other testing details. Each unit was plugged in individually one at a time. No other radios are on in our office. We made sure nothing else was connected to it. So we keep things very clean from a config standpoint. On the 2.4, because I wanted to test for distance, we left it at a channel width of 20 and we put a channel width of 80 on five because we want to test that for speed. I've done other videos on channel widths. So the studio one means it was on the table as you've seen. And then we actually have a kitchen table in our studio and we placed the laptop on the kitchen table and the other one was on the table itself, the studio table, as we call it, and the 2.4 gigahertz performed quite well. And so did the five gigahertz in this condition. Now, these are a line of sight, nothing in between the most ideal way you're using the device. And I'm impressed. So we pretty much see not a dramatic difference between them in this ideal environment. This is what it was able to achieve with my laptop. When we brought it into my office, we didn't see much difference at all. Now, if you're not familiar with my building, my office, there are two walls in between those two standard stick walls, as we may call them here in America, with double layers of drywall between them. So two layers of drywall for the first wall, two layers of drywall for my wall. So not too much that is going through. And I happen had it sitting on top of a metal filing cabinet. So kind of maybe a metal desk, you may be sitting on, kind of simulate that and putting roughly 20 feet between them, between these walls and where the studio is. So we didn't see a significant drop. So maybe just a little bit of loss here. Then back to the studio, ideal conditions right across from the studio. And not bad. I was surprised, though, and I couldn't figure out why. And I ran the test multiple times. And this is part of where things get just confusing to me. Consistently, roughly 322, sometimes 318, sometimes 324, you know, kind of went back and forth. Sometimes 326 it averaged at 322 after a series of tests. And I did this test more than once because it puzzled me the most that I was able to get this 403 out of this, but only 322 out of here. I don't really know why the nano actually kept giving me more speed. And that repeated again when I brought it to my office. I was able to get 395 out of the nano and 318. So they both took a very small loss by going through a couple of walls with the 5 gigahertz, which is impressive. But the nano really is performed really well until we get to the 2.4. And we have 2.4 in the car. That's where things really changed a lot. I went all the way out in the parking lot, so we went about 60 feet away. Now you're talking about a brick wall that it has to go through and several layers of drywall. So brick wall, drywall, then inside my car, sitting on my passenger seat with the doors closed and it's fairly humid out. I know humidity can affect Wi-Fi at least some. But these were all done exactly at the same time. So we switched each one. They were all done within 15, 20 minutes per test. So there shouldn't be too much environmental changes. And surprisingly, the ACLR had no problems reaching out there. 5 gigahertz just didn't work out there. That's why there's not a 5 gigahertz test. It was barely connecting and actually dropping because it was far enough away. And once you put it in my car, well, between the metal of the car sitting at the passenger seat, it's got to go through the car, through the wall, through the brick walls, through the drywall, through to the studio. So we've seen quite a significant drop. But I'm impressed that the UAP HD is really able to pull through even better than the ACLR and substantially better. So for distance, the AP HD definitely seemed to have an advantage. But none of them were able to get 5 gigahertz into my car. But overall, I'm still impressed with these devices. They seem to work really well. I wish I was able to do a density test to really ramp it up and see how they perform against each other. And I may need some more testing like this in the future, or maybe I can get a bunch of people so we can all test simultaneously and see what happens when five people connect to this one. And then we swap it out for another one. But doing these test individuals was definitely interesting. Their performance is good. I still think the Nano is probably a great value for home, especially when you talk about these like the MyOffice one that's basically going through a couple of walls that you may have in your house. And the fact that it performed consistently better for reasons I don't know. I double check the settings, triple check the settings and I just can't see a difference between them. So when we look at and we'll go pull them up here just to show you guys. So Unify AP HD, Config Radio HD 20. This is specifically the 5 gigahertz. So 5 gigahertz VT80 and we called it Little Brother was the Nano one, which is currently disconnected. But we go over here, radios, VT80, Auto Auto, Transmpower Auto, Channel Auto. We I reset it twice just to make sure it consistently does go faster. For reasons I don't understand, I don't have enough. Someone's going to know and maybe they'll leave it in the comments and that'll be very interesting because I didn't do too much digging into. I didn't post on a forum yet or anything like that. Well, and someone maybe will find out why it's a little faster, but it's a little bit of a speed bump I'm getting out of the Nano HD. Now, I did not test this with multiple different devices and different laptops and things like that. This test, like I said, took a lot longer than expected. There was just so many hours of footage. I didn't want to try to condense it all down to show the actual test. So I figured I'd show you is where I tested, how I tested and the results. But it was interesting. It was enlightening, but the performance is really good. And when they're really close to each other, the two force seems to be pretty much the same until you get at distance where the UAP has an advantage. But when they're up close, very little difference, even through a couple of walls, they seem to perform quite well. Thanks for watching. If you like this video, go ahead and click the thumbs up. Leave us some feedback below to let us know any details, what you like and didn't like as well, because we love hearing a feedback. Or if you just want to say thanks, leave a comment. If you wanted to be notified of new videos as they come out, go ahead and subscribe and the bell icon that lets YouTube know that you're interested in notifications. Hopefully they send them as we've learned with YouTube. Anyways, if you want to contract us for consulting services, you go ahead and hit LawrenceSystems.com and you can reach out to us for all the projects that we can do and help you. We work with a lot of small businesses, IT companies, even some large companies, and you can farm different work out to us or just hire us as a consultant to help design your network. Also, if you want to help the channel in other ways, we have a Patreon. We have affiliate links. You'll find them in the description. You'll also find recommendations to other affiliate links and things you can sign up for on LawrenceSystems.com. Once again, thanks for watching. I'll see you in the next video.