Controllerless Networks

 View Only
Back to discussions
Expand all | Collapse all

AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

This thread has been viewed 253 times

  • 1.  AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 29, 2021 03:39 AM
    Edited by MichaelM55 May 31, 2021 10:36 AM
    Hello,

    so AP-635 has arrived lately: https://www.arubanetworks.com/products/wireless/access-points/indoor-access-points/630-series/

    I must admit that I don´t like what I see:

    1, Why did Aruba choose a glossy surface? This might blend and therefor bother everyone sitting around in certain lightning environments.

    2. Shouldn´t be a "AP-635" the successor of a "AP-535"? Let´s compare AP-635 with AP-535 and AP-515: https://www.arubanetworks.com/products/wireless/access-points/compare/#132904,150581,298786

    - AP-635 supports 2x2:2 for each band, only. As Aruba wants it to run in a kind of limited mode with 802.3af, this might be ok. But shouldn´t therefore be a kind of smaller ~AP-615?

    - AP-635 support SU-MIMO, only? No DL-MU-MIMO, no UL-MU-MIMO? Even 802.11ac (Wave 2) supports DL-MU-MIMO. So, is this a typo?

    - Regarding "Max number of Resource Units (OFDMA)": AP-635 supports (up to) 8 RUs, AP-535 supports (up to) 37 RUs, AP-515 supports (up to) 16 RUs.

    What is one of the biggest features of 802.11ax one is us telling about for years? => Yes, it´s OFDMA. Now with AP-635 being a 3rd generation 802.11ax access point, it supports less RUs than the 2nd generation (AP-535/AP-555) and even less than the first generation* (AP-515)?

    (* I myself call AP-515 a first generation/Wave 1 802.11ax access points as its chipset is not capable of UL-MU-MIMO.)

    If I remember correctly, AP-515 uses a Broadcom (BCM43694?) chipset, AP-535/AP-555 uses a Qualcomm (Networking Pro 1200) chipset for wireless. As Qualcomm´s current Wi-Fi 6E chipsets (Networking Pro 610, Networking Pro 810, Networking Pro 1210, Networking Pro 1610) support up to 37 RUs, may I ask which chipset vendor and which chipset is being used for the AP-635 access point? (Hopefully not Mediatek MT79xx which supports 2x2:2 for 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz and 6 GHz radio, aswell)


  • 2.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jun 01, 2021 02:21 PM
    1. We're indeed going back to glossy. Several reasons for that, including how easily the textured surface of the AP-5xx models gets stained
    2. Despite the numbering, AP-635 is not a replacement for or 6E equivalent model of the AP-535. First of all, 6E is not a typical "next Wi-Fi generation", but is adding a complete new spectrum layer (6GHz), which introduces new highs in terms of (realistically achievable) peak datarates (160MHz may finally be actually usable), adds a complete additional radio, and more than doubles the total capacity of the platform. The AP-635 has 2x2 MIMO radios, and while MU-MIMO may theoretically be possible with 1SS client devices, the value is very limited if there at all. Most 11ax (5GHz and 6GHz) client devices in the market now are 2SS. To really take advantage of MU-MIMO, you'll need 4x4 at least.
    Without the 6GHz radio (and ignoring the dual Ethernet and Smart Rate capabilities), the AP-635 is actually more comparable with the AP-505 (2x2 radios, 8 RUs), but with a far more powerful architecture (CPU, memory, etc.) to deal with the incremental performance of the 6GHz radio.
    AP-635 is not replacing anything, but adding an additional AP option for customers that want to take advantage of the improved performance and incremental capacity available in the 6GHz band. It is positioned as a mid-range 6E platform, but is built to support performance levels that compare well with a high-end AP-5xx device.
    Hope that helps a bit.
    /Onno

    ------------------------------
    Onno Harms
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jun 18, 2021 01:00 AM
    Edited by MichaelM55 Jun 18, 2021 01:08 AM
    Thank you very much for clarification. So that means AP-635 will not be Wi-Fi CERTIFIED 6 / Wi-Fi 6 CERTIFIED because of some missing mandatory requirements, correct?
    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jun 18, 2021 04:30 PM
    Wrong. The AP-635 will be Wi-Fi 6 certified, and supports all mandatory features for that (and some optional ones as well). MU-MIMO support (if that's what you're referring to) is not required for certification on a 2x2 radio (probably since the WFA agrees that it does not add any value with that radio config).
    Aruba feels strongly about the need and value of WFA certification.

    ------------------------------
    Onno Harms
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 5.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jun 19, 2021 03:06 AM
    Edited by MichaelM55 Jun 19, 2021 03:08 AM
    Indeed, I´m refering to MU-MIMO support. I haven´t found any useful Wi-Fi CERTIFIED 6 / Wi-Fi 6 CERTIFIED specification sheet saying that MU-MIMO won´t be required any longer.

    https://www.wi-fi.org/discover-wi-fi/wi-fi-certified-6 and https://www.wi-fi.org/download.php?file=/sites/default/files/private/Wi-Fi_6E_Highlights_202101.pdf currently mention it: "Multi-user multiple input, multiple output (multi-user MIMO) allows more downlink data to be transferred at one time, enabling access points (APs) to concurrently handle more devices" Could you please provide a link for that agreement from WFA?


  • 6.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jun 19, 2021 08:14 PM
    For Wi-Fi 6 certification, a radio needs to be 2x2 at least, and needs to support (downlink) MU-MIMO and TxBF only if it supports four or more spatial streams. Most 2x2 Wi-Fi 6 radios do not support MU-MIMO and/or do not obtain certification.
    As an example, I've attached the WFA certs for AP-535 and AP-505. Both are Wi-Fi 6 certified, but only AP-535 (4x4) supports MU-MIMO.
    To obtain certification requirements from WFA, you may need to be a member. We cannot simply share that stuff.

    ------------------------------
    Onno Harms
    ------------------------------

    Attachment(s)

    pdf
    Certificate_WFA83577.pdf   32 KB 1 version
    pdf
    Certificate_WFA99698.pdf   32 KB 1 version
    Original Message


  • 7.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jun 21, 2021 01:20 AM
    Edited by MichaelM55 Jun 21, 2021 02:15 AM
    Thanks. I think I have to rethink about the terms "Wi-Fi 6 certified" and "802.11ax", i.e. "Wi-Fi 6 certified" doesn´t mean automatically that a device supports all features 802.11ax is usually associated with. Unfortunately neither "WFA requirements from WFA" nor "IEEE 802.11ax-2021" is available for free.

    Btw,
    • Regarding the AP-504/AP-505, the datasheet (https://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/ds/DS_AP500Series.pdf) talks about "Features include [...] multi-user MIMO" and "The 500 Series AP support downlink MU-MIMO to maximize the use of its MIMO radio capabilities by simultaneously exchanging data with multiple single stream client devices.". So references to MU-MIMO should be all removed if those access points don´t support it.
    • Regarding the AP-630, the datasheet (https://www.arubanetworks.com/assets/ds/DS_AP630Series.pdf) also talks about "Features include [...]  multi-user MIMO". So this should also be removed aswell if those access points don´t support it.
    • According to your given WFA certificate for the AP-504, for "Wi-Fi CERTIFIED™ ac" "Tx DL MU-MIMO" is mentioned while for "Wi-Fi CERTIFIED 6™" it is not. So, MU-MIMO works when 802.11ac MU-MIMO capable clients connect to the AP-504, but it doesn´t when 802.11ax MU-MIMO clients connect to the AP-504 when they use 802.11ax? Is this correct?


  • 8.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jun 21, 2021 10:39 AM
    Thanks, that's good feedback. I'll verify our documentation for MU-MIMO claims on 2x2 platforms and will make sure any errors get corrected.
    Note that there may be cases where we support it but did not bother to get certified.
    And yes, the WFA defines a subset of 802.11 requirements for their  certification programs. Some features are mandatory, others are optional, many are out of scope.

    ------------------------------
    Onno Harms
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 9.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 18, 2023 11:08 AM
    Edited by amor@itnet.lu Jan 18, 2023 11:11 AM
    Hi,
    I was really surprised to discover that 635 is 2x2.
    • Do you think this AP is future proof?
    • For which market? 
    • Do you recommend to installed today (to be used for the next 6 to 8 years)?
    • What is the side effect of using the 635 today in corporate network with medium to high density?
    We see already few laptop with 3SS. Plus all the marketing around how wonderful is AC and AX standards with MU-MIMO support.

    Looking forward for your input

    ------------------------------
    A.Amor
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 10.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 18, 2023 02:38 PM
    If you feel 4x4 adds critical value, the AP-655 is a good option.
    I'm not aware of any 3SS 11ax client devices. Please share any references. AFAIK the vast majority (if not all) client devices are 1SS or 2SS. Even the latest M2 macbook Pro is 2x2 as far as I can tell.
    With those client devices, the value of a 4x4 AP radio is somewhat limited. The primary benefit is a more robust link and higher likelihood to be connected with 2SS rates (when supported by the client). The practical/real-world value of MU-MIMO is unfortunately quite limited and hardly a reason to consider a 4x4 AP radio. Few client devices support it, and if they do it's typically in the DL direction only. Also, the overhead associated with MU-MIMO can negatively affect the gain as client count grows.
    In short, yes the AP-635 is certainly future-proof, and can handle higher client densities than for example an AP-515 and even an AP-535 (even though the AP-535 may deliver higher datarates at range for some 5GHz clients).
    Original Message


  • 11.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 19, 2023 04:20 AM
    Edited by amor@itnet.lu Jan 19, 2023 05:21 AM
    Thanks for your input, the Broadcom BCM943602BAED has 3x3:3 for long time. The customer is expecting to keep an AP from 6 to 8 years, selecting 2x2 today for corporate client is too risky. The AP-655 is good alternative and has better future proof protection.
    All the vendor 802.11ax marketing is based on OFDM and MU-MIMO, the 635 AP is a contradiction to the sales pitch :) 

    ------------------------------
    Amor
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 12.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 19, 2023 04:55 AM
    Hint: Forget about MU-MIMO in high density situations with 100 concurrent clients connected to 1 radio. So, instead of using 1x AP-655 consider buying 2x AP-635 or 2x/3x AP-615
    Original Message


  • 13.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 19, 2023 05:20 AM
    Edited by amor@itnet.lu Jan 19, 2023 05:46 AM
    Cabling is too expensive, plus too many AP = too many interferences and issues with airtime. I like the solution to split AP 8x8 to 4x4 at least for the cabling part.

    ------------------------------
    Amor
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 14.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 19, 2023 05:30 AM
    Therefore you can use 1 cable with one PoE++ switchport as uplink, on the downlink use a PoE++ powered switch with PoE+ output. You can use 2x AP-615 without problem. Disable 2.4GHz if necessary.
    Original Message


  • 15.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 20, 2023 02:18 AM
    Take a look at Arubanetwork´s own benchmark comparing 4x4:4, 8x8:8 with 802.11ac1, 802.11ac2 and 802.11ax clients:

       - 50 Clients (802.11ac1, SU-MIMO)

       - 60 Clients (802.11ax, MU-MIMO, Intel AX200)

       - 60 Clients (30x 802.11ac2 + 30x 802.11ax, MU-MIMO)

    Arubanetworks Results 1
    Arubanetworks Results 2

    => Instead of using 1 AP running with 8x8:8, use 1 with 2x 4x4:4. As you can see using MU-MIMO is not great, so consider buying 2 access points with 2x2:2 like AP-615 and if you only have one cable a switch like Ubiquiti USW-Flex which is powered by PoE++ and provides PoE+ ports.


    Original Message


  • 16.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 20, 2023 04:11 AM
    You could also get AP-555 8x8 and split it to 2  4x4, then you have no cable restrictions and avoid having 2 AP one next to the other (Architectural restriction).
    Do you have any benchmark  for AP-555 with 2 4x4? I like to see the results.



    ------------------------------
    Amor
    https://itnet.lu
    ITNET
    Luxembourg
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 17.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 19, 2023 02:34 PM
    That broadcom part is an old 802.11ac chipset, which I believe was used in Macbooks years ago. It was indeed 3x3, but newer client chipsets are all 2x2, and new Macbooks have also moved to 2x2 radios. Given the peak datarate increases resulting from advanced modulation schemes and wider bandwidths, the need for 3x3 is simply not there (and it adds complexity, antennas, cost and power consumption).
    The AP-635 does not contradict anything. There's no doubt that the AP-655 offers higher performance and client density, but that does not mean the AP-635 (or AP-615) is not a valid and future-proof lower cost alternative. OFDMA is supported (by definition for a Wi-Fi 6 AP), but MU-MIMO simply doesn't add much here.
    Original Message


  • 18.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted Jan 20, 2023 02:50 AM
    Thanks for your input. This is exactly my point, the AP-655 offer better performance and I will add is more future proof compared to 635. For a new AP installations in 2023-2024, I will definitely go for minimum 4x4 for medium to high density sites to avoid replacing the AP in nearest future. 
    Regarding the RU:
    AP-630
    802.11ax: Orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA) with up to 8 resource units (37 for the 6GHz radio)

    AP-655
    802.11ax: Orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA) with up to 37 resource units 


    ------------------------------
    Amor
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 19.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 25, 2025 08:27 AM

    I was assuming the 635 had more capability than the 515. But what I have noticed is that clients attach to the 515 rather than the 635. Even when the 635 is closer. What makes it interesting is that the 515 backhauls to the 635 wirelessly. That is all the 515 traffic goes thru the 635 wirelessly! So what AP would be a better central communications conductor. It seems the 635 is truly inferior to the 500 series devices.


    Original Message


  • 20.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 26, 2025 10:09 PM

    I'm a bit confused by this message. In Wi-Fi it's ultimately the client device that decides which AP to connect to, so if they connect to a weaker AP, that says more about the device you're testing with than the APs. Also, it sounds like you've set up the AP-515 and AP-635 to establish a mesh link? How does that make one AP inferior to another?



    ------------------------------
    /Onno Harms
    Wireless Platforms Product Management
    HPE Aruba Networking
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 21.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 26, 2025 11:05 PM

    I would agree if is was a single device, but it is multiple devices on different products. It seems that most devices would rather connect to the AP515 which is 35 feet further away than connect to the 635 which only 25 feet away. So it is either a defective AP635 (new device) or the 635 is fundamentally inferior to the AP515. 
    They both have the same version of firmware, What I see is if a device is connected to the 635 it's signal strength is obviously higher, but bit rate is lower. When the same device is connected to the 515, the signal strength is lower, but the bit rate is higher. Since they are running as a single network, the configs are exactly the same. Even though the bit rate is higher the actual performance is lower due to the wireless mesh.

    That is on one of the laptops, the bitrate for the AP635 is 720 versus 1200 for the AP515 which is 60 feet away.


    Original Message


  • 22.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 26, 2025 11:09 PM

    I recently purchased the 635 as an upgrade for the 515.
    So I could use the 515 to extend the net via the mesh capabilities.


    Original Message


  • 23.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 27, 2025 12:04 AM

    Well, if this is on 5GHz, both AP-515 and AP-635 are of the same Wi-Fi 6 generation (802.11ax), and the 5GHz radio on AP-515 is 4x4 versus 2x2 on AP-635. So if this client device is connected in the 5GHz band, it probably makes sense that it has a preference for the AP-515 radio. 35ft versus 25ft equates to a 1-2dB difference only (assuming everything else is identical, which it never is ;-), which is not significant. The value of a Wi-Fi 6E AP is in the addition of 6GHz support; other than that the PHY & MAC layers are the same.

    What channel bandwidth are you using? AP-515 does support HE160 in 5GHz (rarely used in an enterprise campus network) while AP-635 is limited to HE80.



    ------------------------------
    /Onno Harms
    Wireless Platforms Product Management
    HPE Aruba Networking
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 24.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 27, 2025 08:18 AM

    The APs are 35 ft apart, so the 515 is 60+ ft away versus 25 feet away. Both are configured for 80Mhz bands according to the BSS tables. What I think is odd is that there are three devices below the AP635 10 feet or so, and all three are connected to the AP515 which would be 40+ feet away thru three walls.


    Original Message


  • 25.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 27, 2025 08:25 AM

    When I rebooted all the AP the AP635 was up way before the AP515, and all the clients were connected to the AP635, over time once the AP515 is up several devices end up moving even though the AP they move to is further away.


    Original Message


  • 26.  RE: AP-635 inferior to AP-535/AP-515?

    Posted May 27, 2025 01:59 PM

    Again, roaming is a client decision, based on whatever proprietary algorithm the client vendor implemented. Nothing the AP can do about that.

    Perhaps your client devices prioritize certain capabilities and metrics over signal strength.

    Did the performance degrade when they moved to the AP-515? If not, what's the problem? As I said, if the client is connected on 5GHz, the AP-515 may very well be the better choice to connect to.

    Sorry for misunderstanding the relative distances. But even 60 versus 25 feet, would just be 4dB or so. Obviously a lot more if you add three walls as you mention. What's the difference in signal strength reported by the client device?



    ------------------------------
    /Onno Harms
    Wireless Platforms Product Management
    HPE Aruba Networking
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


Related Content