Those figures are spookily consistent and the 4:1 ratio must have a reason. So I finally got around to enabling WiFi on my Vero4K and connected to a nearby 2.4 GHz 802.11n router. It’s behind a thick wall (not drywall!) so the bandwidth figures were a bit underwhelming. On the other end, there’s a (wired) Win7 PC running iperf3. Result: I found that running iper3 to the Win7 PC is consistently twice as fast as the reverse (-R) speed. I’ve run those tests something like 20 times, so there can be no doubt that the figures are consistent.
I did a bit of searching on the forum and found this post from Sam:
The device features a 2x1.
I read this as 2xTx and 1xRx, which certainly meshes with my own 802.11n tests that gave a 2:1 Tx:Rx ratio… It could be that in your case there’s some 802.11ac MIMO goodness happening that is providing a fourfold increase in speed.
As to your more immediate receive-speed problem, you mentioned that you tried 2.4 GHz but it was unbearably slow. You didn’t mention which channel you used but it’s certainly becoming the case that 2.4 GHz is virtually unusable in some high-density urban situations. If you’re in a low-density area, then something else might be causing this problem. If you haven’t done so already, I would strongly suggest you try a different 5 GHz channel, ideally 36, 40, 44 or 48, and see if anything improves.
To provide consistency across tests, I’d suggest that you use the same 449 MB file each time.