Updated over 1 year. These devices seem to be able to reach a maximum throughput of about 500 Mbit/s point-to-point (read, best case). This works fine in my case, but the reported YMMV.1200 Mbps is the total throughput, meaning if you are using these devices (4 devices minimum) in your home coax infrastructure then you have a theoretical potential to get 1200 Mbps throughput on multiple reach devices simultaneously. Under ideal conditions, however, this is pure bandwidth, so you'll see a lot less in practice. I didn't deploy 4 units, so I can't confirm actual throughput in this scenario. I hope the actual total throughput is 600+ Mbps in this scenario. The original rating is below. This worked very well for my use case. An existing isolated coax cable (as part of a previous dish configuration that I'm not using) to carry data at 1Gbps from one end of the house to the other. I haven't tested the throughput, but I can confirm that I can achieve more than 100 Mbps. By connecting to an unmanaged switch that powers the WAP, I was able to run multiple HD streams simultaneously with no lag and achieve over 200Mbps read speeds from a phone connected to the WAP. For my use case the installation was too easy, just plug and play. In my case I tested the system with a shorter coax cable attached to my desk to ensure the devices were working and no DoA. It looks like the devices come with a hardcoded default IP address of 192.168.0.5, which doesn't seem to matter. in my subnet 192.168.1.x. So in other specific cases I can't say what will happen: 1. If you use them in subnet 192.168.0.x. If there is an IP conflict, you need to resolve it somehow. If you are using your home's built-in "coax network", YMMV. It all depends on the complexity and quality of the network, the type, quality and number of splitters and filters used everywhere, etc. Keep in mind that you can only use them if you're not connected to the internet via cable and/or you don't subscribe to cable TV. From a technical perspective, you need to ensure that the frequencies currently used on your coax network do not fall within the frequency range used by G.hn ethernet over coax. So I might as well get and use MoCA for my use case, which seems like a more future-proof and extensible option (i.e. I might later move it to my coax network to coexist with wired internet). I chose this to try out the G.hn technology and save about $30 compared to the cheapest MoCA 2.0 pair I could find (Motorola). 1200Mbps. This is not possible because the devices have a built-in 1000 Mbit/s or Gigabit Ethernet port. As far as I know, no switch will be able to provide speeds over 1000Mbps. While it may be possible for two modules to speed up the data transfer once in a block in order to send it to another block. However, the other end connected to the switch is renegotiated to a maximum speed of 1000 Mbps. So yes, 1200 Mbps is even theoretically impossible!
Enhance Internet Speed with TP-Link AC1200 Wireless Dual Band USB Adapter (Archer T4U V1)
40 Review
Wi-Fi adapter D-link DWA-140, black
46 Review
πΆ Enhance and Expand Your Network with TP-Link AV600 Powerline WiFi Extender and WiFi Booster (TL-WPA4220 KIT)
44 Review
High Gain Wireless Network Adapter - TP-Link Nano USB Wifi Dongle with 150Mbps Speed for PC Desktops and Laptops. Compatible with Win10/8.1/8/7/XP Linux 2.6.18-4.4.3, Mac OS 10.9-10.15 (TL-WN722N)
46 Review
HB-UMLS Sabrent USB 2.0 Hub with 4 Ports and LED Power Switches for Each Port
12 Review
π USR-TCP232-410s: RS232/RS485 Serial to Ethernet Adapter/IP Device Server with DHCP/DNS Support
4 Review
π uni USB C Hub with Ethernet Adapter, 4K HDMI, Gigabit Ethernet, and 3 USB 3.0 Ports for MacBook Pro, iPad Pro, XPS
11 Review
UGREEN USB 3.0 Ethernet Adapter Hub with RJ45: Fast Gigabit Ethernet Converter, 3 Ports USB 3.0 Hub Compatible for MacBook, iMac, Surface Pro, Chromebook, Laptop, PC
11 Review