Page 2 of 2

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:34 pm
by gotsprings
cAP AC arrived last night. Dropped it right in place where the wAP AC has been sitting for the past week. Updated to CURRENT packages. Set it to Caps-Man, matched the channels to what I had used on the other WAPs. Looks like I am getting an average of 189M using local forwarding.

100M SLOWER than the wAP AC (289M).
220M slower than the UniF--k AC Pro (420M)
400M slower than the Ruckus R510 (605M)
So bummed right now.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:29 pm
by biatche
cAP AC arrived last night. Dropped it right in place where the wAP AC has been sitting for the past week. Updated to CURRENT packages. Set it to Caps-Man, matched the channels to what I had used on the other WAPs. Looks like I am getting an average of 189M using local forwarding.

100M SLOWER than the wAP AC (289M).
220M slower than the UniF--k AC Pro (420M)
400M slower than the Ruckus R510 (605M)
So bummed right now.
firmware version?

at this point everyone should just use the latest rc, otherwise test results are irrelevant

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:00 pm
by gotsprings

firmware version?

at this point everyone should just use the latest rc, otherwise test results are irrelevant
RouterOS or Firmware?

As I stated in my post, I updated to the CURRENT RELEASE. Not Release Candidate.

Edit:
Just updated to RC on the OS and firmware.
NO CHANGE

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 4:39 pm
by attilagyurman
Same here, latest RC, MacBook Pro connects with 867 MBit, but real speed is about 10-30MBit.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:19 pm
by gotsprings
Interestingly... I am noticing a bunch of disconnects from a 2.4 device when connected to the cAP AC. Switched back to the wAP AC and its now solid again. Will run it over night and look at the log.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 9:25 am
by normis
Same here, latest RC, MacBook Pro connects with 867 MBit, but real speed is about 10-30MBit.
I have a Macbook Pro right here, and can get 500Mbit easy. Please send your Supout.rif file to support@mikrotik.com, make the file during the Speedtest

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 1:05 pm
by attilagyurman
I have a Macbook Pro right here, and can get 500Mbit easy. Please send your Supout.rif file to support@mikrotik.com, make the file during the Speedtest
500Mbit would be great :-)
I sent the supout.rif, maybe it can help to solve the problem.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:49 pm
by Mechman
That really sounds great, I also sent a new supout.rif I created during the speedtest with the hAP ac^2.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 2:28 pm
by simbav
Same here, latest RC, MacBook Pro connects with 867 MBit, but real speed is about 10-30MBit.
This is joke :( i have plans for buy... But after read, no way...

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 2:33 pm
by normis
Please contact support, it may be a misconfiguration issue. Most users are happy with the speeds (see first above posts)

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 3:52 pm
by attilagyurman
Please contact support, it may be a misconfiguration issue. Most users are happy with the speeds (see first above posts)
Most users in this forum are experiencing the same issue.
A don't say that all cAP ACs are bad, I think this is a great product.
But I ordered 2, tried every wireless config possibility, and can't get normal throughput.

If someone has a working wireless config with 6.42rc, please post it.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:15 pm
by normis
Please contact support, it may be a misconfiguration issue. Most users are happy with the speeds (see first above posts)
Most users in this forum are experiencing the same issue.
A don't say that all cAP ACs are bad, I think this is a great product.
But I ordered 2, tried every wireless config possibility, and can't get normal throughput.

If someone has a working wireless config with 6.42rc, please post it.
We will check your device, but please contact support with supout.rif file.

Here is another topic with good results from other people, so saying "most" is not correct:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=131937

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 4:26 pm
by attilagyurman

We will check your device, but please contact support with supout.rif file.
Ticket#2018032022003899

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2018 12:44 am
by freezer
I've got pretty decent results on my iPhone X over cAP AC. What is interesting for me, my iPhone is connected on 433Mbps link speed. Why not 866 if I got both chains enabled ?

Greg
IMG_7251 2.jpg

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2018 11:09 pm
by gotsprings
That other thread starts out with the exact throughput I had.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:52 am
by attilagyurman
I've got pretty decent results on my iPhone X over cAP AC. What is interesting for me, my iPhone is connected on 433Mbps link speed. Why not 866 if I got both chains enabled ?

Greg
Hi,

This is your max net speed?
Can you post your wireless config?
Mikrotik SW version?

Thanks!

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2018 12:06 pm
by Simono
Those who have good transfers are You using a capsman or standalone AP?

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2018 12:37 pm
by freezer

Hi,

This is your max net speed?
Can you post your wireless config?
Mikrotik SW version?

Thanks!

Eventually my iPhone X negotiated 866Mbps with my cAP AC and works flawlessly.

My SW ver and wireless configuration:

-- CUT HERE --
# mar/26/2018 11:30:07 by RouterOS 6.42rc49
# software id = M86M-TALT
#
# model = RouterBOARD cAP Gi-5acD2nD
# serial number = XXXXXXXXXXX
/interface wireless security-profiles
set [ find default=yes ] supplicant-identity=MikroTik
add authentication-types=wpa2-psk management-protection=allowed mode=dynamic-keys name=pass_profile supplicant-identity=MikroTik wpa2-pre-shared-key=#########
/interface wireless
set [ find default-name=wlan1 ] band=2ghz-b/g/n channel-width=20/40mhz-Ce disabled=no distance=indoors frequency=auto mode=ap-bridge security-profile=pass_profile ssid="MYNET 2.4GHz" \
wireless-protocol=802.11 wmm-support=enabled
set [ find default-name=wlan2 ] antenna-gain=3 band=5ghz-a/n/ac channel-width=20/40/80mhz-XXXX country=poland disabled=no distance=indoors frequency=auto frequency-mode=superchannel mode=\
ap-bridge security-profile=pass_profile ssid="MYNET 5GHz" wireless-protocol=802.11 wmm-support=enabled
/interface wireless access-list
add disabled=yes signal-range=-70..120 vlan-mode=no-tag
add allow-signal-out-of-range=1s authentication=no forwarding=no interface=all signal-range=-120..-75 vlan-mode=no-tag

--- CUT HERE ---

I believe in my case this "20/40/80mhz-XXXX" channel width setting was key to get best connection with my Apple/Samsung devices. I hope this helps.

Regards,
Greg

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 1:21 am
by Sheriff1972
I had a load of disconnects / reconnects from a netatmo camera. I then check ked the firmware and realised that I could not update the firmware, or when I did,, it would not stick. I eventually got it accept the latest RC firmware by using the tik app. If you are experiencing disconnects make sure your CAP AC device is actually using the most recent firmware. Once I got this done the disconnect / reconnect issue has gone.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 1:30 am
by attilagyurman

Hi,

This is your max net speed?
Can you post your wireless config?
Mikrotik SW version?

Thanks!

Eventually my iPhone X negotiated 866Mbps with my cAP AC and works flawlessly.

My SW ver and wireless configuration:

-- CUT HERE --
# mar/26/2018 11:30:07 by RouterOS 6.42rc49
# software id = M86M-TALT
#
# model = RouterBOARD cAP Gi-5acD2nD
# serial number = XXXXXXXXXXX
/interface wireless security-profiles
set [ find default=yes ] supplicant-identity=MikroTik
add authentication-types=wpa2-psk management-protection=allowed mode=dynamic-keys name=pass_profile supplicant-identity=MikroTik wpa2-pre-shared-key=#########
/interface wireless
set [ find default-name=wlan1 ] band=2ghz-b/g/n channel-width=20/40mhz-Ce disabled=no distance=indoors frequency=auto mode=ap-bridge security-profile=pass_profile ssid="MYNET 2.4GHz" \
wireless-protocol=802.11 wmm-support=enabled
set [ find default-name=wlan2 ] antenna-gain=3 band=5ghz-a/n/ac channel-width=20/40/80mhz-XXXX country=poland disabled=no distance=indoors frequency=auto frequency-mode=superchannel mode=\
ap-bridge security-profile=pass_profile ssid="MYNET 5GHz" wireless-protocol=802.11 wmm-support=enabled
/interface wireless access-list
add disabled=yes signal-range=-70..120 vlan-mode=no-tag
add allow-signal-out-of-range=1s authentication=no forwarding=no interface=all signal-range=-120..-75 vlan-mode=no-tag

--- CUT HERE ---

I believe in my case this "20/40/80mhz-XXXX" channel width setting was key to get best connection with my Apple/Samsung devices. I hope this helps.

Regards,
Greg
I've tried the same settings, max throughput I can get is 90Mbit, but the average is about 60Mbit. Tested with MacBook Pro and iPad Pro.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 6:50 pm
by Mechman
No improvement for me, even with the lastest RC...

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:16 pm
by simbav
Anyways, I still bought the cap ac. I think I made a very big mistake. I put the Cap ac up on the ceiling. And right now I'm sitting in the same room about 4 meters from the cap ac. And I got the results
Screen Shot 2018-03-29 at 19.59.23.png

any advice, return???
Different room 1,5 metres away
Screen Shot 2018-03-29 at 20.14.42.png

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2018 1:58 am
by R1CH
Have you actually tried pushing traffic through it? Most devices won't try to negotiate higher rates until it's needed. Simply associating and looking at speed often provides misleading results.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2018 6:43 pm
by gotsprings
Ruckus R510

hAP AC

Just updated the cAP AC to the latest RC. My last test with the cAP AC was topping out in the 189 range. So... its getting better.

5 client on the APs. Each AP swapped in one at a time. Same radio settings on each unit.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2018 8:37 pm
by simbav
6.42rc52 ?

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:47 pm
by gotsprings
6.42rc52 ?
Yup
# apr/04/2018 14:47:08 by RouterOS 6.42rc52

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:18 pm
by Sheriff1972
New RC same old performance. I am getting bored of this now....

I would sell my CAP AC but I can't do it with good conscience knowing the new owner would not be happy with the purchase.

I will put in a drawer and come back to it later. Have just bought a second hand Ruckus R500 to keep me going for now.

Will keep an eye here to see if things change.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2018 1:49 pm
by gotsprings
Come on Mikrotik...

I hate having to use these guys radios.

https://unifi-nanohd.ubnt.com

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:20 pm
by Kerbia
I didn't see this thread before and was just hungry for the hap ac² and the cap ac by looking at the specs. they arrived yesterday.

for me the signal strength improved a bit on both devices. however, i confirm from my side that the throughput is much slower.

i am not using yet the RC firmware. i have the 6.41.4 running.

I really hope this will be solved very soon. I don't want to be forced to return the devices, since the specs and price were exactly what my wet dreams were about the whole last year.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 4:32 pm
by simbav
any news for fix?

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:25 pm
by gotsprings
Updated to RC 6.43__

Unit got slower.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2018 7:48 pm
by WebLuke
Just updated to 6.42.1 on my set of cAP AC (RouterBOARD cAP Gi-5acD2nD), did a speed test from my Google Pixel 2XL, 92 Mbps Down / 272 Mbps Up, tested on a wired connection to the same site 393.9 Mbps Down / 368 Mbps Up. The Transmit side of the hardware should be great considering its a fixed device, yet my phone is doing better. These results seem to be a little better because I was seeing 70-75 Mbps Down before the update but we should be seeing around 150-300Mbps when connected at a Tx Rate of 200-400Mbps40MHz.

Notes: I sit about 20 Feet from the AP testing, 5Ghz, -50bB Signal, I have chosen a channel that is empty in my office building, CPU never goes above 3%, I have a mix of 2.4 and 5 Ghz clients connected totaling only 8 all phones just doing background data.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 8:25 am
by jusvir
Could this all happen because of heating problem? We just bought bunch of CAP Ac:s and noticed that they are really hot. I mean, they all run that hot that they literally smell (burned) electronics and I can't believe that those things will live long this way. Now there's 6.41.4 OS inside them but we are testing others as well. Power is injected with 802.3af switches. CPU load 0-3%. Would it be somekind of transformer/power supply issue?

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2018 4:45 pm
by antonsb

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:47 pm
by Mechman
With 6.43rc5 the throughput has greatly improved for the hAP ac^2. I now get about 300 Mbit/s, RX and TX.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 7:19 pm
by Simono
Only on 5GHz band is improved or 2,4GHz also?

Wysłane z mojego TA-1021 przy użyciu Tapatalka


Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:37 pm
by Mechman
2.4 Ghz was ok for me even before, but it also improved a bit, 130 Mbit/s in both directions.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Sun May 06, 2018 8:54 pm
by volk22
What about cAP AC? I use 6.43rc6. My download speed is terrible when the upload is ok. I have the problem in both standards 2.4 and 5.
The client is Mac Book Pro.
UPDATE:
Problem is solved. It was server upload problem. Mikrotik had nothing to do with it :)

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Tue May 08, 2018 12:03 am
by deanMKD1
Come on Mikrotik...

I hate having to use these guys radios.

https://unifi-nanohd.ubnt.com
Ubiquiti are superior in Wireless sollutions over Mikrotik.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Thu May 10, 2018 8:21 pm
by gotsprings
Updated to 6.43 rc7 got throughput up to 200M

Tried another cAP AC and put 6.42.1 on it. I can connect... but winbox seems to stop. Looks like the mac server is blocked? So nothing shows up in neighbors. 6.43 RC7 does not have this issue.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon May 21, 2018 10:39 pm
by lotnybartek
Man, I'm looking for a 5GHz device - Mikrotik is a 1st one to choose, but this thread is a real show stopper for me.

Right now I have RB2011 but it lacks power now and almost all my devices support 5GHz.

What a bummer.;(

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2018 6:21 am
by jo2jo
(duplicate of my post to other related thread, but info is relevant)

hi, i wanted to post my limited wifi testing so far on the cap AC (good).
I bought the unit from amazon a few days ago (most standard MT US sellers are out of stock).

Running latest release, 6.42.3 (updated FW also). Im very impressed so far with my limited tests (and i have other threads on here with my un-impressed 5g ac wifi tests on other home/office RB 5ghz-AC wifi products, like hap AC and ac lite)

Client- iPhone 7+ w iOS 11.3.1
AP- (see export below ) set to auto, the AP choose 5805 eeeC

Speedtests.net app (to our own in-house speedtest server, so all Ethernet/local, no internet)

Same room as AP ( maybe 4ft from the AP, no obstructions):
200-210mbit down / 190mbit Up

1 room over from AP (AP shows client at ~ -61):
170-195mbit down / ~170mbit Up (great, for 2x chains AC!)

"down stairs" from AP (AP shows client at ~ -80):
~70mbit down / 60mbit Up (great for this test spot)

(2ghz was showing great numbers also, but we focus on 5ghz)

Ofcourse this is just one client type, but so far we are quite impressed! (we test/use ALOT of various APs, ubnt, ruckus, cisco , MT. we only use MT routers ofcourse though. ).

(and WOW is that a powerful new CPU in the IPC-4018 based on our quick tests on cpu!)

(i do hope that /int wire Spectral-history / spectral-scan compatibility can be added in the future, as it is unsupported on both cap ac's wlans currently, as is the case with all MT 5g AC radios currently and several 2g radios too, and its an amazingly useful tool when you can use it)

export:
/interface bridge
add fast-forward=no name=bridge1
/interface wireless
set [ find default-name=wlan1 ] band=2ghz-b/g/n channel-width=20/40mhz-eC disabled=no frequency=auto mode=ap-bridge \
name=wlan1-2g ssid=cap2g wireless-protocol=802.11 wps-mode=disabled
/interface wireless security-profiles
set [ find default=yes ] supplicant-identity=MikroTik
add authentication-types=wpa-psk,wpa2-psk eap-methods="" management-protection=allowed mode=dynamic-keys name=test \
supplicant-identity="" wpa-pre-shared-key=testtest wpa2-pre-shared-key=testtest
/interface wireless
set [ find default-name=wlan2 ] band=5ghz-a/n/ac channel-width=20/40/80mhz-XXXX disabled=no frequency=auto mode=\
ap-bridge name=wlan2-5g security-profile=test ssid=cap5g wireless-protocol=802.11 wps-mode=disabled
/snmp community
set [ find default=yes ] addresses=0.0.0.0/0
/interface bridge port
add bridge=bridge1 interface=wlan1-2g
add bridge=bridge1 interface=wlan2-5g
add bridge=bridge1 interface=ether1
/ip dhcp-client
add dhcp-options=hostname,clientid disabled=no interface=bridge1
/system routerboard settings
set silent-boot=no

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2018 7:47 am
by ronniee
As I read the cap ac and hap ac2 has a chipset with wave 2 support
Some versions ago, in the changelog was a 160MHz channel width support applied.

When do you thing will be ready the wave2 support in RouterOS????
Or we need to buy again other new model to get wave2 support?

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:56 pm
by simbav
As I read the cap ac and hap ac2 has a chipset with wave 2 support
Some versions ago, in the changelog was a 160MHz channel width support applied.

When do you thing will be ready the wave2 support in RouterOS????
Or we need to buy again other new model to get wave2 support?
UP

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:34 pm
by R1CH
There is no Wave2 support in RouterOS. Maybe in RouterOS v7 when the drivers / kernel are updated.

Re: CAP ac bad Antenna design?

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 10:56 pm
by lecaf
I know
this has been beaten to death, but wanted to share my experience
bought a CAPac to replace my TP link AC 1750 (wanted wifi in the garden)

I used the included PSU to power RB450GX4 and from there POE to CAPac.

After first reboot I immediately did a simple config to see the beast and was really disappointed. I would loose connection asap I would move 5m from the AP.
I cursed but said ok lets try latest current firmware, same scheiss...Did some random tweaking and rebooted an the thingy wouldn't even turn its Leds on.
Started considering RMA and then I had an odd idea: lets try another patch cable and TADA thingy would reboot and performance was ok(ish).
Range: 5G is less good than TP link but 2G is better
Throughtput: its reasonable / I don't really care
Compatibility: IOS perfect, Dell Laptop (intel NIC) perfect but Minix and Samsung TV only in 2G. Canon camera also 2G (but might not be AC compatible have to check doc)

Haven't investigated yet why Minix and Samsung don't hook on 5G, will do at a later time when I create VLANs and so (one day...maybe...hopefully)

So to conclude on CAPac could have been better but its ... mmmm...ok. I do have connectivity on half the garden now, but probably I will have to order a second one (one day after Vlan) to put in garage to cover the rest of the garden. And most importantly make sure input power is good its such a pity to have a bad experience for a stupid patch cable.

m.