Is the CubeSA 60Pro ac a real, shipping, thing yet?

I have a farm that has some old 5Ghz PtP links. The problem is they are not playing to well with my WAPS. And the throughput is pretty low.

Most of the shots are clear line of sight.

was thinking maybe 60Ghz sector antennas???

Anyone tried one yet?

I have a bunch of the wireless wire cube out there and they have been solid. But since there are several location in the same general direction... it would be more suited for sector rather than PtP each building.

The silence is a little disconcerting.

What is the distance............?? To ease your mind LOL

200-600 meters

We've been using them for a while now and gradually expanding the network. We were delighted with them initially but have found that if we have more than three stations on a AP the throughput drops by quite a lot. We thought that if, say, three out of four were idle the fourth would get almost the full capacity. This doesn't seem to happen. To be fair, we haven't researched this completely and it could be caused by something we haven't yet considered.

The APs have a hard maximum of six stations, while other suppliers have fifteen on their 60 GHz products.I do not know why that is; perhaps it is related to throughput considerations?

On the plus side, they are very easy to install; the beam forming seems to sort out any small alignment errors. Also the pricing is very good and they are quite small in comparison to others.

I have often wondered why the stations are larger than the APs; I would have thought that the AP would have a larger, more complicated antenna system. Does anyone know?

I hope this helps a bit and might stimulate some discussion.

Bill.

BillP,

That's the sort of thing I was looking for!

@gotsprings I haven't used the SA's at this point. I'm using wAP60's and Cube60's as AP's with up to 8 CPE at a time and have over 100 customers deployed on them. Cube 60 Pro's as CPE work very well, along with the older Cubes and LHG's. I use Cubes up to about 500m and LHG60 up to 750m. For redundancy, the Cubes' WiFi radio can connect to an OmniTik, which can also power the 60GHz APs.

For higher density deployments I'm using Tachyon Networks (32 in 120 degrees) and for distance Ubiquiti's Wave (24 subs in 30 or 90 degrees up to 8km/5mi).

They all have their place in the toolbox.

@Sirbryan,

That brings me to a question.

The price difference between the MikroTik and UBNT stuff is pretty small. Made me question if I should even bother with MikroTik 60Ghz. Just use the UBNT gear which would tie in UNMS.

Doesn't cost that much more.
Can handle greater distances.
Can handle more clients per radio.

Just wondering.

We've just installed our first Ubiquiti Wave devices. So tar they're pretty good - I'll try to remember to report back as we gain more experience.

Bill.

We've just installed our first Ubiquiti Wave devices. So tar they're pretty good - I'll try to remember to report back as we gain more experience.

Bill.

Please do... I was also noticing that UBNT has 2.5 Gigs vs 1.

We've just installed our first Ubiquiti Wave devices. So tar they're pretty good - I'll try to remember to report back as we gain more experience.

Bill.

Whats the word?

Still looking for more input on 60Ghz PtMP

We've just installed our first Ubiquiti Wave devices. So tar they're pretty good - I'll try to remember to report back as we gain more experience.

Bill.

Whats the word?

Still looking for more input on 60Ghz PtMP

It's almost a year now and we have more experience with the Ubiquiti kit. We've used the Wave AP Micro, the Wave Nano and the Wave Pico. We continue to use the Mikrotik cubes. Here's my view of the comparison:
Ubiquiti has the ability to connect 31 client radios (we haven't gone that far yet), We found that connecting more than four Mikrotiks reduced the throughput for each user. I think this could be solved with a better polling scheme.
The Ubiquiti clients do not have much in the way of beam forming - they are very difficult to align. You just point the Mikrotik radios in the general direction and they connect fine.
Ubiquiti kit has longer range - it's hard to quantify this except to say that the numbers produced by Ubiquiti seem to be pretty accurate.
Ubiquiti has more channels available in a wider band (UK models anyway). It is easy to get away from the bad attenuation region at about 59 GHz.
Ubiquiti AP has a 2.5 Gbit/s ethernet port. We haven't needed to use that yet but will do in the future. The clients have a 1 Gbit/s port. Mikrotik is all 1 Gbit/s even though they often report that the radio connection is at 2.3 Gbit/s, so that capacity can't be used.
The Ubiquiti radios are quite heavy and need a very solid mounting; Mikrotik ones are much more forgiving.
The Ubiquit radios have higher transmit power levels. In the UK, this means that you have to have a licence (£75 for five years). Mikrotik cubes are licence-exempt.
Both types have better tolerance of heavy rain than we feared.
The latest Ubiquiti firmware allows the backup radio to be turned off (clients only). This can help with interference. Mikrotik radios have always had this feature.
Ubiquiti radios have better measurement of signal quality via SNMP.
The Ubiquiti kit is more expensive but there is a trend downwards.

I hope this is useful.
Bill.

BillP,

I had to put up a bunch of 60GHZ units around an event space in Sept.

Went with the Tik units and they have been working fine.

Really appreciate the 1st hand information.

I have some trouble with CubeSA Pro (just the AP, not the Cube Pro stations) in a PtMP setup. It seems to introduce a lot of latency and jitter, even at low traffic, and I have reproduced it in a lab setup with the second CubeSA Pro as well, so it's not distance or interference (or single bad hardware - though it could be a bad whole batch of the hardware as both were from the same shipment, one of the first ones when introduced, devices were not yet available in PL so I ordered them from CZ to be the first one to test them). It's just that the good old wAP60G-AP (the one with license level 4, be careful when buying as there are also level 3 station-only devices without the "-A" in product code) work better as long as there is more than one stations connected, latency is lower and more consistent.

That's a pity, as my main reason why I was waiting for the new "ay" devices (other than >8 stations and Terragraph, also never happened) was channel 5 support for longer range - the old APs only support channels 1-4. On the positive side - only the new AP is broken, the new CubePro stations seem to work well connected to the old wAP60G-AP, so they are good replacements for the discontinued Cube-60ad.

The jitter and latency issue with the CubeSA Pro is the same with both RouterOS 6.49.3 (in the lab, version the device had from the factory) and 7.15.3 (in the field, upgraded in the hope the issue would be fixed but it is still not). All it takes to reproduce is connect 2 stations to the AP, even with no real traffic the jitter becomes a few more milliseconds on the new CubeSA Pro compared to the same test done with the old wAP60G-AP where latency increases significanly only under heavy traffic.

EDIT: added SmokePing graph, in the middle (Sep 2024) was the point when the old wAP60G-AP was replaced with the new CubeSA Pro, as the AP for 5 stations (earlier replaced one-by-one from the older Cube60 or LHG60).

#[SUP-179673]

I wonder if the increase in latency is related to the drop in throughput we see with more than about four stations?

I think the multiplexing (polling, or whatever the word is) scheme could be improved.

Bill.

I will say this: I have hundreds of Ubiquiti Wave units deployed. Where possible, I'm replacing my 5GHz UI gear (LTU & AirMax) with Wave.

I had quite a bit of MikroTik 60GHz also deployed, but I'm overbuilding and replacing it all (slowly) with Tachyon 30X radios. They use the same Peraso chips as Wave, have 2.5Gbps ports (and a 1Gbps POE out port), and are rock solid.

The Qualcomm chip pales in comparison to the Peraso chipset: 8 clients vs. 32, short range vs. long range, 4 channels of 2160MHz vs 5 channels of 2160 or 10 channels of 1080MHz, etc. And the Peraso radios stay connected much better.

I would love to see a MikroTik/RouterOS implementation using Peraso radios. Imagine an AP running 1, 2, or 3 radio modules (for 120°, 240°, or 360° coverage) and different CPE options for 1- and 2.5Gbps connectivity.... One can dream.

I imagine it's too much to hope that the Tachyon units are RF-compatible with Ubiquiti? Have you tried?
Bill.

I haven't personally used the CubeSA 60Pro ac, but I've had good experiences with MikroTik gear in the past. Before you commit to a full deployment, I'd suggest grabbing one and testing it out in a real-world scenario on your farm. See how it handles the distance and any potential interference. That'll give you a better idea if it's the right solution for you.

Mikrotik are you planning to change chipset manufacturer? Qualcomm seems to be a bit outdated...

https://feeds.issuerdirect.com/news-rel ... ymbol=PRSO

Do you also replace Ubnt wave with Tachyon?

I I'm overbuilding and replacing it all (slowly) with Tachyon 30X radios.

Do you also replace Ubnt wave with Tachyon?

No. That wouldn't make sense. Tachyon doesn't have the range that Wave does.

I imagine it's too much to hope that the Tachyon units are RF-compatible with Ubiquiti? Have you tried?

Yes, they are, one way: the Tachyon (as CPE) will connect to the UI AP. I haven't tried UI CPE to Tachyon AP's.

The UI AP doesn't show the Tachyon CPE in the GUI, so you don't know they're connected until the CPE comes online and acquires an address from the DHCP server.

The Tachyon CPE have to be configured for either 1080MHz or 2160MHz; they don't automatically adjust like the Wave CPE will when you change settings in the UI AP. Also, the newest Tachyon firmware has different channel assignments for 1080MHz, so they're not compatible if you choose to run 1080 on the UI AP.

So while it works (we used it as a crutch for one customer for about a month), it's not very flexible and doesn't make sense in the long run, especially given that Tachyon radios can be CPE or AP, and cost much less than Wave AP's.

Do you also replace Ubnt wave with Tachyon?

No. That wouldn't make sense. Tachyon doesn't have the range that Wave does.

Not even with the 303X and various antenna options? New 303L was just announced

No. That wouldn't make sense. Tachyon doesn't have the range that Wave does.

Not even with the 303X and various antenna options? New 303L was just announced

Yeah gonna get me some of those. But, the gain on the Wave LR and Wave Pro is superior to the 300m dish option on the 303x. And the integrated 5GHz radio (as lousy as it is) makes the longer ranges possible in our area during rain fade.

@sirbryan, question regarding 60GHz devices:
I need to connect two locations around 1-1.2km distance, PtP link, at least 1Gbit bandwidth (the more, the merrier).
What would you recommend - Ubiquiti or Tachyon ? And which devices specifically ?

Thanks man.

I need to connect two locations around 1-1.2km distance, PtP link, at least 1Gbit bandwidth (the more, the merrier).
What would you recommend - Ubiquiti or Tachyon ? And which devices specifically ?

It depends on your rain zone. Tachyon has a link calculator on their site that will help you figure out which antennas work best with the 303X for that range.
For me, rain zone B (western US) says I'd be fine with two 303X's with 150mm antennas. For rain zone Q, you'd want the 300mm antennas for 1200m.

Tachyon has 2.5Gbps ports vs. Wave Nano/AF60LR/Wave LR's 1Gbps ports.

Wave Nano/LR have backup 5GHz radios, AF60LR does not.

Wave LR and AF60LR have better gain (and therefore rain resilience).

Wave Nano and LR can do 1500Mbps aggregate, whereas AF60LR can do 2000Mbps aggregate. Tachyon can do 2500Mbps aggregate.