Campquake Senate

http://games.dlink.com/splash/dgl-4300/

Is this worth the buy? Anyone?

Also, this is where...well, here is more:

http://www.ubicom.com/solutions/feature ... outer.html

I am not very knowledgable in comps, but to me unless you are multi-tasking on one computer, gaming, emailng etc all at the same time, or unless you are using 2 computers with one emailing or down loading and the other one gaming, I don't think it will help.

We use 2 comps at the same time and don't seem to have any problems. with file transfers and gaming at the same time.

Again, my inexperienced view.

Games will never run good over Wireless for the simple reason of interence. A wired network will always provide you cleaner communication. And the cleaner communication with a wired network means that your router (switch) and computer will not have to repeat their information again and again (cause lag) until it's understood at either end.

It's sort of like my wife talking to me... She says stuff, I never understand it! Mostly because the TV's on, I'm playing on the Internet, and the kids are jumping on the couch and laughing again. She's wireless, and the TV and stuff is interference. But if she writes it down and staples it to my forehead, I get the point. Wired!

Any way, the ideas behind the D-Link router is good. For marketing! Because in actual use, any sound name brand router/switch should be able to connect you to the Internet at wire speeds. The D-link gives the option for you to prioritize certain packets, but if they are being delivered at wire speeds, then there really isn't any need to prioritize those unless you're reaching the full bandwidth of the CPU/Memory of the router.

In my home network, I have two wireless laptops, two wired tower PC's, a wired DVR, and a wired Xbox. I've tested it with at least 5 of those devices connected and loading the network with traffic. My simple $9 D-link router ($59 with $50 mail-in rebate) never has any trouble with connecting me to the Internet even when the system is under load. Even under that peak load, I just don't think that my LAN is causing enough traffic to justify prioritizing the packets.

IMHO you're spending a little extra for insurance and that enthusiastic "Gamer" tag where spending slightly less money will give you an identical end result. Their marketing hype of "reduces lag by 65%" is just that. Would I notice an improvment from 12ms to 7.5ms? Probably not. But that's my local network, and the sort of improvment that they are talking about. They can't improve the speed of the internet because that's out of the control of their device. You won't go from 200ms pings to 135ms because the real lag they want you to think that this will fix belongs to your ISP or the routers between you and an internet game server.

But maybe you have 254 computers on your network all downloading torrents? Then priortizing will help.

Neophyte wrote:But maybe you have 254 computers on your network all downloading torrents? Then priortizing will help.

LOL....gotcha.

...and buzzed: thx ... I use two computers at the same time for gaming as well, and really don't have a lot of problems with mine either..

I was just looking at this, because it is wireless and I want to (in time, and when I have money) make all of the ethernet cables in my house - obsolete. hehe

Thanks for the wireless router tip being slower, as my router was giving me problems I was thinking of going to a new wireless. I did not realize they were slower.

don't make those ethernet cables obsolete, just hide em better!

I've never had any good experiences with FPS gaming on a wireless connection. IMO - wired is where I'll be for a looooong time.