Do yous guys use ethernet or wi fi for online gaming? Is ethernet

I have to use ethernet because the walls in my house are so thick, my signal is shit.

you're a fucking idiot
go to /g/, they have a "stupid questions general" you can find help there.

Ethernet all of the day.

>>387319473
Ethernet for consistency, wi fi is only useful for when you are outside

If you can use ethernet, use ethernet.
Only use wi-fi if you REALLY need to.

File: tumblr_ntd9cyEvwz1uwa0t9o1_500[1].gif (2MB, 425x481px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 425x481px

>pc is right next to internet box
>still use wi-fi for gaming
>still top the scoreboards

>>387319960
/thread

>>387319473
Ethernet. Last time I used Wi-Fi for gaming was on OverWatch. Ping was constantly 50-200 with spikes to around 4000

>>387319696
Fuck off, stop trying to send retards to /g/

>>387319473
An internet connection can be described by three metrics:
-bandwidth
-ping
-jitter

Bandwidth is the size of the connection between you and the server in bytes per second. It is typically not an issue in gaming because game netcode is designed to use and transfer as little data as possible. Unless you're on a 56k this is assuredly fine and wired/wireless won't matter

Ping is the time it takes for a packet to get sent from your computer, reach the server, and for a response to come back to your machine (in ms). In most games you want a ping below 100 for optimal play. Depending on your router's quality and settings this MAY be effected slightly on wireless

Jitter is the variance in your ping. If your ping varies between 50ms and 60ms you have a jitter of 10ms. Jitter is the culprit in nearly all bad situations one encounters when online gaming. Disconnects, stuttering, jumping, failed reg, all can be easily caused by high jitter.

Unless you are on a very high quality wireless router that is very close to your device AND encounters no interference from other electronics then being on wireless WILL introduce jitter. This is why wired is preferred to wireless.

>>387320000
whats ur gamertag, 1v1 me

File: 1486770907341.gif (359KB, 500x444px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 500x444px

>>387319473
if you cant tell the difference between a wire and a signal you should consider eating some glass.

File: welcome back.png (460KB, 386x524px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 386x524px

>>387319473
Buy a 100ft ethernet cable if you need to. There's no excuse

>>387320000
if you are that close to the wifi signal then sure, the difference is negligible as you have virtually no interference.
But also if you really are that close it is better to use cable for the sole reason that you'll free precious wifi bandwidth for the other devices that actually need it.

wifi. Never had any issues with it, no reason to go and buy a 100ft cord to hook up my shit when wifi works perfectly fine.

>>387319473
I've been using Ethernet until I moved into my new appartment a year ago. It was just a hassle to set up the cable, and I had built-in wifi adapters in the computer, so I've rolled with that. Apart from my router getting old and fucking with me, I've not really noticed much difference.
I'll be going back to Ethernet soon, though, as I move into another place.

>>387320000
checked

I live in Australia so I need every bit of reliability I can get. I use ethernet whenever possible.

File: 1502144865866.jpg (48KB, 432x513px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 432x513px

http://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/page/ethernet-vs-wifi-ping-packets-playing-better

tl;dr wifi is trash for gaymen

I only use Wi-Fi on my phone, all my consoles, PCs and smart TVs are connected by Ethernet.

File: IMG_20170815_164026.jpg (94KB, 676x901px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 676x901px

This is with Ethernet. With wifi I get at most 55 Mbps download speed, but usually much less.

if you play multiplayer games on wifi end your life promptly

>>387321001
How much do you pay?

>>387320962
What's your wire management looking like senpai?

>>387321001
>169ms ping with Ethernet
Disgusting

>>387319473
If you see problems between WLAN and LAN then either stick to LAN or buy Access Point for atleast 10$ since you are probably jewed for cheapest routers by your internet provider.
I played online games with 50ms latency on average [normal ping in my country] using my phone with only 3,5G as a hotspot for a year and I never had any problems with jumping ping.

>>387321001

Is your router really far away? My download speed is virtually the same for both.

>>387320682
everything about this post is wrong

>>387320272
this

i have some mad jitter being super far away from the router. I'm ready to get an apt and move out of Carlos's.

>>387321001
bandwidth doesn't matter for gaming

see >>387320272

>>387319696
But anon, he said the word "gaming", now the thread is fully eligible to be posted on /v/ ;^)

Is the only reason I lose at SFV because everyone is playing on wifi?

>>387321001
Link to the speed test?

>>387321139
And there should be no much difference since atleast 3-4 years now. WiFi was shit when the standard was a-c and most network interfaces were shitty.

>>387319473
Ethernet.
If you live in somewhat crowded neighborhood where everyone has a wifi router you get fucked if you expect flawless wifi connection.

>>387321139
2,4GHz wifi has limit of about 11MBps
5 GHz wifi has limit of about 56MBps
He seems to be using 5GHz wifi and getting what he should

>>387320831
>invent wi-fi
>have the worst internet in the world

It's not fair, my place is still 2 years from nbn rollouts too.

File: spped.png (16KB, 411x607px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 411x607px

>>387321139
This is from a few seconds ago, and I'm sitting across the living room from my router.
>>387321236
Maybe not, but it's nice for downloading games.
>>387321268
Just google "internet speed test"

>>387321315
5GHz band kind of fixes the crowdnessnes issue

>>387319473
Ethernet because it's more reliable. Also if you do any sort of FTP, Ethernet is so much faster than WiFi. We're talking about the difference between 2-3mb/s to 45-50mb/s.

>>387321340
Are you living in 2000? .That was standard for a/b. Also it's Mbps as in Mega bits per second, not MBps as in Mega bytes per second
Currently speeds are >56Mbps and more like around 150.

>>387321081
From my main router I have
>Cable to network storage
>Cable to my main PC
>Cable to the TV stand in my room, which connects to an 8 port network switch to which most of my consoles and TV are connected to
>Cable that leads to the living room TV stand which has a 4 port switch on it which connect the TV, and other consoles
>Cable from the living room switch goes into another room and goes into another r port switch which connects to a PC and a bluray player.

I would like to mention at this point in the thread something important:

There IS a difference between "mb", "Mb", "mB" and "MB".

You probably want either Mb - Megabits - or MB - Megabytes.

File: Screenshot_2017-08-16-15-09-20-1.png (51KB, 1280x379px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1280x379px

>>387321431
I'm supposed to be getting 240mb broadband speed don't know what's going on

>>387320272
To add to this
Latency is affected the most by distance from you to the server. Not number of hops as it once was, routers are much more sophisticated these days and packets sent frequently to the same destination and back again are spending practically no wait time.

Packet loss. This can occur en-route to the server and can have nothing to do with your in house link. Using free tools like WinMTR and pinging the server IP can help you diagnose the bad egg along your route.

>>387321741
>Using free tools like WinMTR and pinging the server IP can help you diagnose the bad egg along your route.
After you get some results is there a way to fix it yourself or are you completely at mercy of telcos that might mismanage their gear and fuck up your connection?

>>387321607
You are either stupid or still use router from early 2000s. LAN speed depends on cable [10/100/1000Mbps], WLAN depends on standard [11/54/300/1000Mbps]. Also for good signal you can get practically no difference what so ever, If your ping was higher by 1ms it would probably mean you have too many walls or your router is shit.

>>387321689
Oh yeah, and I have a tiled ceiling, all the cabling between rooms is run up there, the only cable that run alone the ground is the one between my main PC and the router because it's 6 feet away.

File: 1499500600143.png (237KB, 680x421px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 680x421px

>>387321431
>mfw paying the equivalent of $30 per month for 1000/100 Mbps here in Sweden.
I've been thinking of downgrading to 100/100 or 100/10 Mbps priced at $13 respectively $7 dollars per month since I don't use the total bandwidth outside of pulling down Linux distros and Bittorrent.

>>387321963
Yeah it's pretty much bullshit how expensive high speed internet is in the USA, but at least we can actually get speeds up to 100 mbps now; my cable company only started offering that about a year or two ago.

>>387322040
You can thank the cable oligopoly.

File: speedy internet.png (88KB, 732x146px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 732x146px

its like 30-50 a month or somethin

File: Screenshot_2017-08-16-15-17-17-1.png (254KB, 800x949px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 800x949px

Is this an alright router?

>>387322040
>but at least we can actually get speeds up to 100 mbps now
What about FUPs or hidden caps?
Does anyone still bother with that shit or can you actually use unlimited internet if you want?

>>387321842
coin toss

I've managed to get to an actual engineer before by calling through to my local provider store instead of their national help line and they were able to investigate my issue (I was able to tell them which IP was reliably dropping)

>>387322191
Jeez Louise, where is this?

I can get 6mpbs on a good day in Australia.

File: file.png (10KB, 397x169px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 397x169px

>>387322310
just did it again with google's shit
i havent gotten it to 340 but ive gotten close

only downside is its spectrum (time warner when i got it)

>>387321882
Wifi's listed speeds are theoretical, you never get that speed. In real world use ethernet is faster. Ethernet is a little overstated as well because it doesn't include overhead but you can expect to get 925mpbs over gigabit 100% of the time, you won't get anything over 300mpbs even with in AC router in the same room.

>>387322258
>I've managed to get to an actual engineer
That's almost impossible where I live.
The big telco that most people use is so bad at customer service, people either deal with the home/small office router stuff themselves or call some geek acquaintances.
Of course the guys with the actual knowledge that manage the commercial lines won't even talk to you unless you provide proper credentials. Shit sucks.

>>387322251
Right now it's unlimited, but I'm pretty sure in my contract there is a clause that allows them to start capping it whenever they feel like it. Again, pretty much bullshit.

>>387322310
>>387322372
>>387322191
its Los Angeles for the record

>>387321340
you are confusing bands with speed
2.4Ghz and 5Ghz are bands and have little to do with the speed of the connection
5Ghz is faster because the higher you go in the radio frequency spectrum, the faster the signal updates data, but also the harder for it to penetrate obstacles because the signal is thicker.

a, b, g, n and ac are the standards and are the ones responsible of the speed of the connection
b is capable of 11MBps (1.3Mbps)
g is capable of 54MBps (6.75Mbps)
n is capable of 300MBps (37.5Mbps)(dualband, 150MBps (18.75Mbps) on single band)
ac is capable of 1.3GBps (162.5Mbps)

with the 5Ghz band you get better speed because gets less interference because the signal is stronger and less prone to it.
with the 2.4Ghz band you can get up to the 150MBps of the wifi n single band, but you need to have almost no interference to get to that level so is almost impossible, you typically get 65MBps (8.125Mbps) which isn't as bad

MB = megabit
Mb = megabyte
8MB = 1Mb

>>387321154
care to explain what is wrong??

>>387320000
>tries to get cancers this hard
damn..

>>387319473
Wi-fi was made solely for situations where the device wouldn't be often enough to deem the drilling into walls worth it.

It is a flat out inferior option on all possible accounts aimed at stuff like connecting when on the road and when you absolutely can't get the cables there.

Could using wifi and having a worse connection potentially give you an advantage in some games?

>>387322898
Unless you use some illegal non certified signal boosters there's no way to get cancer from wifi.
The signal just isn't strong enough.
>>387323156
Lagstabs in Dark Souls.

>>387322246
>cable modem
Get a physically seperate modem and router, as in two seperate devices. You don't want one box doing two distinct jobs, and you don't want someone who discovers in exploit in the modem simultaneously gaining access to your network.

>>387322798
>b is capable of 11MBps (1.3Mbps)
>g is capable of 54MBps (6.75Mbps)
>n is capable of 300MBps (37.5Mbps)(dualband, 150MBps (18.75Mbps) on single band)
>ac is capable of 1.3GBps (162.5Mbps)

These are all theoretical optimums of data travel.
Real life conditions where you put the antennas -next to each- other are much closer to half of that.

>>387323625
of course, the same goes for cable.
you never get the theoretical maximums on anything.

i'm on wired for everything, but the only genre i've seen it REALLY matter for is fighting games. when you're fighting some fuck on fightcade it's incredibly obvious when they're on wifi