Networking • Automation • Occasional Podcasting
,

Mikrotik R52Hn

Looks like MTK has put out a new high power version of their N card. See specs below. Looks like they will be retailing for around $50 over at Baltic.

Looks like a wireless card to me
  • Dual band IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n standard
  • Output Power of up to 25dBm @ a/g/n Band
  • Support for up to 2×2 MIMO with spatial multiplexing
  • Four times the throughput of 802.11a/g
  • Atheros AR9220, chipset
  • High Performance (up to 300Mbps physical data rates and 200Mbps of actual user throughput) with Low Power Consumption
  • 2 X MMCX Antenna Connector
  • Comments

    10 responses to “Mikrotik R52Hn”

    1. Tim Payne Avatar
      Tim Payne

      I’ve had a lot of disappointment with MikroTik “N” so far. Probably due to a lack of industry standard. It seems it works great if you are using a Tik-to-Tik link, but not so well when I use my iMac to Tik. In that regard, 802.11g works better. As nice as the features on that card look, I’ll wait till there is some real AP-to-Client connection metrics before I purchase anymore “N” radios. Glad to see they are embracing MMCX connectors.

    2. Greg Avatar

      As odd as it sounds, you are the first person I know that has attempted to do client to tik on N…hehe. Most of the people I know are using it only on backhauls. It almost sounds weird to think you are trying it…hehe.

    3. Jimmy Avatar

      Nice, I have been debating getting a R52n for a while now for the house (this just makes the decision harder). I have a R52H already, but my laptop has a N card, so I figured I might as well take advantage of it.

    4. Greg Avatar

      indeed. Looks like your mileage may vary.

    5. Tim Avatar
      Tim

      Weird as it may seem to you, with the availability of “N” capable routers on the consumer market shelves, why wouldn’t I try a AP-to-Client link with a Tik? They’re the ones who have pushed this to the market claiming wonderful, astounding performance, yet no where have I read, even in the fine print, that advertised performance will only be achieved through the use of point-to-point links or performance goals will not be achieved by using it as a local AP. If this is their goal (point-to-point) market, then that’s ok but they should say so or at least offer up some performance reality or guidance when using it for a local AP don’t ya think? (hehe)

    6. Greg Avatar

      Fair point Tim.

      What I was trying to imply is that I forget that people use MTKs as common APs. I get so used to them being backhaul radios or CPEs, that I forget you can use them as a standard AP. To that I have to say “This IS Africa.”

      I don’t know that there is any compatibility testing done by MTK either…

    7. Greg Avatar

      While this has nothing to do with the R52Hn…it is crazy fun…hehehe.

    8. Holden Avatar
      Holden

      Yeah, I was in a bit of rush when I posted the game link and didn’t bother to search for your Trebuche post. Anyhow, I figured you’d enjoy this timewaster!

    9. Greg Avatar

      HA, you know it fool!

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *