This request has been put out before by others, but most of them are from people that do not actually understand Wireless Technologies. As modern Wireless Infrastructure systems increase in technology, it continues to amaze me that Wyze cameras and other devices only support the 2.4GHz Wireless band. While there are a multitude of ISM bands available that could be much better suited for a wireless camera system, namely that of the 5GHz (commonly known as 5.8GHz WiFi).
The maximum theoretical speeds capable on 2.4GHz is 600Mbps under absolutely perfect conditions. Those conditions include: A router capable of processing the bandwidth on the frequency, excellent signal strength, and non-compete for spectrum with other devices. The average user sees a maximum throughput speed of less than 150Mbps however and many more users in congested network locations such as urban developments and apartment complexes likely see even less bandwidth often measured in the 50Mbps or less category.
The 2.4GHz ISM band for WiFi is comprised of only 14 channels by US standard, with Channels 1, 6, and 11 being configured for non-overlapping 22MHz bandwidth which allow for the most throughput. Put that into start comparison of the 5GHz band which has multiple 20Mhz, 40MHz, on up to 160MHz wide channels which will allow for significantly faster throughput.
In my home which is located in a suburban neighborhood with minimum one acre lots, we have a massive overcrowding of WiFi networks. With a simple scan I can count over 40 different SSIDs on the 2.4GHz band alone. This congestion makes the band almost unusable add into that mix the licensed users that are allowed to use this band that further increases connectivity issues. Whereas on the 5GHz spectrum those 40 SSIDs are less likely to interfere and frankly I see less than a dozen due to the attenuation and reduced line of sight distances within this frequency spectrum.
Wyze could also adopt additional frequency spectrums and utilize a “hub” to augment the network providing the ability to further reduce network congestion. I would also like to mention though that adding in simple PoE support on devices (which should be able to be done through a USB-C connection if needed would give even more flexibility to users by allowing them to hardwire those connections that the feel could benefit from this, allowing devices to reduce their RF footprint and congestion on the network.
I love my Wyze cameras, but they are becoming very unreliable with the increased pressures on the spectrum and it simply is poor practice for Wyze to not adopt the 5GHz band into their designs. The economy of scale has long kept the 2.4GHz chips at a less expensive cost, but let us face the fact it really does not matter, Wyze is going to pass that cost onto consumers and I for one would much rather have cameras (and other devices) that support the 5GHz band.
PS the requirement to select two topics above has resulted in this weird sub-grouping.
Looks like it’s being ignored by a lot of IOT cam manufacturers. I personally don’t want a 5 GHz cam even though Wyze has introduced a few and I own one, but have it locked to 2.4 GHz. As previously mentioned, your best bet for Wyze visibility is to reply to the Wishlist topic. But Wyze will not be retrofitting v3 and v4 cams with a 5 GHz radio. If implemented at all, it will be for new cam models.
I realize they can not upgrade existing devices, but moving forward they should adopt it. We just can not continue to push 1080p, 2K, 4K, and beyond over the existing 2.4GHz band.
The majority of the users can not tell the difference between range on a 2.4GHz and 5+ GHz system. The fact is that the 5+ GHz frequency range has better wall penetration than 2.4GHz as well. When you live in a congested frequency area you will find performance is far superior with 5+GHz than 2.4GHz and that is why they need to adopt those standards in newer devices. The devices already state they support Wi-FI 6 " * Wi-Fi: 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi, Wi-Fi 6" yet you can not truly adopt that standard without the Wi-Fi 5+ band being added to the devices, otherwise the advanced frequency allocation does not function. It comes down to physics of signals. As a radio guy, this is one area I understand better than most non-radio operators. If I sit around my house with an Anritsu SiteMaster I have an extremely high noise floor on the 2.4GHz band due to all the neighboring APs. That decreases performance drastically.
The wall penetration statement is actually inaccurate. The higher you go up in frequency, the shorter the wavelength and the harder wall penetration ability.
Yes you are correct to a point. However, the 2.4 GHz signal is attenuated by many modern building materials more than the 5+GHz band. It has to do with absorbtion and reflectivity.
There are many natural elements that attenuate the band too such as pine tree needles. The common microwave also operated at 2.4GHz at 1000-5000 watts, the body is a great capturing of these frequencies due to our water makeup.
Genuinely interested, as I’m working in the tech field, including Wi-Fi : what building materials are worse for 2.4 GHz than for 5 GHz, propagation wise?