Comparing UAP-AC-PRO and UAP-nanoHD highlights their distinct features and capabilities.
Comparing UAP-AC-PRO and UAP-nanoHD highlights their distinct features and capabilities.
Hello once more. I'm placing an order for an access point today to see if one unit covers the entire floor or if two per floor would be better. Ubiquiti's new nanoHD resembles the AC-PRO but is smaller, faster (1300 vs. 1733), and nearly same price. It seems to use a 3x3 instead of 4x4 MIMO, drops the secondary port, and can't aggregate. I was thinking about upgrading to the nanoHD for future-proofing, but after reading some confusing comments online, I felt uneasy. I don’t know much about how it’ll be used—mostly cat6 outlets for desktops and TVs, maybe a few laptops and phones, perhaps one PS4. There will be two cat6 ports per AP, and at least three APs needed. The decision is: which one should I pick? Here are the links I found: https://unifi-nanohd.ubnt.com/ and https://www.ubnt.com/unifi/unifi-ap-ac-pro/.
I’d consider the nano HD option, though it only supports a single Ethernet port. The 2.4 GHz network is slower compared to the AC Pro. Its Mu-MIMO and 4x4 antenna give it an edge here. If you intended to delay the AC-Pro ports, that won’t work. You can assign one for Power over Ethernet and another for data traffic. Also, ensure you have the required POE injectors (unless you’re using a POE switch). Lastly, the nano HD features a different mounting bracket than the AC Pro and newer models, making it simple to replace an AC Pro with an AC HD or higher since they share the same bracket.
I’d use a PoE switch and connect the dedicated ports to the APs, offering a tidy setup without extra power points or cables. For larger spaces, one central AP per floor works well. With Ubiquiti, it’s easy to apply the same settings across all devices, creating a seamless mesh network.
I'm not sure what "LAG the AC-Pro ethernet ports" means, but I was thinking of using one cable now and keeping the other for later. Unless both can work together and boost speed. I've set up around 50 PRO units and haven't used the second port yet. Someone said it's for when you need to extend the cable or something. The extra Cat6 cable is being added because my cables are in 20mm pre-pulled corrugated pipes with choices like 2xCat6+coax, 2xCat6, and 1xCat6. I only had the first two options available at installation, and I tend to treat myself.
LAG enables linking two network ports together for additional connections or failover, though it doesn't boost speed beyond 1Gb/s. It's preferable to have two cables with one as a backup, especially considering the effort needed for installation. You can set the secondary port as a pass-through or a backup. I hope you install the cable properly. I've had plenty of time in attics running CAT6.
A PoE switch will arrive soon, and I’ll need to power it via an injector for the next few months. My goal is mesh networking—one per floor and one for the toilet, which seems to block signals despite being 4 meters away from the source.
John's perfect WiFi is definitely important? Well, things have definitely changed.
@NelizMastr & @scottyseng Discussed the PoE injector purchase and its suitability for an Ubiquiti In-Wall HD access point. They noted similar specifications but questioned performance in a bathroom environment, especially during showers. The user prefers wall-mounted placement due to humidity concerns and aesthetic reasons, while also sharing personal experience with poor installation conditions. They emphasized the importance of high-speed connectivity in their 4m² bathroom and shared a link for further details.
Yeah, the second port on anything but the super high end APs are purely for convenience and redundancy. There's not much of a reason for LAG on any of these APs anyways as they are not going to saturate 1Gbps. The Nano will get close if you have a whole bunch of Wave 2 AC devices hitting DL all at once but it won't quite get there and you're unlikely to do this in a home environment anyways. Always good to run two cables but only because the effort involved in running the cable is high and the cost of the cable itself is trivial It's worth pointing out that most of these APs come with a PoE injector in the box. From memory I think the only ones that don't are the multi-packs. In terms of the in-wall AP I don't think the range is quite as good because it has a smaller antennae array. The only reason I'd go with one of those is if you were installing it over an existing wallplate or if you wanted to piggyback a PoE device via the PoE passthrough like a camera or a VOIP phone. If you're doing new cable runs anyways I'd just run one for the AP and one two a couple of ports in a standard wallplate for a better and cheaper end result than the In-Wall HD.