Netgear Powerline 500 (XABV5201) Review

Tech News

Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
29,589
Reaction score
470
Points
29,702
Location
Cyberspace
Reviewed by Greg Hook, 1st November 2012. Since the Netgear Powerline 500 (XABV5201) can typically be picked up for under £40 it represents excellent value which, along with its superb performance, makes it a worthy winner of a Highly Recommended badge.
Read the full review...
 
Thanks. I don't suppose you could compare the performance of these to 200 Mbps rated plugs in your environment could you?

My 200 setup gives me speeds approaching those that you achieved here and I'm intrigued to know how much more the 500s would offer.

Also it's XAVB5201 not XABV5201....
 
Thanks. I don't suppose you could compare the performance of these to 200 Mbps rated plugs in your environment could you?

My 200 setup gives me speeds approaching those that you achieved here and I'm intrigued to know how much more the 500s would offer.

I only have the 500 Homeplugs for review so can't compare that unfortunately.
 
Can I ask where you're getting the info that the XAVB5201 is gigabit ethernet? All I can see on Netgear's website is the words "Fast ethernet", which I think is 100mbps.

I can see that they state quite explicitly that the more expensive model, XAVB5101 that you also mention is gigabit, but not the XAVB5201.

Are you sure they're gigabit?

XAVB5201
- states "One (1) Fast Ethernet ports each"

XAVB5101
- states "One (1) Gigabit Ethernet port each"
 
Sounds like these are getting really useful. How many can you run of these i.e. can i buy an extra one? Or do they need to be i n pairs?
 
Sounds like these are getting really useful. How many can you run of these i.e. can i buy an extra one? Or do they need to be i n pairs?

They don't need to be in pairs (after the initial pair obviously). I'm not sure the maximum you can run and I only had two to test with, but Netgear's documentation seems to point that adding additional ones are very easy.
 
I think from memory, Netgear claim you can add up to 30 adaptors to a network, I'm not sure whether that many would be feasible but you can certainly add quite a few.
 
Can I ask where you're getting the info that the XAVB5201 is gigabit ethernet? All I can see on Netgear's website is the words "Fast ethernet", which I think is 100mbps.

To be honest this is something of a moot point because as Greg proved in his review, you won't get 100Mbps over a powerline network, let alone 1Gbps.
 
To be honest this is something of a moot point because as Greg proved in his review, you won't get 100Mbps over a powerline network, let alone 1Gbps.

It is if you're going to test the two products differently, and only use DU Meter on one of them, in different environments. There's no way whatsoever to be able to compare the two reviews.

It definitely explains why Greg is not getting over 100mbps. I get 75 mbps with my 200 series Solwise, which also have a 100mbps ethernet in them. I would have imagined that in the same environment, switching to a 500 series product with a gigabit ethernet port should give me a better connection, but I will never know from this review.
 
Well unfortunately different people reviewed the different products, so I'm afraid there isn't much we can do about that.

The point I was making is that when it comes to powerline networks, the limiting factor tends to be the electrical circuit rather than what type of Ethernet port is on the adaptor. As Greg points out, despite the claims of 250Mbps speeds, in actual fact it was a lot less than that. My experiences and yours would seem to back that observation up.
 
An excellent review, but after reading it I feel cheated by Netgear. If it wasn't reviews like this you will never know how much of an exaggeration (I say, a lie) that 500 Mbps figure is.

First you divide that 500 Mbps to two (but you don't do the same for wired Ethernet). Then you find that, 250 Mbps is 'theoretical' (whatever that means) and the device can at best achieve 100 Mbps (less than half of what is advertised) and only when the devices plugged next to each other (a scenario that makes no sense in real life whatsoever).

How can a manufacturer markets a device that can never, EVER, be tested, even on a lab, to achieve 250 Mbps? This is at best a 100 Mbps device where in real life you expect to achieve about 70 Mbps.

The speed you will get is less than the THIRD of what is advertised or a SEVENTH of what the figure on the box says. My comment to Netgear is: shame on you!

I remember the boom-boxes of my youth, which run with a couple of D size batteries that had 1000 Watts written all over them -- as if! Audio manufacturers lied to us big time then until the regulatory requirement for using RMS power came and normality resumed. I think we need similar regulatory intervention on network equipment and we need that soon.
 
Last edited:
Hi Guys , any idea where i could buy one of these ? Cant see to find one here in Ireland .. Thanks John
 
Thanks Steve , Not one i normally think of .. Had a look , In stock so Just purchased one .. Cheers John
 
To be honest this is something of a moot point because as Greg proved in his review, you won't get 100Mbps over a powerline network, let alone 1Gbps.

Well unfortunately different people reviewed the different products, so I'm afraid there isn't much we can do about that.

The point I was making is that when it comes to powerline networks, the limiting factor tends to be the electrical circuit rather than what type of Ethernet port is on the adaptor. As Greg points out, despite the claims of 250Mbps speeds, in actual fact it was a lot less than that. My experiences and yours would seem to back that observation up.

Ethernet, like anything, isn't 100% efficient. By the time you take overheads into account you do not get 100Mbps. It's very likely that the Fast Ethernet port is therefore the limitation because the powerline adapters can be communicating at faster speeds.

What is the source that Netgear's advertised speed isn't a full duplex claim?
 
Morning all - quick question.

I'm not really up on the full technological terms, etc., so can someone decipher into English for me? :D

I have a BT Home Hub router in the hall, a PC in the kitchen, a media player, sky box, and several NASs containing many TB of media in the lounge, and media players in two bedrooms. I currently have ugly CAT 5 cables running around the house, and SWMBO doesn't like them. Neither do I, but at least I can see the (current) necessity.

Now I appreciate I won't be able to have multiple HD Video streams going on at once.

But I think I want 6 of these (3 pairs). Number 1 for the router in the hall, Number 2 for the kitchen PC, Number 3 will go to a switch in the lounge, which will feed the media player and sky box, numbers 4 & 5 will feed the media players in the bedrooms, and Number 6 I want to connect a switch, and connect all my NASs to this switch - I can tuck this away somewhere then.

In fact, every room with one of these would have a switch attached so that I could also plug in a laptop.

Is that do-able? Or have I misunderstood how this works?

Steve W
 
Last edited:
Yes Steve that is do-able, theoretically you can add up to 30 to one network.

I suspect you would struggle to run multiple devices simultaneously but as a quick, cheap, easy and tidy alternative to running Cat5 cables it definitely works.

The best approach is to buy a pair and try them out and, assuming you're happy, gradually add more.
 
Steve, the logical thing to do is to leave all your NAS connected to the switch in the lounge, next to the media player and Sky box. That way you will have wire speed at your main viewing location, and use one less Netgear unit.
 
Cheers - I'd thought of that.

The thing is, if I were to put the NAS elsewhere, that'd be a total of 6 units required, and they sell them in pairs.

We really won't be using more than one media player at once. At most I think we'd have the media player streaming HD video from the NAS and someone else using t'internet in another room, but that'd be very basic surfing, not watching YouTube, or downloading. If this system can cope with that, then I suppose there's no reason not to add the NAS to another location. Of course, the big benefit with that is that I can hide the NAS away.

As has been suggested, I'll order just one pair first and see how I get on. But it'd be interesting to hear from others who've already used this if they experienced any issues, and if so at what point.

BTW, I'm in a new build house just 6 years old. Is the wiring any more or less likely to be good for this?

Cheers.

Steve W
 
Well they worked in my cottage which has rather old and decidedly ropey wiring, so I think having new wiring will certainly help in terms of speed and creating a robust network.
 
Here's a response from Netgear that they have allowed me to publish. Hopefully it might answer some questions.

500 Mbps or 200 Mbps are the bit rate over the powerline physical layer, which means the “real data to transmit” plus the overhead due to embedded protocols (TCP, IP, Ethernet, Powerline).

- If you remove all of these overheads (that guarantee the stream arrives to point B without any errors) you will get the net bitrate available.

- For 200 Mbps (e.g. XAVB1301), the Powerline physical rate in best case (which means almost no attenuation and no noise on the power line) would be around 170 to 200 Mbps, which means a net bit rate around 75 to 85 Mbps (Mbits/sec)
- For 500 Mbps (XAVB5201 or XAVB5101), the Powerline physical rate in best case (which means almost no attenuation and no noise on the power line) would be around 450 to 500 Mbps.
For the XAV5101 (with a Gigabit Ethernet port), the net bit rate available at Ethernet port would be around 200 to 250 Mbps (Mbits/sec).
For the XAV5201 (with a Faster Ethernet port), the net bit rate available at Ethernet port would be around 85 to 95 Mbps (Mbits/sec). This is due to the Fast Ethernet port on the product which is limited to 100 Mbps max.
- Therefore the XAVB5201 will be limited to 95 Mbps (in best conditions) where an XAVB1301 will be blocked at 85 Mbps.
- You would say that at this stage there is no real interest to take a 500 Mbps product. But this is wrong if you consider that in your house you can have more than two adapters, maybe five adapters (for example).

- The 500 Mbps powerline pipe will then be shared between five adapters at the same time, meaning that you’re able to exchange much more data than on a 200 Mbps pipeline.
- A useful analogy is if you look at it like a highway with two lanes for 200 Mbps and five lanes for 500 Mbps. With two lanes, you can go at the same speed if only two cars on each lane. But if there are five cars, there may be some traffic build up. This would not be the case on the five lanes highway.
- So, having five XAVB5201 adapters at home is much better than having five XAVB1301.
 
Maximum bitrate for Blu-ray Disc is 54Mbps, which falls well within the maximum range for the XAVB5201.

As long as whatever else you were doing didn't draw on the NAS, you could be watching a full HD video rip on two units (one at the NAS end - the other at the media player end), and as long as you were using two different units for whatever else you're doing (say one at the PC end and one at the router end) the two should have no impact on each other.

The HD video would be more likely to conk out because of the limitation of the individual unit/interference rather than whatever else you were doing elsewhere in the house.

That's if I understand the comments correctly.

Steve W
 
A couple of questions on usage.

1 Does one have to attach to the router, or could I place (for example) one in the living room next to the NASs and the other in the bedroom?

2 does it have to plug into a wall socket, or can you use a spare in on a 4-gang, or an extension lead?

Cheers.

Steve W
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom