Start the wifi card comparison.
All checks were successful
build-staging Build build-staging has succeeded
All checks were successful
build-staging Build build-staging has succeeded
This commit is contained in:
32
pages/post_ai_levels/index.org
Normal file
32
pages/post_ai_levels/index.org
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
|
|||||||
|
#+OPTIONS: html-postamble:nil
|
||||||
|
#+title: AI Article Levels
|
||||||
|
#+date: <2026-10-15 Thu>
|
||||||
|
#+author: Tom Alexander
|
||||||
|
#+email:
|
||||||
|
#+language: en
|
||||||
|
#+select_tags: export
|
||||||
|
#+exclude_tags: noexport
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
LLMs are a powerful tool that are rapidly changing the tech landscape. While I recognize their value, they have created an imbalance. In the past, each article/post took more effort to produce than it took to read. Today, an LLM can generate an infinite pile of posts before lunch. While low quality and high quality posts are possible both with and without LLMs, I am going to annotate my posts with an AI disclaimer indicating the extent that AI was used for that post. You are free to ignore it or use it as a heuristic on whether reading a post is worth your time.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* AI Levels
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** None
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
At this level, an LLM was not used for writing any part of the post, writing any part of the code, or for any sort of planning/brainstorming.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Coach
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
At the "Coach" level, an LLM was used to discuss ideas and suggest actions. The article itself and any code it contains was still written by a human.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Author
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
At the "Author" level, an LLM wrote some or all of the article/post, but it did not write any of the code.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Code
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
At the "Code" level, an LLM wrote some or all of the code in an article/post, but it did not write the article/post.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Full
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
At the "Full" level, an LLM was involved in both the writing of the article/post and the writing of the code. That could be anything from 0.01% of each being written by an LLM to 100% being written by an LLM.
|
||||||
76
posts/2026/10/15/qcncm865-mt7927-comparison/index.org
Normal file
76
posts/2026/10/15/qcncm865-mt7927-comparison/index.org
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
|
|||||||
|
#+OPTIONS: html-postamble:nil
|
||||||
|
#+title: QCNCM865 vs MT7927 Comparison
|
||||||
|
#+date: <2026-10-15 Thu>
|
||||||
|
#+author: Tom Alexander
|
||||||
|
#+email:
|
||||||
|
#+language: en
|
||||||
|
#+select_tags: export
|
||||||
|
#+exclude_tags: noexport
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For most of the Framework AMD 7040's life, the only choice for a full-featured Wifi-7 card on Linux was the Qualcomm QCNCM865, The [[https://frame.work/products/amd-rz717-wi-fi-7][Mediatek 7925 in the RZ717]] lacks support for 320MHz channel width, and the Intel BE200 was not an option since that card prevented AMD machines from booting.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
With the release of Linux 7.2, we finally have a second choice for full-featured Wifi-7 cards: the MT7927.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I purchased both cards and tested them in my Framework 13 AMD 7040 laptop to see how they compare. This isn't a scientific test; I live in an apartment in a dense city without a faraday cage, so I am unable to control all variables. Regardless, I did my best to make the tests fair and I hope this data helps others in picking their wifi cards.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* AI Disclaimer
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This article is at AI level: None. Click here to see what this means and why this matters.
|
||||||
|
# TODO: Write page on the different AI levels and make this a link.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Conclusion
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# TODO: Write comparison.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Comparison
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Speed
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For this test, I ran an =iperf3= server on my router to measure the speed between my laptop and my router. The speed did not go out to the public internet and is not impacted by my home ISP. I ran 4 tests.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
*** Upload from laptop to router over tcp
|
||||||
|
*** Download from router to laptop over tcp
|
||||||
|
*** Upload from laptop to router over udp
|
||||||
|
*** Download from router to laptop over udp
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Latency
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For this test, I ran =ping= to my router for 10 minutes to measure the latency.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Power Consumption
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For the power consumption tests, all readings are the *full* power usage of my laptop. The readings do not reflect the power consumption of the wifi card alone. There are many variables that go into a full system's power consumption (for example, which SSD and RAM you have installed and the brightness of your screen), so you shouldn't consider the absolute values here. Instead, you should look at the differences in power consumption between the two cards.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
*** Idle
|
||||||
|
For this test, I let the laptop sit idle for 10 minutes and I measured the battery level before and after the test to calculate the power consumption.
|
||||||
|
*** Sleep(ish)
|
||||||
|
The Framework 13 AMD 7040 laptop only supports s2idle (colloquially called "modern standby") which some critics argue is "not real sleep" (referring to ACPI S3). Regardless of your opinions on s2idle, for the rest of this article I will be referring to s2idle as "sleep".
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For this test, I put the laptop to sleep for 10 minutes and measured the battery level before and after to calculate the power consumption.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
*** Active
|
||||||
|
For this test, I kept the wifi card active for 10 minutes by continuously sending pings to my router with src_bash[:exports code]{ping -f -i 0.002 172.16.0.1}. This specific invocation requires TODO's version of =ping=. I measured the battery level before and after the test to calculate the power consumption.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Signal Strength
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
** Interface Information
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# TODO: Is there anything interesting to report here?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
* Test Setup
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
My test setup consisted of a Framework 13 AMD 7040 laptop with each of the wifi cards, connecting to a [[https://techspecs.ui.com/unifi/wifi/u7-pro][Ubiquiti UniFi U7 Pro]].
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I tested each card in two different locations:
|
||||||
|
1. About 6 feet from the access point with a clear line-of-sight.
|
||||||
|
2. In another room, going through 1 interior wall.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
# TODO: Add floorplan?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
And I ran each test with both power saving on and power saving off.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
To run the tests, I built a bootable live USB that kicks off my scripts, saves the results to disk, and then shuts down the laptop. So the laptop was left undisturbed and unused during each run of the test. For full transparency, you can access my test script here. I started each test at 70% battery at left it unplugged for the full duration of the test (to support power consumption readings).
|
||||||
|
# TODO: Add a link to the test script code.
|
||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user