Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
We are in the process of building a new house and wanted to put two WAPs on two sides of the house. At this point, I was thinking of the nanoHDs. However I came across the U6-Pros which are slightly more expensive but would be more future proof (I guess). In terms of devices, all my IoT devices are on 2.4G while most of my non-IoT devices are on 5G. In total, I would have around 40 wireless devices - of which 10 of them would be 5G and the others would be on 2.4G. With every foot of free space and every obstruction, a Wi-Fi signal attenuates and gets weaker. 5 GHz signals attenuate faster, and are more affected by obstructions. When deciding on how many access points you need, a good general rule is don’t expect 5 GHz coverage to extend further than 2 walls or 30 feet away. Verdict: It’s obvious that the Ubiquiti NanoHD is better equipped than its predecessor, but is the performance and most important, the stability of the access point actually better? It’s true that the NanoHD had some initial bugs, but Ubiquiti has fixed them over the past two years and it seems that most users are quite satisfied with the UAP-nanoHD, so yes, it is indeed better than the UAP-AC-PRO from the internal hardware point of view (it’s worth mentioning that the UAP-AC-PRO may have a slight advantage with the 2.4GHz clients). Features and Wireless Performance This way, from the client to the server, at 5 feet, I measured an average of 629Mbps (-41dB) 665Mbps and, at 30 feet, I saw an average of 439Mbps 242Mbps. At 70 feet, the attenuation was -87dB which would defeat most APs, but the Ubiquiti nanoHD still managed to offer an average of 31.4Mbps. Downstream, I measured an average throughput of 346Mbps at 5 feet 310Mbps and, at 30 feet, the speed went down to an average of 224Mbps 226Mbps. At 70 feet, I saw an average of 13.7Mbps. Afterwards, I switched the channel bandwidth to 80MHz and ran the same test again.
The interesting thing is that the U6-Pro has a smaller case, not as small as the nanoHD, but it’s a sign that Ubiquiti finally calmed down after switching to the WiFi 6 standard. If we ignore the size, both the Ubiquiti U6-LR and the nanoHD have the same, dare I say iconic design. Left: Ubiquiti nanoHD. Right: Ubiquiti U6-LR. To specify which AP and which band was being used, I used the settings offered in the UniFi network controller or Instant On portal, and swapped them in and out as needed. I then stepped through the different channel widths and bands, letting the connection stabilize before beginning my tests.In-Wall APs can be used if mounting a traditional access point isn’t an option. Ethernet should still be run to these, but they also have the benefit of providing two or four Ethernet ports for other downstream devices, thanks to a small built-in switch. AC-Lite: The do-everything workhorse. Unless you are trying to push gigabit speeds or have some really heavy wireless needs in mind, this is a good default option. GHz signals extend this circle out a bit, but with a few walls in the way, getting low SNR links and slow performance is likely. If there is clear line of sight AP range can extend much further, but every wall imposes a dBm penalty. Wall material and quantity are usually more important than distance in a home or small business network. All UniFi Cloud Gateways, as of November 2023. These models are newer, and they all run UniFi OS. They have been called UniFi OS Consoles, Gateway Consoles, and now Cloud Gateways. They act as routers or firewalls, and also run the UniFi software applications like Network and Protect. These can’t be used with Cloud Keys, cloud services, or a self-hosted UniFi Network application. Another popular Ubiquiti access point, the UAP-AC-Pro had some issues with the heat management, but the nanoHD was far better in this regard. Sure, the Ubiquiti U6-LR performs a little bit better, but considering the size of the nanoHD, I would say that the access point has a good heat management. Both of them do, actually, so don’t worry about having very hot access points on your ceiling.
All UniFi Gateways, Cloud Gateways, and UniFi OS Consoles, as of November 2023. See my UniFi Router Comparison for more details. For clarity I've separated them into categories based on their role.The UniFi nanoHD Access Point features a low-profile form factor. The optional ceiling mount or custom skins allow the AP to blend even more discreetly into its setting.
As expected, this is the case with the NanoHD and, yes, the zinc alloy bottom does a good job at dissipating the heat, but the case still gets hot to the touch at the bottom, near the port. Ubiquiti nanoHD – Heat Management Internal Hardware The UAP-nanoHD features auto-sensing 802.3af PoE support and can be powered by any of the following: For now, UniFi is still a good way to create a high performance network. More Wi-Fi 6 models are coming. I have not heard any rumors or seen anything confirming Wi-Fi 6E capable APs are coming soon, but I will update my current UniFi access point guide when that happens. This Gigabit Ethernet port is used to connect the power and should be connected to the LAN and DHCP server. The UniFi nanoHD AP features the latest in Wi-Fi 802.11ac Wave 2 MU-MIMO technology. Intuitive UniFi Controller SoftwareThe Cloud Keys are different. They are not gateways or routers, they only run UniFi OS applications. I’m including them to make comparing which models run which UniFi OS applications easier. Cloud Keys require the use of the USG, USG-Pro, UXG-Lite, UXG-Pro, or some 3rd party router or firewall. You may choose to restrict the collection or use of your personal information in the following ways: This decision has been made to help improve the heat dissipation since a more compact body and no cut-outs do mean that it’s going to have a harder time managing the internal temperature and I also noticed that the NanoHD feel heavier than the UAP-AC-PRO (although it’s not, the former weighs 0.77 lbs, while the latter only 0.66 lbs). The Ubiquiti UAP-AC-PRO was built to be suitable for indoors, as well as some outdoor conditions (it shouldn’t be kept on a pole in the open, but it should be fine while mounted on the outer wall of a shed), so the case is completely sealed off, including the ports area which has a silicone cover to allow only a couple of cables to go through. This means that the device can easily reach a higher temperature and indeed, the access point runs a bit hotter than some devices from the competition (although there was no overheating and I experienced no throttling). You will not be able to put the Ubiquiti AP-nanoHD outdoors since it has no protection against water and dust ingress and I noticed that it also functions warmer than some other access points, especially on the bottom, where the area can get hot to the touch. It has two gigabit Ethernet ports. The 2nd can be used to bridge to another device, or combined into a 802.3ad-based link aggregation.
Since you get to choose them individually, you might want to consider getting a few different models. If you want maximum performance in one area, you can have one Pro or HD covering that, and use AC-Lite’s or mesh APs to extend the network into less used areas. Alternatively, if you want to expand coverage in the future, you don’t need to match the AP’s you currently have. You can add any of them at any time, anywhere you need them. 802.11ac Wave 1 Vs. Wave 2 Downstream, I saw an average of 301Mbps 207Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 144Mbps 103Mbps at 30 feet; at 70 feet (-87dB), the throughoput was pretty much zero. Lastly, I ran the same tests while connected to the 2.4GHz network and, from the client to the server, I saw an average of 185 Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 74.5 Mbps at 30 feet. From the server to the client, at 5 feet I measured an average of 177 Mbps and at 30 feet, I saw an average of 53.3 Mbps. AC-HD: For really high density and/or maximum throughput. Only buy this if you have the need, or the cash to burn. The HD has the best 2.4 and 5 GHz performance I’d recommend for home use. The only step up from the HD is the UWB-XG, which is intended more for places like an auditorium or sports venues (hundreds or thousands of devices in a small area). Verdict: The Ubiquiti UAP-AC-PRO did quite well at the long-range test on the 5GHz band, but on everything else, the UAP-nanoHD performed better; there’s also the MU-MIMO support, so it wins this round. Setup and SoftwareThe AC-HD is the top of the line for home networks, exceeded only by the UAP-SHD and UAP-XG. It offers the best speeds UniFi offers on 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. It also features an antenna specifically designed for close cell spacing and vertical coverage, and dedicated hardware offload for QoS, Guest Control, and Client Management. I have tested the Ubiquiti nanoHD more than two years ago and, considering that I have changed the testing procedure a bit since then, I simply retested the device to create a better comparison between it and the U6-LR. This involved connecting the access point to a PoE switch which was, in turn, connected to the router via cable. And then I connected the wireless client devices to the 5GHz network (160MHz channel bandwidth) of the Ubiquiti nanoHD and the first one that I used was the laptop equipped with an Intel AX200 adapter (WiFi 6). Ubiquiti U6-LR vs nanoHD – Long-term speed test – 80MHz & 160MHz – Upstream – 5 feet. But, even if there is no IP rating, the Ubiquiti nanoHD still doesn’t have any openings and, just like with the U6-LR, the case seems to be completely sealed. How does that fare for the temperature? Ubiquiti-nanoHD – Heat Management
Great Deal 
New Comment