Quote Originally Posted by sergeikolomov View Post
Giving specs for lower bitrates is legitimate, since the WiFi standard allows radios to make the tradeoff when necessary. I was accidentally being misleading when I said -96dBm @ 1Mbps is close to the noise floor (my mistake, not theirs).
But isn't the 362 state of the art if cost is accounted for? Or is there any device for sale which can do better and doesn't cost thousands of dollars?
When specs are given, the measurement criteria should also be given. What are the conditions that constitute their "sensitivity"? Is it a bit-error-rate (BER) of 5%, or a much more liberal 8, 9 or even 10% BER? That is the problem when comparing specs from different vendors when the conditions aren't properly spelled out.

Given the two models that you stated, the 362 definitely has much better sensitivity that the other model, provided that the test conditions were equal. They both represent pretty much the industry norm. A more sensitive board for this market would not make sense, given the intended use (normal in-home use) and would only meet a specific niche in the market, since the top three design criteria in this market is cost, cost and then cost.