I recently bought the newer NH version of the AWUS036, seduced by 2000w transmit power plus N-speed data transfer. I've made a pseudo-scientific comparison; same 5 dBi antenna, HD install BT5R1 32 then BT5R2 64, controlling as many variables as possible.
Number of APs seen in wicd: about the same
Speed connects to router (WPA2): H much quicker
Download speed test:
H 100 packets transmitted, 99 received, 1% packet loss, time 99162ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.240/4.726/177.438/19.295 ms
NH 100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99232ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.359/677.013/2927.134/612.316 ms, pipe 3
H 286 KB/s
Airodump scan: H sees 30% more APs
Reception PWR: H much better, by an average of 10 dBm
(Note that the value for PWR is reported by the driver, therefore may not be comparable).
RXQ on fixed channel/AP: very variable. H reports itself as more sensitive (eg 24 vs 12) , but both seem to collect a similar number of packets.
Injection: both excellent.
Transmit power: Hacking the regdb/CRDA allows:
I tried to test this by DOSing my AP from a distance (PWR -85). NH reported fewer ACKs (eg H [58|62 ACKs] vs NH [18|28 ACKs]), but this is probably a function of its lower sensitivity. There seemed to be no difference in the effectiveness of the deauth.
wlan1 (H) IEEE 802.11bg ESSID:off/any
Mode:Managed Access Point: Not-Associated Tx-Power=30 dBm
wlan3 (NH) IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:off/any
Mode:Managed Access Point: Not-Associated Tx-Power=35 dBm !!
I suspect there is no advantage in increasing transmit power at the expense of reception sensitivity.
Setup: no problems on either, airbase and dhcpd work.
Soft AP transfer speed (for the victim):
|Victim browsing experience
||slightly better than dialup
Macchanger: no problems with either.
5GHz band: not seen by either (need AWUS051NH for this)
Virtualbox: H stable, NH flakey
If I could have only one, it would definitely be the AWUS036H.
P.S. If anyone has any tests they want me to run I'll do my best to oblige.
P.P.S. Anyone want to buy my NH?