Head to Head: Bigfoot Killer Wireless-N 1102 vs. Intel Centrino Ultimate-N 6300
Out-of-whack price/performance ratios snuffed our enthusiasm for earlier Bigfoot Networks Killer NIC products. Would that be the case with the company's first wireless NIC, too? To find out, we tested two otherwise-identical CyberPower X6-9300 gaming notebooks: one with Bigfoot's new Killer Wireless-N 1102, and the other with Intel's Centrino Ultimate-N 6300. The Intel part supports three 150Mb/s streams while the Atheros AR9382-based Bigfoot part supports two streams.

Round 1: TCP Throughput
Bigfoot tells us it has optimized the software for latency-intolerant applications: multiplayer games, VoIP, video streaming, and so on. The trade-off, a company spokesperson said, is slightly lower TCP performance, which is used for email, web browsing, and other apps where packets can be reassembled out of order.
But our Jperf tests didn't reveal a yawning performance gap: Intel's part was 11 to 19 percent faster on the 2.4GHz band, with the bigger difference occuring at a longer distance (with the client on our outdoor patio). Bigfoot's part, on the other had, delivered slightly faster performance when operating on the 5GHz frequency band, although the delta wasn't nearly as wide (just 5 percent). Intel's part was negligibly faster on the 5GHz band when the client was on the patio.
Winner: Centrino Ultimate-N 6300
Round 2: UDP Throughput
Applications that can't tolerate latency—online games, VoIP, audio and video streaming apps, and similar programs—utilize UDP (User Datagram Protocol). UDP operates on the assumption that it's better to drop packets than to wait for them, and that the application will handle any necessary error correction.
When we configured Netperf to send 1,024-byt packets using UDP, we saw only negligible differences in throughput: Intel was 1 percent faster on the 2.4GHz band, and Bigfoot was 5 percent faster on the 5GHz band. But when we increased packet sizes to 1,472 bytes (the maximum size that will fit within an Ethernet frame, assuming a 20-byte IP header and an eight-byte UDP header), Bigfoot's part delivered UDP throughput eight to 10 times faster than Intel's.
Winner: Bigfoot Killer Wireless-N
Round 3: Latency
We used the Bigfoot-developed GaNE (Gaming Network Efficiency) benchmark for this test. We're naturally suspicious of vendor-developed benchmakrs, but Bigfoot is opening its source code so we'll give it the benefit of the doubt here. GaNE measures the latency between two PCs on the same local network by sending a 100-byte packet over the network every 50 milliseconds (a scenario typical of online games).
The Killer Wireless-N 1102 absolutely crushed Intel's NIC on this benchmark, delivering average ping times of just 1.2ms on the 2.4GHz band, compared to 7.3ms for Intel's adapter. We saw similar results on the 5GHz band, with Bigfoot's card delivering average pings of 1.1ms compared to the Intel card's 10.9ms.
Winner: Bigfoot Killer Wireless-N
Round 4: Real-World File Transfer
For this test, we timed how long it took for each notebook to copy a 2GB file over the wireless network to a third computer hardwired to the router. We repeated the test three times on each notebook on each frequency and averaged the results. We expected these results to be relatively similar to the more synthetic Jperf test, but Bigfoot's card proved to be slightly faster than Intel's card on the 2.4GHz band—and it was significantly faster than Intel's card on the 5GHz band.
Winner: Bigfoot Killer Wireless-N
And the Winner Is…
It's actually a double win for Bigfoot's Killer Wireless-N 1102. The adapater scored resounding wins in three of four categories, and it's significantly less expensive than Intel's part—at least in CyberPower's configurations. You can't buy the part at retail, and Bigfoot can't dictate how much OEMs charge their customers, but CyberPower charges $15 to upgrade to Bigfoot's part, versus $26 for an upgrade to Intel's Centrino Ultimate-N 6300.
| Killer Wireless-N 1103 (2.4GHz) |
Intel Centrino Ultimate-N 6300 (2.4GHz) |
Killer Wireless-N 1103 (5GHz) |
Intel Centrino Ultimate-N 6300 (5GHz) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPerf TCP, Kitchen (Mb/s) | 79.8 | 88.5 | 147.0 | 140.0 |
| JPerf TCP, Patio (Mb/s) | 49.6 | 59.0 | 44.4 | 44.9 |
| NetPerf UDP (1,024-byte packets), Kitchen (Mb/s) |
102.1 |
103.2 | 163.4 | 155.5 |
| NetPerf UDP (1,472-byte packets), Kitchen (Mb/s) | 29.0 | 3.3 | 36.3 | 3.4 |
| 2GB File Transfer (sec) | 179.0 | 187.3 | 139.0 | 188.7 |
Best scores are bolded. We used a Linksys E4200 router for these benchmarks, which supports two spatial streams on its 2.4GHz radio, and three spatial streams on its 5GHz radio. In the Kitchen test, the router and client are 20 feet apart and separated by one interior wall. In the Patio test, the router and client are 38 feet apart and separated by one interior and one exterior wall.
Comments
Comments are closed on this article
![]()
asterix
December 24, 2011 at 6:51am
2GB file transfer: The results in the written article are the opposite way round from those in the table. Oh, and the slower result is highlighted as the winner in the table.
Which one is right? Surprising that at 5ghz a 2-stream client achieved 188Mbps at all, and 3-stream just 139Mbps. Or maybe its not just the writeup but the tests and results which are also all mixed up...
![]()
Gezzer
November 05, 2011 at 4:33am
Didn't I read this in a fairly old issue of MaxPC?
Slow news day?
![]()
ABouman
November 07, 2011 at 11:19am
Yes.
And no.
By that I mean, yes, you did read it in an old issue of Maximum PC (September). However, we don't typically publish Head to Head articles online. With the increasing moves to digital content, we decided to start including them on the website to gauge readers' interest. However, since it's not a news post, or a news item, it doesn't have anything to do with a "slow news day" or a fast one, either. So no, not a slow news day, just an attempt to increase the amount of feature content on the site.
![]()
Number Six
November 05, 2011 at 10:33am
Wow, thanks aarcane for the link! I just ordered one, so we'll know in a few days whether it is legit.
-Six
![]()
iceman08
November 05, 2011 at 10:48am
do tell if it is legitimate, please. I'm considering upgrading the wireless in my laptop
![]()
Number Six
November 05, 2011 at 10:50am
I ordered too quickly! Bigfoot has an improved version (the 1103). I just cancelled the order with AVA and ordered the new one through Amazon. :D
-Six
![]()
bloodgain
November 04, 2011 at 12:58pm
Just FYI, Mythlogic Computers sells them through Amazon for ~$46 shipped.
I've considered upgrading my Acer laptop/HTPC to a dual band card. This carries a premium price, but it is a premium card, and it's not really much more expensive than most other non-draft Wireless N cards. The Draft N stuff is pretty old, and doesn't match the performance of the new stuff.
![]()
sotoa
November 04, 2011 at 12:36pm
I would've liked to see a comparison with the Killer 1103 as well.
I almost thought 2x2 vs 3x3 wouldn't be a fair fight, but considering the router is a 2x2 on 2.4GHz, it doesn't matter much (as I understand it).
![]()
tekknyne
November 04, 2011 at 11:04am
Nice read and those prices are pretty attractive, but I'll just stick with my cheapo Realtek TYVM. Currently on public wi-fi downloading at 1 mb/s and couldn't be happier. By night, I'm just a simple level 85 Worgen (Tauren at heart) Druid. Think it would help with my healing!? :)
Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook
Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.


















