Wi-LE: Can WiFi replace Bluetooth? (2019) [pdf]

Re:Wi-LE: Can WiFi replace Bluetooth? (2019) [pdf] by jnurmine on Saturday February 27, 2021 @06:42PM (#26289222)

I hope not. For one thing, Bluetooth consumes less battery.

Also, when the topic of Bluetooth comes up, many people complain that they have Bluetooth issues. Sadly, some manufacturers do not care about interoperability. Maybe I'm just lucky but I don't even recall when I would've had issues with Bluetooth. I use several devices practically every day (car, headphones, speakers).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wi-LE: Can WiFi replace Bluetooth? (2019) [pdf] by kumarvvr on Saturday February 27, 2021 @09:05PM (#26290018)

As the paper explains. At the actual energy consumption level, the modulation techniques used by WiFi are about 3 times more efficient than Bluetooth.

The whole premise of the article is that this allows for efficient use of WiFi hardware to emulate BLE like behaviour.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wi-LE: Can WiFi replace Bluetooth? (2019) [pdf] by dinero_rojo on Saturday February 27, 2021 @06:50PM (#26289285)

At least read the abstract before commenting, man...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wi-LE: Can WiFi replace Bluetooth? (2019) [pdf] by jnurmine on Saturday February 27, 2021 @06:57PM (#26289316)

I did, man.

Table 1.

  Wi-Le Energy/packet: 84 uJ
  Wi-Le Idle current: 2.5 uA

  BLE Energy/packet: 71 uJ
  BLE Idle current: 1.1 uA

You can see this from Figure 4 as well.

So, like I wrote, Bluetooth consumes less battery.

In addition there are unsolved issues, which are likely to add to the overall consumption.

Edit: formatting

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wi-LE: Can WiFi replace Bluetooth? (2019) [pdf] by theta_d on Saturday February 27, 2021 @08:02PM (#26289711)

> We believe that an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) implementation will have much lower power consumption.

Line from right above the table so it could possibly go the other direction and use less.

[ Parent | on HN ]