MANUEL LOPEZ AND CORI JACKSON
In an era dominated by seamless connectivity and multiple smart devices, the promise of flawless Internet coverage has led to the rise of mesh networking systems (MNSs). These innovative systems offer a transformative alternative to traditional single-router setups, ensuring that Wi-Fi dead zones are a thing of the past. But with enhanced connectivity comes a new set of challenges, from higher upfront costs to energy efficiency concerns. A recent study conducted by the California Lighting Technology Center (CLTC) dives deep into the performance, energy usage, and consumer implications of MNSs versus traditional routers.
MNSs are engineered to solve a common frustration: inconsistent Wi-Fi coverage in homes, especially larger or multi-story residences. Unlike traditional routers that rely on a single device, mesh systems use multiple interconnected nodes to distribute wireless signals evenly. This approach eliminates the need for range extenders and reduces the complexity of setup while providing superior connectivity. Aesthetics also play a role, with mesh nodes designed to blend seamlessly into home décor—gone are the days of clunky, antenna-ridden routers. The CLTC study analyzed 60 MNS products from eight manufacturers, focusing on systems featuring the latest Wi-Fi protocols—Wi-Fi 6, 6E, and the emerging Wi-Fi 7. Researchers evaluated everything from setup experiences to energy consumption under real-world conditions. The findings not only highlight the growing popularity of these systems but also their potential drawbacks, particularly in terms of cost and energy use.
CLTC’s research highlights a key trade-off between MNS performance and its energy consumption. While MNSs provide reliable and widespread coverage, adding more nodes significantly increases power usage. For instance, the study found that expanding a mesh system from one to three nodes nearly tripled its power consumption. Active data transmission, such as streaming or downloading, further exacerbates this issue, with energy usage spiking by an average of 44% during high-traffic conditions.
The report also noted disparities among products. Older Wi-Fi generations, such as Wi-Fi 5, tended to consume less energy, while newer protocols offered better speeds and coverage but at higher energy costs. Surprisingly, one Wi-Fi 6E system demonstrated lower energy consumption than its Wi-Fi 6 counterparts, showcasing the importance of product-specific design optimizations. This suggests that consumers cannot rely solely on protocol generation as a predictor of energy efficiency and should instead consider manufacturer-specific performance metrics.
Ease of setup and use are significant selling points for MNSs. Most systems rely on mobile apps for configuration, guiding users through installation with minimal technical know-how. However, the reliance on apps isn’t without drawbacks. Some systems require both an app and a web interface for full functionality, adding unnecessary complexity to what should be a streamlined experience. One tested system even locked pre-paired nodes to its setup, preventing users from removing or rearranging them—a limitation that undermines the promise of flexibility that MNSs typically offer.
Moreover, the lack of universal user interface standards means experiences can vary widely between systems. Some MNSs provide robust apps with comprehensive settings, while others limit key features to web interfaces, requiring users to switch between platforms for full control. For less techsavvy users, this dual-interface requirement can be a significant hurdle, complicating basic tasks like renaming Wi-Fi networks or managing connected devices.
Photos: Adrian Ang, CLTC
A CLTC engineer connecting a network traffic generator to the networking equipment testbed.
Connecting a traditional router to the testbed to measure energy consumption.
Adjusting power analyzer settings to accurately capture device performance.
CLTC researchers identified critical gaps in current industry standards. Existing voluntary guidelines, like ANSI/CTA-2049-A, Determination of Small Network Equipment Average Energy Consumption, only measure single-node idle power consumption. This approach fails to capture the real-world energy impact of multi-node MNS configurations, particularly during active usage. The report advocates for updated standards to include multi-node assessments and traffic-based scenarios, providing consumers with more accurate energy consumption metrics.
Another key recommendation is for manufacturers to promote incremental deployment. Instead of encouraging users to activate all nodes at once, a staged approach would allow households to determine the minimum number of nodes needed, reducing unnecessary energy consumption. Such an approach could also save consumers money, as they might discover that fewer nodes are sufficient for their specific coverage needs.
The study also calls for greater transparency in marketing materials. Many MNS products advertise maximum coverage without clarifying that these figures often assume ideal conditions, such as open spaces with minimal interference. Clearer guidance on how factors like wall materials and furniture placement affect performance would help consumers make better-informed decisions.
Cost is another critical factor influencing consumer adoption of MNSs. While these systems generally require higher initial investments, multi-node bundles often provide better value. For example, Wi-Fi 6 products emerged as the most costeffective in the study, with three-node packages offering substantial savings compared to equivalent standalone routers. However, the newest protocols, Wi-Fi 6E and Wi-Fi 7, come with steeper price tags, making them less accessible to budgetconscious consumers.
To understand the financial implications better, researchers compared MNS pricing using two approaches. The first assumed that each mesh node offered the same coverage and performance as a standalone router. Under this model, the per-unit cost of MNSs was often lower. The second approach compared the cost of a complete MNS package to a single high-performance router. Here, MNS packages were consistently more expensive, with price increases ranging from 35% for Wi-Fi 6 products to over 200% for Wi-Fi 7 systems.
These findings suggest that while MNSs can offer long-term value, especially in larger homes, they may not be the best choice for smaller residences or consumers with modest networking needs. In such cases, a highquality traditional router could provide comparable performance at a fraction of the cost.
With growing awareness of environmental issues, the energy efficiency of home devices is an increasingly important consideration. CLTC’s research highlights significant variations in the energy consumption of MNSs, particularly when systems are expanded or subjected to heavy traffic. Idle power consumption for single nodes ranged from around 4 watts for the most efficient system to over 9 watts for the least efficient. When all three nodes were active, total power usage tripled in some cases, emphasizing the need for consumers to carefully consider their actual coverage needs.
Researchers also compared MNSs to a traditional router and range extender combination. While the traditional setup generally consumed less power, it offered inferior coverage and performance. This trade-off suggests that for consumers prioritizing energy efficiency, careful planning and incremental deployment of MNS nodes are essential.
To address these issues, manufacturers should explore energy-saving features such as adaptive power modes that reduce consumption when nodes are idle or underutilized. Updating industry standards to account for multi-node configurations and active usage scenarios would also help align technological advancements with sustainability goals.
The findings underline the need for further research and innovation in MNS design. Advanced modeling to understand real-world energy usage, improved antenna technology, and better consumer guidance are essential to system optimization. Field testing in diverse home environments could provide valuable insights into how factors like building materials, device placement, and user behavior impact performance and energy consumption.
The emergence of new protocols like Wi-Fi 7 offer exciting possibilities for MNSs. With dramatically increased data rates and wider channel bandwidths, these systems have the potential to revolutionize home networking. However, their higher costs and energy demands mean that manufacturers must prioritize efficiency and affordability to ensure widespread adoption.
Consumer education will also play a critical role in the future of MNSs. Clear, standardized metrics for comparing MNSs to traditional routers, as well as step-by-step guides for optimal deployment, would empower users to make informed decisions. Retailers and manufacturers could collaborate on interactive tools that help consumers visualize coverage areas and estimate energy usage based on their specific home layouts.
MNSs represent a significant leap forward in home connectivity, offering unparalleled coverage and reliability. However, their adoption is not without challenges, particularly in terms of energy efficiency, cost, and complexity. CLTC’s research provides a roadmap for addressing these issues, from updating industry standards to promoting consumer education and incremental deployment.
As the demand for seamless connectivity continues to grow, the evolution of MNSs will depend on balancing performance, affordability, and environmental sustainability. By aligning technological advancements with these priorities, MNSs can fulfill their potential as the future of home networking, delivering seamless Internet access while minimizing their impact on wallets and the planet alike.
THE AUTHORS | Manuel Lopez is an R&D engineer IV at the California Lighting Technology Center (CLTC). His work includes designing and testing engineering solutions for efficient lighting and control systems, as well as collecting and analyzing data for these systems.
Cori Jackson is responsible for planning, budgeting, scheduling, and monitoring CLTC research projects. For several years, she managed CLTC’s Demonstrations program, facilitating the installation of leading-edge lighting technologies in more than 100 sites throughout California and other areas of the U.S.
Mesh networking systems (MNSs) have significant applications in residential smart lighting systems, offering enhanced connectivity, seamless integration, and improved energy efficiency.
1. Reliable connectivity across the home: Smart lighting systems often rely on wireless protocols (e.g., Wi-Fi, Zigbee, or Bluetooth) to connect bulbs, switches, and hubs. MNSs provide a robust backbone for these devices by:
Eliminating dead zones: Mesh networks ensure consistent Wi-Fi coverage across the home, even in areas where traditional routers struggle to maintain a signal. This is crucial for smart lighting devices in remote rooms, basements, or large spaces.
Facilitating low-latency connections and ensuring that lighting systems respond instantly to user commands, whether issued through a smartphone app, voice assistant, or automated schedule.
2. Centralized control and integration: MNSs can simplify the control and integration of smart lighting systems by:
Connecting all devices: A mesh network allows all smart lighting devices to connect to a single network without needing additional range extenders or separate hubs.
Creating a unified smart home ecosystem: Many MNSs are compatible with smart home platforms like Amazon Alexa, Google Assistant, or Apple HomeKit. This integration enables users to manage lighting alongside other smart home devices (thermostats, cameras, etc.) seamlessly through a central app or voice commands.
3. Scalability for larger or complex homes:
Scalable coverage: MNSs allow homeowners to add nodes as needed, ensuring that every light, regardless of its location, remains connected.
Support for high-density devices: Modern MNSs can handle dozens of connected devices without compromising performance, which is ideal for homes with numerous smart bulbs and switches.
4. Enhanced automation and energy efficiency: Mesh networks improve the functionality of smart lighting by:
Enabling automation: MNSs ensure that automation schedules (e.g., dimming lights at sunset or turning lights off when no one is home) are executed reliably across all devices.
Providing adaptive energy savings: By maintaining strong and consistent connections, MNSs reduce the likelihood of devices disconnecting and defaulting to higher power states.
5. Integration with Zigbee and Thread protocols: Some MNSs, like Google Nest Wi-Fi, include built-in support for Zigbee or Thread protocols, which are widely used in smart lighting systems.
Zigbee compatibility: Allows direct communication with Zigbee-based smart bulbs, reducing the need for additional hubs.
Thread networks: Thread-based smart lighting systems (e.g., Matter-compatible devices) benefit from the reliability and low power consumption of MNS nodes.
6. Future-proofing smart lighting systems: As lighting technology evolves, MNSs will:
Support advanced features: Emerging technologies (dynamic lighting scenes, circadian friendly lighting, and higher-resolution dimming) require stable, high-bandwidth connections, which MNSs provide.
Adapt to expanding smart home ecosystems: MNSs ensure that smart lighting systems remain compatible with new devices and protocols, protecting a homeowner’s investment.