Busy household. Does Stream/WiFi Max hold up?

[Wurst1]

We've had Sky Q for several years (2TB Q main box, 2 x miniboxes, 1 x SR203 mesh-compatible hub). We also have Full Fibre 500 and into the house we get around 450mb down, and 60-65mb up. It works pretty well but isn't perfect - we have quite a busy household in terms of device usage.  Every device we have is connected via WiFi, apart from one miniboxes and one tv which are over ethernet.

We're considering changing to Sky Stream + Sky WiFi Max as in theory it will provide better support for multiple devices (as it is WiFi 6 and most of our devices are WiFi 6).

But - I'm concerned about reliability, stability, wifi coverage and the fact our entire household including the tvs will be be entirely reliant on and increase the demand on WiFi. At the moment the Q 'Mesh' system does a lot of the lifting in terms of tv, and it's also connected via satellite aerials.

I understand the main 2TB box would have to be swapped to a Stream "puck", as would the miniboxes. Our router is in the hallway downstairs, so all tvs are separated from the router by either a wall, or a floor, or both.

For those with a similar setup - how does it work in practice?

Can this system (Sky WiFi Max + Full Fibre 500 + Sky Stream) really support say, three tvs being watched live at the same time, plus laptops, mobiles etc being used on top?

Any input appreciated. Sky advisor persuaded us with the Sky WiFi Max router without telling us it wasn't compatible with the mesh system, which is annoying.

Thanks

FYI our current layout/setup:

[Chrisee · Accepted solution]

@Wurst1 in practice each Stream ouck cannot use more than 40Mb/s so bandwidth of your broadband connection should cope easily. However each unit requires a stable WiFi signal which the Sky Max hub together with WiFi extender pods, that can come with Sky's WiFi Max, should be able to provide. However the new WiFi system can be an issue in older homes with solid internal walls. .

When Sky launched their streaming service I made exactly to switch you plan. This was before Sky launched the new Sky Max hub so I bouught a cheap 3 unit Deco wifi system to replace my 3 Q boxes' WiFi, this proved reliable. When Sky launched their Max hub and pods I tried these but due to the layout of my home even with two pod extenders and help from a Sky engineer they gave worse coverage than my own WiFi system so I rejected the WiFi Max and reverted to my own units. With stable WiFi my three pucks and a Glass TV can all be used at the sametime and I still have ample bandwidth for other devices My WiFi system has paid for itself several times over as Indo not have to pay for WiFi Max.

[Wurst1]

Thanks again Chrisee. From everything I've read I'd anticipate a similar issue in our house. Seems a lot of people have more success with third party mesh routers and third party pucks/boosters, it's a shame they're very pricey compared to Sky's equipment costs.

I'd like Stream and strong wireless coverage throughout (who wouldn't?), but it sounds like changing to Stream + Wifi Max won't make a big difference to our current Sky Q setup and may even be worse without the mesh system. 

[2muchTV]

This is what works for my household with 7 TVs:

• third party mesh (over 60 connected devices)
• NOW TV (with Ultra Boost/ upto 3 TVs simultaneously)
• 2 x Apple TV boxes on primary/ best TVs, Roku or Firesticks on others

[CoffeeDrinker]

Running quite happily with the following setup all running off a WiFi 6 EE router with a 900Mb/s FTTP connection without boosters or mesh extenders:

• 2x Sky Glass TVs (often both in use concurrently)
• 2x Apple TV 4K boxes
• PS5 Pro
• XBOX Series S
• 3x iPhones
• iPad Pro
• 2x Macbook Air
• 4x HomePod/HomePod Minis
• Kindles, Apple Watches 

WiFi 6 is enough to handle the device concurrency so as long as you have a strong enough signal to allow a 40Mb/s signal to your Sky devices when you're watching, you should be good.