I would suggest try changing channel id in your Wifi. It has been awhile iirc you can change channels like on Wireless landline phones.
Valve index controllers, according to spec, use 2.4GHz. Which is one reason why I switched to 5Ghz - but the problem remains.
Preamplifier clipping or parasitic rectification could explain this. Your WiFi device may use the same input devices for both 2.4GHz and 5GHz, so strong signals on either band nearby could overwhelm both. Much less likely, but also possible, inadequate harmonic filtering, or use of both 2.4GHz/5GHz, might also cause such interference.
With PiTool, HMD, etc, connected to a different computer, if WiFi speed still drops when controllers are turned on, then such radio interference is likely the problem.
Also worth trying using your WiFi with a much poorer antenna, so the preamplifier does not get overwhelmed. Some WiFi devices also allow the preamplifier to be disabled for exactly this.
All that said, I still think some weird software/hardware glitch is probably to blame.
2 Likes
SweViver, as I explained above in my post I experienced the issue on my old USB WiFi setup. And now my current setup is PCIe WiFi. I can produce ping tests for you that very clearly indicate the issue starts and ends with Pitool and itâs interaction with WiFi. Thanks for weighing in. @SweViver
3 Likes
Wifi channels are mini bandwidths. This Link explains a bit about them
Channel Checking
Another link
Only quick skimmed them.
1 Like
Preamplifier clipping could easily affect the receiverâs entire passband, all channels, all bands, simultaneously.
1 Like
I donât doubt that. Just something folks with other wireless components causing interference as described with turning on Index Controllers can try and see if it helps.
I have one friend that it is best not to have her around when trying to debug a things as she has interesting effects on wearable devices. 
1 Like
Hello,
Thank you for the ping!
We have asked Alex to take a look at this with other engineers.
Maybe they will contact with you guys regarding the required logs.
Sincerely.
2 Likes
Well, I disabled 2.4Ghz on my computer because otherwise I did not have full control which one was used. So only 5Ghz is active (2.4Ghz networks are not seen at all). But I donât understand it on HW level, still it would be strange if 2.4Ghz would interfere even when it is disabled, that would be strange design and completeley negate the purpose of 5Ghz.
Possibly the repeater could be affected, that one has both channels active, but it is not in the same room.
1 Like
Well, on 2.4Ghz yes, you only have three âseparateâ bands - channels 1,7 and 13 (I am in Europe, USA does not have 12 and 13 so they would go 1,6,11 which is still enough separation).
On 5Ghz it is different though and each channel has itâs own full 20Mhz range + small extra. So with 5Ghz different channels should not overlap. Anyway that is not a problem currently, I donât have anything competing in 5Ghz and also other visible networks are very few and very weak (as 5Ghz penetrates much worse than 2.4Ghz and there are much less devices using it).
1 Like
Figured might still be worth a try even though does seem odd with IC controllers on 2.4ghz for your to xp wifi issues on 5ghz
It could be like someone blowing a really loud high-pitched whistle in your ear, while you are listening for a whisper. Sure, the frequencies may be different, but when your eardrums are shatteredâŚ
Purpose of 5GHz is to provide more spectrum, for more high-bandwidth WiFi connections, not so much to tolerate non-WiFi devices. VR controllers may be emitting far more powerful bursts of energy than some sensitive WiFi devices input amplifiers can use. This causes those amplifiers to basically stop working as designed.
FCC (and similar organizations) officially seem to rather intend WiFi frequencies to be essentially useless, having originally allocated them for such things as microwave ovens. The rules seem to be all about making everything on these frequencies look like miscellaneous noise, rather than serve any functional purpose. Cellular protocols are not designed well enough to be much better eitherâŚ
So, with WiFi, on any frequencies, officially, it seems you are lucky if it works at all. On top of that, you are trying to get VR controllers - still experimental stuff - to work in the same room.
Now, maybe that should be another reason to go get Ethernet.
Can you get a traffic trace on the wifi interface, when PiTool is on and off?
It seems to me that it would have to generate a lot of traffic in order to block the interface this way.
The other possibility is, it uses some non-standard way of working with the network API and stalls the whole stack. Debugging this will be a bit more challenging though.
2 Likes
Would you say that Bluetooth is still experimental?
1 Like
Have this issue on multiple pcs and would be willing to help with log files, ping results etc.
While i agree usb-wifi adapters are not cutting edge, Pimax would be shooting themselves in the foot by requiring everyone to have top of the line everything to run their headsets. I have many a VR HMD and none are incompatible with my internet solution but Pimax.
There are also reports of this happening on certain motherboards with integrated WiFi. I have my doubts that incompatibility entirely stems from our WiFi solutions being worse than others. That same argument dragged for months about USB controllers when many of us had stutter issues. Bottom line is if the price of entry to run the 5k+ is 5,000 USD thatâd be an issue for the vast majority of people.
1 Like
lol thank you, I was wondering where the lag spikes were coming from using the Q2 wireless 
From Pitool lol
3 Likes
I get your point - Bluetooth has been around for a while and WiFi has compatibility features for it. However, Bluetooth can be configured to do things in vastly different ways, and the controllerâs use of it is definitely experimental. I can easily imagine some Bluetooth serial port configured to send full-power burst transmissions. WiFiâs Bluetooth compatibility feature can do more harm than good as well.
That said, I do consider Bluetooth, WiFi, and most cellular protocols themselves experimental. Most, if not all, of these consumer radio protocols, are many orders of magnitude less robust than they easily could be. To the point there are well known denial-of-service exploits.
None of these consumer radio protocols should be completely relied upon for anything remotely real-time, like VR. At minimum, WiFiBroadcast (sending raw WiFi packets to receivers in monitor mode) would be a better way to go.
1 Like
So in that respect while it seems AntVR died. They had the better idea of controllers wired to headset(definitely fixes battery life).
I think Nvidia had this wifi option on there sheild controller. However they added the hook you could only use wifi on the gamepad if you were running an Nvidia gpu.
No, absolutely not.
Correct idea is coded LED transmissions to cameras, as Oculus did, then to go one step further with a dedicated camera-to-position converter box (instead of lots of USB3). Inherently long battery life (months per AA), low cost per tracker, unambiguous signaling, spatially filtered communication.
Add a <1deg laser grid projector, and you would have precise enough tracking to use for HOTAS replacement (on that count at least).
Imho for those into Piloting/driving sims nothing really can beat real controllers designed for simulators. Flight, Construction, car, etcâŚ
At least if you want a more quality authentic feel/xp.
With WiFi becoming more the way these days things need to be made compatible. The need for wireless solutions is becoming more common place.