So the devices differ only marginally from the 500 family. The form is more pleasing (but a matter of taste), the LEDs are now smaller and "cool white" bright and just switched off as its predecessor. Well, I think the idea is to turn the network jacks so, so that the "locking lug" on the RJ45 connector now facing forward rather than to the wall as its predecessors. In order for a change of the Ethernet cable is much easier.
The installation in the already existing network went just unspectacular. It fell to only that I (500 to 650) in the Devolo Cockpit only saw the new adapter for replacement of the central adapter and add the "old" again by hand had to. It paid off when you have the SecurityIDs the adapter stored. Incidentally, it is a nice idea to be able to scan to the rear panel via QR code - even if the effort to get this then in the PC is probably comparable to typing.
Let's talk about speed: the 500s or 650s an adapter not even reach these speeds in the shortest connections, has probably already got around and need not be mentioned etxtra. I lost my power now so modified so that two 500 Adapter (incl. The central to "feed") were exchanged for the 650s. In addition, there is a 200WLAN upstairs and a 500 WLAN mini downstairs.
The first test was referring to whether any compatibility issues similar to the question is in mixed mode. The good news: no problems. The more theoretiche question whether slower adapter possibly all PowerLAN line reactors on the lowest common speed is refuted by a few tests.
The second question was: Does the fact that the new adapters are now 1000Baser-T Ethernet ports and no longer "just" Fast Ethernet any advantage? After all, you have multiple adapters in operating all of which can each 100MB / s, thus exceeding the central network center could (it's like a star up) limit with 100Base-T might. Answer: In all of the tests that I could perform (with a gigabit switch behind which summarizes over LinkAgregation several Gigibitanschlüsse to and thus more bandwidth provides) were no differences / improvements be made out here.
Now to the actual test - the speed in PowerLAN:
The interference-prone route improved slightly from 100 to about 130 Mbit / s - this value when load (copy audio files to Sooloos) was held while he as a media player to 110 MBit / s decreased during operation of the PS3.
The 200 AV Wireless upstairs changed virtually no (112 to 115) and the 500 WiFi also stayed with his already quite good 220 - 230MBit / s.
That summed up: For the already known "problem port" to TV / AV System / PS3 among other things was a small improvement in measurable - even under load and after switching on of different consumers and for the other adapter my net was probably already largely trouble-free and therefore by not improve filter technology of 650s.
In terms of a recommendation so I would definitely advise newcomers to the 650s and WLAN but to wait or through the 500 WiFi cover mini.
Switching from the 500 family should be clear that significant benefits may arise only in problem situations and must therefore probably try unfortunately.
Small note still edge: owners of newer Fritz boxes seen in the menu / the home network display the PowerLAN Adapter - including speeds etc..
If you gave a few tips or decision support this review, I would appreciate a positive rating. Many Thanks!