Bluetooth mesh , Thread, and Zigbee are popular mesh networking standards used to add wireless connectivity to building and home automation products. Silicon Labs conducted mesh network performance testing to help developers better understand difficult-to-predict wireless behavior and make more informed choices when designing products for the IoT.
Webinar: Benchmarking Bluetooth Mesh, Thread, and Zigbee Network Performance
Learn about performance results and additional criteria for selecting the appropriate mesh networking technology.
Examining Mesh Networking Technology
Networking performance characteristics such as throughput, latency and the impact of network size on scalability and reliability are important factors to consider. Additional factors such as technologies used in different ecosystems, gateway interfaces and cloud connectivity should also be factored in when making a technology selection.
| Bluetooth Mesh | Thread | Zigbee | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market Focus | Lighting and Home Automation | Commercial/Industrial | Home Automation, Lighting, Metering |
| Maturity | Established 2017 |
Established 2015 | Established 2003 |
| Application Layer |
Native Mesh Model | Flexibile support for IP-based application layers like dotdot, OCF and Nest Weave | Comprehensive Zigbee Cluster Library (ZCL) |
| IPv6 |
No | Yes | No |
| Cloud Connectivity |
Smartphone (Temporary) Gateway | Border Router Gateway | Gateway |
| Ecosystems |
None | Nest | Amazon, IKEA, Phillips HUE, Samsung SmartThings, Lowes Iris, Wink, Cox, Rogers, Deutsch Telekom (Qivicon) and others |
| Routing |
Managed Flooding | Full Routing | Full Routing |
| Additional Notes |
Beaconing, Direct Phone Connectivity | — | Most Mature |
Whitepaper: Selecting the Appropriate Wireless Mesh Networking Technology
Examine the key factors such as technical strengths, maturity in the marketplace and established deployments to determine the appropriate technology for your needs.
Comparing The Performance of Mesh Networking Standards
Testing Network Performance
Tests were conducted using Silicon Labs’ Wireless Gecko SoC platform capable of running Bluetooth Mesh, Thread, Zigbee, and Proprietary protocols. Silicon Labs Bluetooth Mesh, Thread, and Zigbee software stacks were utilized. The test environment was a commercial office building with active Wi-Fi and Zigbee networks in range. Wireless test clusters were deployed in hallways, meeting rooms, offices, and open areas.
Benchmarking Results
Latency over Four Hops
- All protocols provide similar latency for very small payloads
- Thread fragmentation (6LowPAN) achieves the best efficiency and latency performance as payload size increases
- Zigbee has good efficiency but some application layer fragmentation
- Bluetooth mesh latency degrades as payload size increases due to small packet size and resulting segmentation
Large Network with Small Payload
- Thread performs best with latency up to 100 ms
- Zigbee performs well – most packets received with 80 ms latency, spreading up to 130 ms
- Bluetooth mesh latency peaks at 60 ms, spreading past 250 ms
- All 192 nodes were Bluetooth mesh relays and no relay optimization was used
Large Network with Moderate Payload
- Thread performs the best with latency spreading up to 100 ms
- Zigbee performs well – most packets received with 80 ms latency, spreading up to 130 ms
- Bluetooth mesh latency peaks at 60 ms, spreading past 250 ms
- All 192 nodes were Bluetooth mesh relays and no relay optimization was used
