>>>>I was wondering if anybody has tried a dual band Internet routers and you find that they benefit the speed?
>>>
>>>Haven't tried one myself, but they should be better, as long as your device (laptop etc.) supports the router's second band.
>>>
>>>http://reviews.cnet.com/best-wireless-routers/
>>>
>>>What are you doing, that you require high-speed wireless LAN connectivity? As always, if you want high performance AND high reliability, run a cable.
>>
>>Do you know how to find out if a computer (laptop, iPad) supports the 5Ghz band (I understand that this is the second/extra band that these routers support)?
>
>Check the specs - the wireless/connectivity section will probably say "dual-band" if the device supports it. If not, in some cases you can add a dual-band wireless adapter e.g. Google [dual-band usb].
>
>But again, look closely at your use case. If all you want to do is browse the Web or download from the Internet, any wireless connection faster than your WAN link will be fine. Typical broadband these days might be 10Mbit/sec. Even an average wireless-G connection might be 20-24Mbit/sec, and wireless-N should be better than that, without having to go dual-band. Fast wireless is really only beneficial for devices on your LAN communicating peer-to-peer, unless you have an extremely fast WAN connection. If you know your local 2.4GHz band is very crowded, or subject to significant interference, then dual-band may be useful. But to repeat, if you want both speed and reliability, run cables.

Thank you very much for the detailed answer. I suppose since the current router (which must be 2.4 GHz) works then buying even a single band router 802.11n (which will be still 2.4GHz) will improve the speed. My cable company (ISP) says that we get 12 Mb connection (I have not tested it though). This is for home use, not work, so reliability is not that important (not for my wife though <g>).