does it even matter what router you choose?

[Fardringle]

Not really. It's all solid state. A soho router just doesn't stop working.

It's almost always user error. Blaming hardware is the last step in network troubleshooting. Not the first.

I disagree (which doesn't happen too often with your posts). User error is certainly the first culprit, but not the only one. I do a lot of contract IT work for small businesses and home office users and over the years I have seen quite a few cheap SOHO routers stop working properly (losing connections/losing settings/intermittent errors) that were clearly hardware/firmware faults, or stop working completely to the point where they won't even power on. Granted, it doesn't happen a lot, but it definitely does happen, especially with "bargain" junk that someone pulled off of a shelf at their local department store.

 

[Arg Clin]

Fianlly replaced my old D-link DIR655 with a Linksy EA6500. The D-link just wan't cutting itanymore in terms of range (after moving to something bigger). It's like day and night in terms of range and speed.

Maybe not a fair comparison, but I'm convinced to some point that you get what you pay for.

 

[JackMDS]

but I'm convinced to some point that you get what you pay for.

MonoPrice

50 FT 24AWG Cat6 550MHz UTP Ethernet - Black - $7.33

Vs.

Staples 50' CAT6 Patch Cable - Black

Item: 837375 Model: 18786/SNC650BLK - $46.99




-----------
It is wise to let go of 20th century cliches.

 

[RLGL]

I had an older Dlink. I could not connect to the guest network but to the main was ok.
It was replaced with an Asus N66R, The differences were noticeable. Even the guest network works correctly. BTW there are 12 devices connected at the minute.

 

[Goros]

"Home" routers definitely offer different throughput depending on the model. I've used a linksys/cisco rvs4000 with a wap4400n, a linksys/Cisco e4200v1 running dd-wrt, and now a netgear wndr4500.

The rvs4000 had garbage throughput and got HOT. It had issues streaming netflix 1080p (among other things). The e4200 was great on throughput (at the time) but I burned out the wireless inside from having the antennas too hot (default settings range was absolute garbage).

This new one is going strong and has great everything, and gets the job done. It lives in the basement and I get a decent n wireless signal in the master bedroom 60 feet away and 10 feet down.

There are definite gains to be had from focusing on high throughput routers, especially if you have purchased your own docsis 3.0 cable modem with a gig port supporting it.

I'm the first to admit I'm a networking noob and have never worked on a managed switch or ever been in IT as a career, but I noticed definite gains in performance with my "home" router being upgraded.

Even file transfers between pc's doubled in speed without me changing a single driver or setting between them (avg 100-150MB/s now sustained depending on if I'm writing to and from ssd's or to a HDD from an ssd or vice versa).

 

[KlokWyze]

It's not just the WAP, it's how you config it.

You can boost the signal of these cheap $30 WAPs w/ tons of firmware out there. Setting up VPNs are incredibly easy. That being said, I think it's likely that premium h/w costs more, but even then, that stuff can fail just like the cheapos.

 

[KlokWyze]

MonoPrice

50 FT 24AWG Cat6 550MHz UTP Ethernet - Black - $7.33

Vs.

Staples 50' CAT6 Patch Cable - Black

Item: 837375 Model: 18786/SNC650BLK - $46.99




-----------
It is wise to let go of 20th century cliches.

Yeah lol. Consumer B&M stores are rip offs for certain products and they will continue to be as most consumers are ignorant.

It's funny how much stuff is simply recycled, including new, basically unused, Cat6e cables, perfectly fine last gen servers, enterprise network gear, etc.. We used to make our own copper cables at this one place, but they just decided to buy bulk prefab cables through monoprice because it's simply more cost effective, reliable, etc.

 

[marvinbower]

Sorry to revive this after 4 years. But I think the topic is still and maybe more important now than then.

What It's missing is quantitative data to say "this router A is better than that router B"

I understand the fact that a better router will deal better with massive data spread between many devices and I understand that the difference is in the "massive" and in the "many".

But can we be more "quantitative" and introduce a better way to compare routers?

 

[VirtualLarry]

and introduce a better way to compare routers?

Yeah, support for third-party firmware. This also generally means less esoteric hardware (no multiple seperate CPUs / offload co-procs), though not necessarily worse-performing (single strong multi-core CPU).

I'm a fan of Asus AC66U and AC68R/U. Looking into LinkSys WRT3200ACM.

 

[mv2devnull]

But can we be more "quantitative" and introduce a better way to compare routers?

Do you mean a set of benchmarks that you run on as many devices as possible (like AT does for CPU's and GPU's) and then tabulate the results?

SmallNetBuilders appears to do something like that.

 

[mnewsham]

But can we be more "quantitative" and introduce a better way to compare routers?

I like to compare WAN-LAN and LAN-WAN throughput as a general indication of the quality of the router.

If it can't achieve 1gbps WAN throughput I wouldn't want to use it anyway. Having a 1gbps ISP really makes you pay a bit more attention to your network bottlenecks.

 

[marvinbower]

Do you mean a set of benchmarks that you run on as many devices as possible (like AT does for CPU's and GPU's) and then tabulate the results?

SmallNetBuilders appears to do something like that.

Thanks.
SNBuilders does exactly what I was looking for.

But I'd like to see those values/benchmarks on any website selling routers. From AMZ to the manufacturer page itself.

It seems to me that the features described are still too much qualitative (great performance to watch your fav IPTV !!) than quantitative

 

[Burner27]

Used pfSense exclusively for years, never an issue. Can do more than consumer level routers if that's what you need. Ran it on top end hardware (which was a mistake since it didn't need all that horsepower), and have an AC router in WAP mode to handle Wifi. Switched to Meraki MX64 + MR33 setup (since I got it for free). Works well, sips electricity, and is quite adept at handling threats.

 

[jackstar7]

Looking into LinkSys WRT3200ACM.

I haven't futzed with it, but I can vouch that this one has been solid and stable for me compared to a few other attempts at finding a viable router for my house.

Will be using this for as long as it is viable and then will look primarily at its modern equivalent should I need to replace it in a few years.

 

[razel]

But I'd like to see those values/benchmarks on any website selling routers. From AMZ to the manufacturer page itself.

Good luck getting true facts with that... actually with any product in general. SMB tells you everything you'd want know via a lab test. Their router chart isn't the easiest to use at 1st but once you get the hang of it, it's unbeatable.

However, even if you do charts and graphs once you bring it home it won't be the same. There is no one router perfect for every home. As a moderator here once put it (and maybe still does) perfect WiFi for the home is like a fitted suit.

If you are interested in coverage you really need to do the sampling and work yourself. You maybe surprised at how easy it can be sometimes. Merely moving a router inches or even rotating it can make a difference. In most of my family and friends homes, simply elevating the router made the most difference. Hell even you and whether your body is between your measuring device and the router makes a difference. You are mostly water and 2.4G (microwaves) interact most with water.

 

[freeskier93]

I like to compare WAN-LAN and LAN-WAN throughput as a general indication of the quality of the router.

If it can't achieve 1gbps WAN throughput I wouldn't want to use it anyway. Having a 1gbps ISP really makes you pay a bit more attention to your network bottlenecks.

Having a gigabit connection is what opened my eyes to the difference between WAN to LAN (and NAT) compared to LAN to LAN.

The only reason majority of the consumer junk can market itself as a "gigabit router" is because of its LAN speeds. WAN to LAN is a whole different ball game and very few consumer SOHO options are up to the task. What's worse is the consumer options that can handle a gigabit connection are painfully overpriced.

Don't even get me started on reliability...

I don't even have a gigabit connection anymore and I'll never go back to consumer hardware.

 

[JackMDS]

Thanks.
SNBuilders does exactly what I was looking for.

But I'd like to see those values/benchmarks on any website selling routers. From AMZ to the manufacturer page itself.

It seems to me that the features described are still too much qualitative (great performance to watch your fav IPTV !!) than quantitative

I am afraid that the only solution is the Run for Office in Congress and hope that you can enforce something like this through legislation.

 

[marvinbower]

Having a gigabit connection is what opened my eyes to the difference between WAN to LAN (and NAT) compared to LAN to LAN.

The only reason majority of the consumer junk can market itself as a "gigabit router" is because of its LAN speeds. WAN to LAN is a whole different ball game and very few consumer SOHO options are up to the task. What's worse is the consumer options that can handle a gigabit connection are painfully overpriced.

Don't even get me started on reliability...

I don't even have a gigabit connection anymore and I'll never go back to consumer hardware.

Could you elaborate more on the WAN to LAN issues and comparison btw consumer/soho rt.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Thanks.
SNBuilders does exactly what I was looking for.

But I'd like to see those values/benchmarks on any website selling routers. From AMZ to the manufacturer page itself.

It seems to me that the features described are still too much qualitative (great performance to watch your fav IPTV !!) than quantitative

That's marketing for you.

The guy selling the less capable router for cheaper has no incentive to offer benchmarks showing how mediocre his product is. Especially since most people won't understand what those benchmarks actually mean.

 

[bononos]

Could you elaborate more on the WAN to LAN issues and comparison btw consumer/soho rt.

I think what it means in simple terms is that downloading from the isp is choked by consumer grade firmware because of lack of features like hardware NAT. A typical home user with a 5-80Mb dl speed is not going to notice the difference however.

 

[mnewsham]

I think what it means in simple terms is that downloading from the isp is choked by consumer grade firmware because of lack of features like hardware NAT. A typical home user with a 5-80Mb dl speed is not going to notice the difference however.

Correct, but ISPs like my own are making it far more apparent to more consumers. My ISP for new customers in most of it's larger cities and suburbs now only offers two speed tiers.

50/50mbps for $39.99
or
1/1gbps for $69.99


Between those two options, most people will stick with 50/50, but anyone who needs more, say a family of 5 who really needs more than 50mbps, instead of just getting 100 or 150mbps, the lowest they can get is 1gbps.

So more and more heavy users are getting access to 1gbps and thankfully the ISP provided router can handle 1gbps WAN-LAN throughput, but since you're allowed to use your own router if you want, there are lots of people quickly finding out their favorite router simply can't handle full 1gbps WAN throughput. Right now the options for consumer routers that can handle those speeds are fairly limited and you can't just go out and buy any router you want without doing some research to see what kind of performance it can actually handle.

 

[bononos]

.......
So more and more heavy users are getting access to 1gbps and thankfully the ISP provided router can handle 1gbps WAN-LAN throughput, but since you're allowed to use your own router if you want, there are lots of people quickly finding out their favorite router simply can't handle full 1gbps WAN throughput. Right now the options for consumer routers that can handle those speeds are fairly limited and you can't just go out and buy any router you want without doing some research to see what kind of performance it can actually handle.

So what are some of the better consumer routers? Do they require flashing to aftermarket firmware?

 

[mnewsham]

So what are some of the better consumer routers? Do they require flashing to aftermarket firmware?

Well you have routers like the Nighthawk X6S which specifically advertises 1gbps WAN to LAN speeds in it's feature set.
Beyond that you have the Ubiquiti Unifi Security Gateway that can manage 930-940mbps WAN to LAN throughput with hardware NAT offload on.

I have no experience with flashing aftermarket firmware particularly, if i want that much control i'd probably run a pfsense box.

Small net builder's testing is really the best way to tell if a given router can achieve 1gbps WAN throughput, sadly since they don't test every router out there, you wont always be able to check, but it's a safe bet to buy one of the one's on their list.

EA9300, R7000, RT-AC5300, etc