Question Getting into Ubiquiti, which router

CU

Platinum Member
Aug 14, 2000
2,202
1
81
#1
Just ordered a NanoHD AP. How it all started. I had a R6300v2 setup as wireless bridge to my router which is a R7500v2. It start dropping 50% of the packets. Normally when more than one computer connected to it was on. It has the cable providers custom firmware, so I cannot flash it to a newer version to see if that fixes it. Might still try to figure out how to force it on there though.

So, my plan is to move the R7500v2 to the wireless bridge role and use the NanoHD as my new AP. Now I need a router and switch. So I ordered the Netgear GS308 with the NanoHD. Didn't really need a fancy switch for my home use. So for the router, I was looking at the USG or the ERLite-3. I like the idea the ERLite-3 doesn't need a controller. But, having the router and AP in a the Unfi controller does look nice. But, without a permanent controller running not sure it is worth it. The AP's are pretty much setup and forget, but the router is something I would go to more. So, has anyone gotten the ERLite-3 and just really regretted not getting the USG?

Also my house has 1Gbps internet up and down, so hoping the new router will use more of that speed than my R7500v2.
 
Last edited:

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
73,857
187
126
#2
I don't think those will handle gigabit internet service
 

Burner27

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2001
4,206
0
81
#3
Build your own. Get an old PC, throw pFsense or Sophos UTM on it and never look back. (Be sure to use Intel NICs)
 

CU

Platinum Member
Aug 14, 2000
2,202
1
81
#4
Don't really need all the features that building my own would give me. Not to mention the time invested in doing it. Also an old PC running 24/7 is sure to use a lot more power than a "normal" router.

As for handling 1Gbps internet, Smallnetbuilder.com has it tied for 3rd in their HTTP WAN to LAN test at 61.4% and the throughput test has it doing 941Mpbs. No plans to run QOS, so I don't care that turning that on kills performance.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
73,857
187
126
#5
Don't really need all the features that building my own would give me. Not to mention the time invested in doing it. Also an old PC running 24/7 is sure to use a lot more power than a "normal" router.

As for handling 1Gbps internet, Smallnetbuilder.com has it tied for 3rd in their HTTP WAN to LAN test at 61.4% and the throughput test has it doing 941Mpbs. No plans to run QOS, so I don't care that turning that on kills performance.

USG is integrated into unifi ui so you would just use that to control your router and ap.
 

rchunter

Senior member
Feb 26, 2015
895
13
61
#6
I have a edgemax pro in my rack. It's been good, had it about a year. I use it to load balance 2 internet connections.
 

CU

Platinum Member
Aug 14, 2000
2,202
1
81
#7
USG is integrated into unifi ui so you would just use that to control your router and ap.
Yeah. I know. Just don't want to run the controller every time I want to look at the router. Don't really want to spend more money a cloud key either or run it all the time on my computer. Now if I had a server I already ran it would be a different story.
 

rchunter

Senior member
Feb 26, 2015
895
13
61
#9
How does it work out for you? And who are your ISPs?
It's fine, I have 2 slow 9mbit connections combined into one. This router can handle way more and it's overkill but I mainly wanted a router I can rack mount so I got it. ISP is nez perce tribe, I have 2 of their 9mbit point to point fixed wireless plans.
 

mv2devnull

Golden Member
Apr 13, 2010
1,207
1
81
#10
IIRC, the Lite and USG are practically identical, except for the software. I have the ER-poe5 on a 200/20 connection. Cannot see it limiting at that speed. Supplies POE to two AP's as well.

There is not much to tinker after initial installation.
 

CU

Platinum Member
Aug 14, 2000
2,202
1
81
#11
Won a new ERLite-3 on ebay for about $55. So, I am going with that. USG's are pretty much double that with the only difference being the Unifi controller which has pros and cons.
 

bbhaag

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2011
3,989
22
126
#12
Won a new ERLite-3 on ebay for about $55. So, I am going with that. USG's are pretty much double that with the only difference being the Unifi controller which has pros and cons.
Congrats man. Back in July of '16 I decided to ditch the all in one consumer grade stuff and ended up with an ER-X coupled with a Unifi Ap AC LR. Honestly it was one of the best tech purchases I have ever made. Both of them are still chugging along without any reboots or dropped signals.
 

aigomorla

Cases and Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
17,050
18
126
#13
Yeah. I know. Just don't want to run the controller every time I want to look at the router. Don't really want to spend more money a cloud key either or run it all the time on my computer. Now if I had a server I already ran it would be a different story.
This is such contradictory to your thread... lol..

I highly recommend the cloud key + USG route as unifi portal is a breeze.
However i dont run USG, but i do run a cloud key for my AP's and guest access.
And yes i absolutely love that cloud key... its a simple plug setup and forget, and its on a POE switch on top with all my AP's that i dont have any messy power adapters running anywhere but to that POE switch.
 

CU

Platinum Member
Aug 14, 2000
2,202
1
81
#14
Got the EdgeRouter Lite setup, and the NanoHD setup.

Was surprised how out of date the firmware that came on the EdgeRouter was, but an update fixed that.

Also the Ubiquiti App doesn't let me change the settings on my NanoHD. The options to change anything, like setup a SSID, are just not there, so I had to run a controller to set it up. That is overkill for one AP in a home setup. Hoping they fix the app. Even got the Beta app after posting on Ubiquiti's forum, but still no luck.

My R7500v2 shows it connected at 1692 Mbps to the NanoHD. So, that is pretty good. Although in the Unifi controller I don't see the R7500v2 connected, which seems strange. I do see a computer connected to the R7500v2 listed at 1.3 Gbps though, so maybe it won't list the R7500v2 only devices connected through it. I would have thought the links rates would have matched though. I also did an internet speed test from that computer and it got around 300-400 Mbps. When I had the R7500v2 as the main router and a R6300v2 as the bridge internet speed test showed 600 Mbps. So, the NanoHD seems slower. But, if it is more stable I guess it is a good trade. Also my phone was connected to the 2.4g instead of the 5g when I was in the same room as the NanoHD. Not sure if that is normal or not.

Speaking of speed test. On a wired computer connected to a TP-Link TL-SG1005D switch connected to the R7500v2 as the main router I could only get around 700 Mbps up and down. I switched that switch out to the Netgear GS308 before I started making any other changes and started getting 950 Mbps up and down. I never would have suspected the switch was limiting me.
 
Aug 25, 2001
42,469
235
126
#15
Speaking of speed test. On a wired computer connected to a TP-Link TL-SG1005D switch connected to the R7500v2 as the main router I could only get around 700 Mbps up and down. I switched that switch out to the Netgear GS308 before I started making any other changes and started getting 950 Mbps up and down. I never would have suspected the switch was limiting me.
Speedtest.net server change?
 

Similar threads



ASK THE COMMUNITY