New router recommendation

[de8212]

I have a wireless router (smc 2404wbr but I disabled wireless) connected to a linksys wireless router (wrt54GS). I think the smc is flaking out so I want to get a new one. Just looking for opinions on whether or not i should just get an "N" router and use it for my wireless and just use my linksys as wired.
I just want the most stable router I can get. Don't really need any additional range for wireless because I only use my laptop occasionally and it works fine.

Should I just get any old linksys/netgear/d-link and just disable the wireless and put it in place of the smc.

 

[kevnich2]

Other than to cause headaches, why do you have TWO routers on your network??

 

[de8212]

Originally posted by: kevnich2
Other than to cause headaches, why do you have TWO routers on your network??

When I had my house built I prewired all rooms with Cat6 and ran everything back to a walk in closet in the room I wanted to be my PC room. I even had power and a cable hookup put in the closet so I could put my modem in there. The closet is at one end of the house and I wanted to add wireless after I moved in for my laptop, tivo and a wireless media device in the garage. So since the living room/den is about as central as I can get I went ahead and connected the wired router (in the closet) to the wireless router by one of the Cat6 wires I ran in the walls. Make sense?
In a little over 3 years it really hasn't been too much of a headache.

 

[kevnich2]

That setup is ok as long as you disabled the firewall and the DHCP on the wireless router (which I'm assuming you did). Back to your original question, you mention you think the SMC is flaking out, what makes you think that? As far as a new router is concerned, for reliability and wireless range, I'd recommend the Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 Router for $59. This has a built in amplifier which should stretch through your entire house. I'd recommend swapping out your SMC for this router and see how the wireless is as far as range and everything and if it doesn't stretch, simply hook up your Links WRT54GS on the other side of the house connected to one of your CAT6 ports with the same SSID and your done.

 

[de8212]

thanks for the info. Yes the wireless firewall is disabled and DHCP is off. All that is done through the wired router.
I'll look up the Buffalo WHR-HP-G54. I don't know about running it instead of the linksys because the linksys has speedbooster so it should be faster than regular "g" and running two wireless seems confusing to me (although it may not be).

As far as the smc, I originally used it for wireless at my old house and it always dropped connection even after numerous tech support calls to smc, different adapters and updated firmware. So I figured it would be fine strictly wired. The other day my main pc gave me the limited or no connectivity error. Wouldn't connect to the router. After some troubleshooting I fended up being able to connect to the router but still couldn't get online. I thought it was the modem so I got a new one yesterday. Worked fine for a few hours and then the same thing happened. SO I have a strong feeling it's the smc router. Hopefully replacing it will solve this issue for good.

 

[de8212]

Forgot one question.
Would it be beneficial to get a new router that does 10/100/1000? My 680i mobo is gigabit but wouldn't I only benefit if another pc on the network had 10/100/1000???

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: de8212
Would it be beneficial to get a new router that does 10/100/1000? My 680i mobo is gigabit but wouldn't I only benefit if another pc on the network had 10/100/1000???

Some gigabit routers are actually better than many 10/100 routers, but in general, yes, you'll only get a benefit from gigabit if/when you have other GbE-enabled local computers and do data transfers among them.

 

[kevnich2]

No, it's not beneficial to get a gigabit router. If you want to run gigE, just get a large gigabit switch and uplink that to the router. As far as the Buffalo router, the HP router is actually much better speed and range wise than the linksys is. The buffalo router uses MIMO technology but again, also has a built in amplifier which gives stronger, cleaner wireless signal.

 

[Madwand1]

The Buffalo is not MIMO. It's "MIMO Performance", which is Buffalo's way of marketing its built-in amplifier. Speedbooster is also not a hardware-dependent feature, and can be turned on the Buffalo if wanted with a third-party firmware such as DD-WRT. With that, you could also turn one of the wireless routers into a wireless bridge.

Edit: The Buffalo has the Speedbooster "125 Mb/s" in its native firmware as well.

 

[de8212]

Just checked and the Buffalo is not available at the Circuit City/Best Buy locally. I'd like to go ahead and get this by sunday at the latest. So, unfortunately that leaves me with B&M stores.

 

[yuppiejr]

The problem with all of the Broadcom based DD-WRT compatible routers, including the Buffalo models, is that the underlying hardware platform is relatively slow by current standards which impacts routing performance and can limit your Intranet speeds if you're on a particularly fast connection. The newer Ubicom chipset based routers from D-Link, Zyxel and others are vastly superior in terms of routing performance and include the best "out of the box" QoS on the market. While I like the features that the DD-WRT firmware brings to a number of budget wireless routers on the market I don't think spending more than $40 on the hardware to use it is worthwhile.

In order of price, I'd reccomend the following 3 routers:

Zyxel X-550 - G - MIMO router, 4 x 10/100 (best prices without rebate are on E-bay, brand NIB figure $55 shipped from a couple of Ebay merchants - http://cgi.ebay.com/ZyXEL-XtremeMIMO-X-...QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem)

D-Link DGL-4300 - G - MIMO router, 4 x 10/100/1000 (http://shop4.outpost.com/product/4315795 - $99 w/ free ship)

D-Link DIR-655 - N - MIMO router, 4 x 10/100/1000 (http://www.circuitcity.com/ccd/productDetail.do?oid=165020 - $130 shipped)

 

[JackMDS]

All of the above are preN/MIMO, that is why they are more expensive.

If you use them with regular 802.11g client, their Wireless is regular 802.11g.

To gain from the MIMO you have (that is where the Gotcha comes) to spend about $100 to buy a card for each Wireless Client.

By year End, all of these MIMOs would be Wireless ?Junk? because they are Not going to be compatible with 802.11n

In contrast, you can pay $60 for Buffalo High Power and with any $20 Wireless Card you would get enhance Wireless performance.

It does WDS out of the box (you need to Flash it with DD-WRT only if you do need Qos or any of the other add-ons).

If you do not need enhanced Wireless you can save even more by buying the regular Buffalo Wireless Router for $40.

So how I would go about it.

If One needs Qos and is afraid to Flash, fork more $$ and buy the Zyxell from a real vendor.

Otherwise, you would the same or better performance from less expensive Hardware.

In general, it is Not a matter of this or that Rulz or that you have to buy what Poster (or imposter) X or Y says.

A user should know his needs his options and make an Intelligent decision.

BTW. As a general advice be careful when you buy today a new Wireless some of the Wireless Routers firmware is Not compatible with Vista.

===================================================
Disclaimer, I do not sell computer Hardware. I have no connection with any Brand that manufactures Network Devices of any kind, my comments are based as a reference to hardware that I buy with my own money.

 

[yuppiejr]

If he'd asked for the cheapest basic router available, I'd agree with the Buffalo WHR-G54s as a decent option in the $40-ish range.

He did not, he asked for the most stable router he could get which the platforms I recommended will provide. He also mentioned that he's got CAT6 cabling run all over his house which is large enough to require localized AP coverage, therefore I assumed that price is not his first concern. While the devices I suggested do happen to include MIMO or Draft-N radios, the feature played no part in my suggesting them since he mentioned wireless is a secondary concern.

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_wrapper/Itemid,156/

You'll notice that the benchmarks highlighting the performance of the units I suggested put them at the top of the heap in terms of non wireless related functions like LAN-WAN throughput and max simultaneous connections (important for p2p users). Two of the devices at the top of the list are based on the same Ubicom IP3023 network processor (D-Link 4300, Zyxel x-550), while the Linksys WRT54G and other Broadcom 5352 based hardware (Buffalo WHR-G54S) place in the middle or bottom of the pack.

I'm not saying the Buffalo products or other Broadcom reference designed router options are bad, they are simply targeted at the value market and are built with price instead of performance and stability in mind. With the DD-WRT firmware you can certainly extend the feature set of the Buffalo but the limitations of the 2-3 year old basic hardware design and Broadcom network processor can not be overcome. The whole reason the DD-WRT platform has been ported to the X86 platform is to overcome the limits of the Broadcom reference design on which it was originally designed.

--

OP: Since we're looking at products that can be picked up at a retail store this weekend, the D-Link DIR-655 at Circuit City for $130 seems like the best bet:

http://www.circuitcity.com/ccd/productDetail.do?oid=165020

Basically the next generation replacement to the 4300 with similar basic features (including upstream QoS, gigabit switch, SPI firewall, etc..) with a faster Unicom network processor and a Draft-N radio for $130.

I could not find a national chain that carries the Buffalo, Zyxel or D-Link 4xxx series routers. Good luck!