Menu
What's new
By:
Filters Better Search

Honest review of Asus WRT 5.0 (3.0.0.6 Branch)

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

glens said:
This little bit of discussion reminded me of my P100 with, I think, 4 Mb RAM running Slackware with an early 2.x Linux kernel, before tabbed browser windows (Netscape). Somewhere I've got a screenshot indicating 96 netscape windows open, and the system was highly responsive! This was about the time Y2K was becoming a concern. The 32-bit seconds-counter overflow was actually more of a concern, but it wasn't until Windows98 itself was nearly done-for before anyone discovered a counter Windows used in W95 overflowed in like 39 days and caused a system lockup. This tells me that few people had left (were able to leave) such a system running long enough to identify the issue!

Meanwhile I'd been using an old headless 386-25 system for network (dialup and LAN) management and was truly pissed when a prolonged power outage ran out my UPS and failed the computer at somewhere near a couple years uptime! Life was simpler "back in the day".
Click to expand...
Wow in had mine in i think 1995 or so... And when the y2k bug entered the phantom world I had my athlon running. Any howsse... Time frame stuff ... Back on topic.
 
glens said:
I welcome your accolades. So few folk "get me"...

GUI is a tradeoff for limited (in)convenience. Command-line is where it's at if one wants to get there more easily and quickly; daisy-chaining things in the *nix philosophy. Still have to type either way, just getting right to it is usually better and almost always much faster.

My taskbar currently shows three browser windows (each with multiple tabs) and 24 terminal windows. Time to do some housekeeping...
Click to expand...
Can't say I have much of a need for CLI. I am still just a casual Ubuntu user, and only because that is how I ended up fixing Window 10 (around 2017/2018) as a last resort after multiple W10 reinstall. Go figure.

I wanted to get more experience in CLI, figured I'd get better at it with hands on, troubleshooting some apps or extensions on GitHub. It was going great, slowly but surely, until I got suspended ~10 months in.
Your account was flagged because you appear to have registered multiple free user accounts.
Click to expand...
Never would have guessed that GitHub operates on appearance, and not facts.

Just made me feel bad for developers on repos where I was active, removing little of what I had time to contribute in "issues", and creating a dead 404 link to my repo with a theme.
 
I have a GT- AX6000 and running the latest firmware 3.0.0.6.102_21514-g9affda2_136-g5d23c. So this is confusing. I have a Reolink WIFI Video Doorbell, purchased last year. In the Reolink camera software on the PC, its configured for a static IP address 192.168.50.151. In the Reolink Android software, the same thing, shows Static IP address 151. In the Blue Iris camera software (DVR), it shows and configures for 151. If I try to configure the camera in Blue Iris using 150, it doesn't find it. When I look in the GT-AX6000 Network Map, View List, it shows Static IP but shows 150 not 151? MAC address matches on the Network Map devices and on the Reolink Software. I have 28 devices and this is the only device that doesn't match.

How can the router be reporting a different IP address of 150? is this a firmware issue?
 
Michael James said:
I have a GT- AX6000 and running the latest firmware 3.0.0.6.102_21514-g9affda2_136-g5d23c. So this is confusing. I have a Reolink WIFI Video Doorbell, purchased last year. In the Reolink camera software on the PC, its configured for a static IP address 192.168.50.151. In the Reolink Android software, the same thing, shows Static IP address 151. In the Blue Iris camera software (DVR), it shows and configures for 151. If I try to configure the camera in Blue Iris using 150, it doesn't find it. When I look in the GT-AX6000 Network Map, View List, it shows Static IP but shows 150 not 151? MAC address matches on the Network Map devices and on the Reolink Software. I have 28 devices and this is the only device that doesn't match.

How can the router be reporting a different IP address of 150? is this a firmware issue?
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, what does your question have to do with the general discussion of this topic? Apparently you have posted a similar question to a different thread topic yesterday.
www.snbforums.com

GT AX 6000

A couple times a day my network goes down. I have a GT AX6000 and 4 mesh nodes. The GT AX6000 is reporting this: Feb 17 16:18:35 roamast: sta[B6:50:8C:12:D4:CC] on ap[58:11:22:28:67:3C], rcpi is 86 and rssi is -67 Feb 17 16:19:37 wan: finish adding multi routes Feb 17 16:19:37 miniupnpd[3233]...
www.snbforums.com www.snbforums.com
Generally is good etiquette not to post the same or similar question about a router issue to multiple different threads to avoid confusion and people responding to duplicate posts across different thread topics.
 
bennor said:
Out of curiosity, what does your question have to do with the general discussion of this topic? Apparently you have posted a similar question to a different thread topic yesterday.
www.snbforums.com

GT AX 6000

A couple times a day my network goes down. I have a GT AX6000 and 4 mesh nodes. The GT AX6000 is reporting this: Feb 17 16:18:35 roamast: sta[B6:50:8C:12:D4:CC] on ap[58:11:22:28:67:3C], rcpi is 86 and rssi is -67 Feb 17 16:19:37 wan: finish adding multi routes Feb 17 16:19:37 miniupnpd[3233]...
www.snbforums.com www.snbforums.com
Generally is good etiquette not to post the same or similar question about a router issue to multiple different threads to avoid confusion and people responding to duplicate posts across different thread topics.
Click to expand...
Got your point. Was posting here because this thread is addressing the firmware I am using and wondered if anyone else using this specific firmware has seen this issue.
 
Because specs alone do not a (great) router make.
 
RF design and implementation for one.

www.snbforums.com

[Review] ASUS GT-AX6000 vs RT-AX88U Pro vs RT-AX86U Pro

After I tested tested each of the three routers, I decided to make a dedicated video to find out which one of them is the better WiFi 6 router. I look forward to any questions and feedback.
www.snbforums.com www.snbforums.com
 
L&LD said:
RF design and implementation for one.

www.snbforums.com

[Review] ASUS GT-AX6000 vs RT-AX88U Pro vs RT-AX86U Pro

After I tested tested each of the three routers, I decided to make a dedicated video to find out which one of them is the better WiFi 6 router. I look forward to any questions and feedback.
www.snbforums.com www.snbforums.com
Click to expand...
I get it. It's hard to compare wifi signal. Which one would you choose if they are at the same price and we won't consider design?
 
If you are not interested in the external appearance, choose the one that costs less.
 
VANT said:
If you are not interested in the external appearance, choose the one that costs less.
Click to expand...
Price is the same here. I don't care much about design, I would rather have the best performing router out of these two and also better support.
 
MEner said:
If so, why is the GT AX6000 performing better in available tests than AX88U Pro?
Click to expand...
If it really does, then it's simply due to differences in either the hardware or the RF tuning.
 
From my experience, Qualcomm-based routers perform a tad better than Broadcom-based routers when running speed tests on Qualcomm-based phones (or Wi-Fi cards). This could be the other way around for people using Intel, MTK, or Broadcom-based Wi-Fi cards/phones. I think this is why you can see that people are getting different results in different reviews.

The AX6000 uses the Qualcomm IPQ8074, and the AX88U Pro uses the Broadcom BCM4912, so you might want to choose the one that best suits your client devices.
 
jixiangyuan said:
Are you certain about that? According to techinfodepot, GT-AX6000 uses IPQ8074:
https://techinfodepot.shoutwiki.com/wiki/ASUS_GT-AX6000

Where as GT-AX6000 v2 uses BCM4912:

https://techinfodepot.shoutwiki.com/wiki/ASUS_GT-AX6000_v2
Click to expand...
In this video you can see that it's Broadcom BCM4912.


3:11


RMerlin said:
If it really does, then it's simply due to differences in either the hardware or the RF tuning.
Click to expand...
Also in this comparison, the single client test comes better with GT AX6000. Can it be firmware tweaks?
 
MEner said:
I get it. It's hard to compare wifi signal. Which one would you choose if they are at the same price and we won't consider design?
Click to expand...
The GT-AX6000 has slightly superior RF. But the RT-AX88U Pro is a few years newer and will most likely be supported for longer.

Based on that, I would buy the RT-AX88U Pro today, if I'm not expecting to buy another router in the next year or so.
 
L&LD said:
The GT-AX6000 has slightly superior RF. But the RT-AX88U Pro is a few years newer and will most likely be supported for longer.

Based on that, I would buy the RT-AX88U Pro today, if I'm not expecting to buy another router in the next year or so.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry if I don't understand this correctly but what do you mean by saying superior RF? What component part is different?

I'm also leaning slightly more towards 88U Pro but if the GT has better RF, I'm not sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Similar threads
Thread starter Title Forum Replies Date
F Release ASUS RT-AX1800S Firmware version 3.0.0.4.386_69089 for V1 & 3.0.0.4.388_33625 for V2 (2024/11/08) ASUSWRT - Official 0
F Release ASUS RT-AX68U Firmware version 3.0.0.4.388_24708 (2024/11/08) ASUSWRT - Official 0
L Release ASUS RT-AC86U Firmware version 3.0.0.4.386_51955 (2024/11/08) ASUSWRT - Official 4
rudoyeugene Release ASUS ZenWiFi Pro ET12 Firmware version 3.0.0.4.З88_24610 (2024/11/08) ASUSWRT - Official 2
F Release ASUS GT-AX11000 Pro Firmware version 3.0.0.6.102_34735 (2024/11/07) ASUSWRT - Official 0
F Release ASUS RT-AX59U Firmware version 3.0.0.4.388_33404 (2024/11/07) ASUSWRT - Official 0
DMcD-EMS-USMC Release ASUS RT-BE96U Firmware version 3.0.0.6.102_37031 (2024/11/07) ASUSWRT - Official 0
visortgw Release ASUS RT-AX58U Firmware Version 3.0.0.4.388_25139 ASUSWRT - Official 5
N Release ASUS GT-BE98 Pro Firmware Version 3.0.0.6_102_37031 ASUSWRT - Official 6
F Release ASUS TUF-AX6000 Firmware version 3.0.0.4.388_33427 (2024/11/06) ASUSWRT - Official 2

Similar threads

Latest threads

Support SNBForums w/ Amazon

If you'd like to support SNBForums, just use this link and buy anything on Amazon. Thanks!

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!

Members online

Total: 680 (members: 31, guests: 649)
Top