R7800 SmallNetBuilder Review

[sfx2000]

Surprised no comments on Tim's review on the R7800 802.11ac Wave 2 Router...

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...mart-wifi-gaming-router-reviewed?limitstart=0

While it's being marketed as a "gaming" Router/AP, there's a lot of interesting stuff inside - not much that clients can leverage now (they'll still perform well), but it's the future stuff - MU is of course, interesting, but it's the 80+80 that is even more interesting...

 

[L&LD]

It is good to see there are no obvious problems with it as shipped. But it's NG. When the models are in the 6 digit range I may look into them again.

 

[avtella]

Its QCA9984 chip apparently can support 2 2x2 MU-MIMO devices concurrently, but 3 devices max concurrent with 1x1 devices.

I don't think Intel or Apple will support 160 MHz width anytime soon though, just as with 40 MHz on 2.4 GHz earlier on. Then again I could be wrong.

I just hope they redo the UI eventually, not very intuitive at the moment.

 

[hifiguy]

I had the R7800 and it was very fast and had great range, better range than another more expensive router. File transfers were great too. The problem I had was it did not work well with my 2011 MacBook Pro. When the Mac would awake from sleep it would not find the network (both 2.4 and 5GHz band). I would have to run the network diagnostics and then it would find the network. This happened every time it went to sleep. The issue did n0t occur with any other router so I suppose it must have been a firmware issue.

 

[L&LD]

I had the R7800 and it was very fast and had great range, better range than another more expensive router. File transfers were great too. The problem I had was it did not work well with my 2011 MacBook Pro. When the Mac would awake from sleep it would not find the network (both 2.4 and 5GHz band). I would have to run the network diagnostics and then it would find the network. This happened every time it went to sleep. The issue did n0t occur with any other router so I suppose it must have been a firmware issue.

Or an Appple issue.

 

[bobsilver]

I had the R7800 and it was very fast and had great range, better range than another more expensive router. File transfers were great too. The problem I had was it did not work well with my 2011 MacBook Pro. When the Mac would awake from sleep it would not find the network (both 2.4 and 5GHz band). I would have to run the network diagnostics and then it would find the network. This happened every time it went to sleep. The issue did n0t occur with any other router so I suppose it must have been a firmware issue.

My 2011 Macbook Pro and my 2013 Macbook Air have no issues with my R8500 which is very similar to the R7800.

 

[avtella]

Two completely different chipsets though Broadcom (R8500) vs Qualcomm (R7800), I don't have this issue with Apple devices however.

 

[NETGEAR Guy]

Have sent on the Macbook information to the engineering team so we can try to replicate the issue.

We have seen a similar issue with Apple devices which occurred when HT160 was enabled. This involved an iPhone6s and iPhone6s+, ie., intermittent disconnect experienced after awake from sleep mode if the beacon from the router indicated HT160.

 

[thiggins]

Have sent on the Macbook information to the engineering team so we can try to replicate the issue.

We have seen a similar issue with Apple devices which occurred when HT160 was enabled. This involved an iPhone6s and iPhone6s+, ie., intermittent disconnect experienced after awake from sleep mode if the beacon from the router indicated HT160.

Router ships with HT160 disabled. That should prohibit HT160 beacons, yes?

 

[thiggins]

When the models are in the 6 digit range I may look into them again.

6 digits of what?

 

[NETGEAR Guy]

Yes unless HT160 is enabled, beacons should be prohibited

 

[L&LD]

6 digits of what?

For example, when the NG model R990007 ships...

 

[RMerlin]

Also I don't know if Netgear offers a setting to enable/disable it but if they do, disable beamforming and try again.

 

[NETGEAR Guy]

Both HT160 and Beamforming options are available to configure under "Advanced => Advanced Setup => Wireless Settings".

Beamforming and HT160 are enabled and disabled by default respectively.

 

[sfx2000]

The reason why I started the thread is because this device is very much an advanced Wave 2 device from QC/Atheros - MU-MIMO and HT160 (80+80), which, along with the review, is why I started this thread over in the non-vendor specific sub-forums...

So while the product is very interesting - there are a few that skip the Asus/Netgear vendor specific forums that might miss an opportunity to see what's going on... and burying this in the Netgear sub-forum might be harmful... we should all appreciate that Netgear has brought the product forward, and it really does deserve attention from the general crowd.

Any Moderator care to complete the jump to hyperspace and put it back?

Thx -- sfx

 

[sfx2000]

Yes unless HT160 is enabled, beacons should be prohibited

I'm going to forget you even said that... seriously...

802.11 requires beacons - whether it's A54, N65/72, N150... and so forth - even 11ac transmits beacons on a 20MHz channel - VHT20/40/80/160 - it's a basic requirement.

 

[sfx2000]

Router ships with HT160 disabled. That should prohibit HT160 beacons, yes?

There's a VHT epigram in the Beacon frame - it outlines capabilities of the AP, period...

Enable/Disable of VHT160 (and the mode, 80+80 or 160) is a line item value in that epigram - similar to MU capabilities (or not) - one has to look at the VHT operational items in the beacon (how it is operating), not just capability - and this also goes for HT mode items to determine number of spatial streams supported - they're additive...

 

[thiggins]

Any Moderator care to complete the jump to hyperspace and put it back?

I moved it here, which is where it will stay.

 

[thiggins]

There's a VHT epigram in the Beacon frame - it outlines capabilities of the AP, period...

Enable/Disable of VHT160 (and the mode, 80+80 or 160) is a line item value in that epigram - similar to MU capabilities (or not) - one has to look at the VHT operational items in the beacon (how it is operating), not just capability - and this also goes for HT mode items to determine number of spatial streams supported - they're additive...

So translating down from Wi-Fi geek speak, the question is whether disabling HT160 mode removes the advertisement of that capability from the beacons.

 

[sfx2000]

So translating down from Wi-Fi geek speak, the question is whether disabling HT160 mode removes the advertisement of that capability from the beacons.

Should be easy enough to tell - if one has a relatively modern MacBook Air/Pro (2011 or later) - a couple of free pieces of software - AirTool and Wireshark...

AirTool - MenuBar app that indicates current channels/modes, and also make captures easy - default behavior is to pipe the captures to a file, and if Wireshark is installed, it'll open the file for analysis.. it's written by the same guy that has done the very awesome WiFi Explorer app for the Mac...

Alternative - Windows can use Acrylic WiFi, and if one has a Broadcom NIC, the Aircap plugin can grab the 802.11 frames there.

With VHT160 (80+80), also other VHT modes (VHT20/40/80), check the VHT Capabilities stanza, tag 192... the items to look for are Channel Width, Channel Center Segment 0 (and channel), and Channel Segment 1 (channel there if present in VHT160 80+80, otherwise should be zero.

Knowing this, two runs - one with VHT160 enabled, and one with it disabled.

Would be interesting to see if it can do/try MU in the VHT160/80+80 mode or not...

If you have questions - please feel free to PM me...