ASUS RT-AC66U 3.0.0.4.354 Official Firmware

[doubleroll]

5 days and 5 ghz has been solid. So far so good.

+1 for both bands 2.4 and 5 GHz...

 

[KumquatOfPain]

I think the answer to your question is Yes, media bridge.

A more detailed answer about the test conditions:

Server/Internet end:
Modem -> AC66u #1 (in Router mode) ---> Server connected via Ethernet
5GHz devices: AC66u #2 (Bridge)
2.4GHz devices: Phone (n), Laptop/Server (n)

Office end:
PC + VOIP ---> AC66u (in Media Bridge mode) connected via Ethernet
AC66u #2 Bridged to AC66u #1 via 5GHz link.

File transfer tests are done with just a simple Samba share from Server to PC across the bridge. Other devices, while active, are not using bandwidth.

Distance between AC66u devices is about 50 feet, interior through 5 layers of sheetrock, horizontal plane only.


I do have a laptop available with 5GHz 802.11n capability, but everything else is 802.11n 2.4GHz (aside from the inactive Kindle which is 802.11g).

And update with more testing:

Router .270, Bridge .270
Transfer = 40MB/s
5G Signal = -60dB
2.4G Signal = -55dB (fluctatutes)

Router .354, Bridge .270
Transfer = 43MB/s
5G Signal = -62db
2.4G Signal = -55db (fluctatutes)

Router .354, Bridge .354
Transfer = 30MB/s (never shows connected)
5G Signal = -62db
2.4G Signal = -55db

Router .270, Bridge .354
Transfer = Won't connect at all.
5G Signal = -62db
2.4G Signal = -55db

In short, yes, I think the .354 media bridge mode is problematic. I see both a significant speed drop and general "flakiness" of the user interface. I did notice they change the media bridge connection interface quite a bit. Before the SSID to connect to had to be hand entered. Now you can scan the network landscape and just click to connect. So there have been some changes.


For the router side, it's similar to .270, if not about 5-8% faster.

Oddly, when the router is .270 firmware and the Bridge in .354 I can't even get them to connect.

I'll continue to run it with the router at .354 and the bridge at .270 and report any additional issues.

 

[Dick_W]

mtd-erase -d nvram

After issuing the above command you should see a message that the nvram has been erased. Then reboot the router.

That's all there is to it.

Thanks for the post. But is it really all there is to it? Does this whack all the settings? (So I have to reload from a config backup with the router running with the default IP/password...) Does this whack the set upnp_minport etc. settings necessary for a device to port forward the well-known port numbers via UPNP?

Reason I ask is that I'm having "issues" with two items with .354. First is 5GHz stability--sometimes it works, sometimes not with both Android and Wintel. (In more limited testing, my Mac has always seemed to work.) Second is IPv6 vs Win8--the PCs work fine freshly booted. After they've slept, they have problems seeing IPv6 LAN connectivity.

 

[mikeg]

After 5 days + unknown hours my router rebooted itself....

5 days and 5 ghz has been solid. So far so good.

 

[kayphoonstar]

Is anyone experiencing wireless slowdowns on fw 354 and / or occasional disconnects (2 disconnects in 4 days whereas with my N66U and previous wifi adapter I never had disconnects)?

I just switched from an N66U to an AC66U (still have the N66U in case).

I am trying to determine whether the HUGE 2.4 GHz wireless slowdown issue in the post I made today in the below thread is due to the USB-AC53 adapter, RT-AC66U router or the combination of the two.

http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showpost.php?p=65333&postcount=6

I just dropped back to .270 after having very slow speeds on 5ghz after waking up from sleep (using an Intel 6300). I've only had this problem with the .3XX betas. I'm intending to flash it again and this time clear nvram to see if that makes a difference.

 

[got_milk]

I just dropped back to .270 after having very slow speeds on 5ghz after waking up from sleep (using an Intel 6300). I've only had this problem with the .3XX betas. I'm intending to flash it again and this time clear nvram to see if that makes a difference.

RMerlin has identified and reported an issue with the new Broadcom driver and Intel wireless chipsets. It's being investigated so you'll have to wait for the next firmware for a potential fix.

 

[kayphoonstar]

RMerlin has identified and reported an issue with the new Broadcom driver and Intel wireless chipsets. It's being investigated so you'll have to wait for the next firmware for a potential fix.

Thanks, I thought he just mentioned the RT-N66U as having the problem and others have reported that clearing the nvram worked to solve the issue. I may just wait, as you suggest. Fact is, .270 has really been rock solid and pretty fast for me.

 

[got_milk]

Thanks, I thought he just mentioned the RT-N66U as having the problem and others have reported that clearing the nvram worked to solve the issue. I may just wait, as you suggest. Fact is, .270 has really been rock solid and pretty fast for me.

The AC66U should use the same driver code for N clients so (in theory) driver issues with the N66U should affect the AC66U as well. I don't think any extra logic for the AC specification would change that.

 

[RMerlin]

The AC66U should use the same driver code for N clients so (in theory) driver issues with the N66U should affect the AC66U as well. I don't think any extra logic for the AC specification would change that.

The RT-AC66U uses a completely different driver, and is not affected by the Intel-related issue that's affecting the RT-N66U.

 

[got_milk]

The RT-AC66U uses a completely different driver, and is not affected by the Intel-related issue that's affecting the RT-N66U.

Ah, well colour me silly then. Sorry for the misleading advice.

 

[njweb]

I have been using this firmware with my AC66U since it came out.

Finding that my wireless performance (USB-AC53) is worse on both 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands on my AC66U compared to my N66U.

The N66U had a better signal in 5 out of 6 tests (3 locations times 2 bands).

See attached.
Has anyone else compared the two routers recently?

Going to try to improve 5 GHz which was surprisingly weak / erratic even at moderate range by experimenting with the following:
- A single WL-ANT157 (I have seen good reviews from several users who used one as a center antenna replacement)
- Bumping TX power to 100 mW (perhaps 110 or 120 max).
- I may temporarily install an older firmware (given several users say it improved performance in their situations)