[Asus RT-AX88U] Experiences & Discussion

[Grisu]

Well whatever it did it worked.

thats fine, could you please test a bit more with manual changing channel to 36, then 40, 44 and 48 staying on 80MHz bandwith (often resets to auto-mode).
Then test you real world speed with those control channel and report them back to us, this will help others too.

 

[Embattle]

So here are the results of link speed and transferring a file of 10GB.

I normally have channel bandwidth set to 20/40/80 but as requested I set it at 80:

Auto (36) - 346 Mbps - 29 MB/s
Manual 36 - 1.5 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 40 - 1.5 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 44 - 1.4 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 48 - 1.4 Gbps - 106 MB/s

 

[L&LD]

So here are the results of link speed and transferring a file of 10GB.

I normally I have channel bandwidth set to 20/40/80 but as requested I set it at 80:

Auto (36) - 346 Mbps - 29 MB/s
Manual 36 - 1.5 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 40 - 1.5 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 44 - 1.4 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 48 - 1.4 Gbps - 106 MB/s

Thanks, that is the kind of output I expect and why I always choose a manual Control Channel. The router seems to be working for someone else in 'Auto' Control Channel mode.

 

[Grisu]

So here are the results of link speed and transferring a file of 10GB.

I normally have channel bandwidth set to 20/40/80 but as requested I set it at 80:

Auto (36) - 346 Mbps - 29 MB/s
Manual 36 - 1.5 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 40 - 1.5 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 44 - 1.4 Gbps - 106 MB/s
Manual 48 - 1.4 Gbps - 106 MB/s

Here you can see, exactly what I said and predicted!

Irrelevant which channel 36-48 you choose, they all do the same with 80MHz bandwith using all of them.

In Auto-mode it may not use 80MHz, thats why you thought ch. 36 is slower, but it isnt.
You only used 20MHz bandwith, so only ~1/4 speed.

 

[Embattle]

I really wasn't looking at this in any depth, in the end I solved my problem with the first change and came to the conclusion that Auto was the problem but beyond that I couldn't say I really cared at the time.

I picked 48 simply because it is clear of other people in the area, I get the same figures with 20/40/80 bandwidth option but the key factor is just not using Auto.

 

[Erno]

I am wondering if anyone could help me to find out why I receive these faults in my router's log. It heppen every seconds during the night. My firmware is 3.0.0.4.384_5951
I even can't read any other massege beacuse full of my log with these
Thx.

Apr 26 03:00:00 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:01 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:02 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:03 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:04 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:05 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:06 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:07 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:08 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:08 acsd: acs_do_ci_update(398): ci scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:09 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:10 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:11 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:12 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:13 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:14 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:15 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:16 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:17 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:18 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:18 acsd: acs_do_ci_update(398): ci scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:19 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:20 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:21 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:22 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:23 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:24 acsd: acs_scan_timer_or_dfsr_check(1098): cs scan failed ret code: -22
Apr 26 03:00:33 acsd: staying in current channel as txop is recovered with in time limit
Apr 26 03:28:24 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6084)]period_retry = 0
Apr 26 03:28:25 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6110)]retrieve firmware information
Apr 26 03:28:25 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6124)]no need to upgrade firmware
Apr 26 03:28:54 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6084)]period_retry = 1
Apr 26 03:28:55 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6110)]retrieve firmware information
Apr 26 03:28:55 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6124)]no need to upgrade firmware
Apr 26 03:29:24 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6084)]period_retry = 2
Apr 26 03:29:26 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6110)]retrieve firmware information
Apr 26 03:29:26 WATCHDOG: [FAUPGRADE][auto_firmware_check6124)]no need to upgrade firmware
Apr 26 13:56:24 kernel: FPM Pool 1: invalid token 0x20278000 freed

 

[NEO2070]

I really wasn't looking at this in any depth, in the end I solved my problem with the first change and came to the conclusion that Auto was the problem but beyond that I couldn't say I really cared at the time.

I picked 48 simply because it is clear of other people in the area, I get the same figures with 20/40/80 bandwidth option but the key factor is just not using Auto.

I have mine set to 20/40/80/160 and manual control channel 153 on 5Ghz. and auto channel on control channel set on 2.4Ghz. Should I have 2.4 Ghz set to manual control channel? What channel would give best performance on 2.4 and 5 Ghz.
Should I be using 36-48 on 5Ghz?

 

[Grisu]

My question would be:
Does it even use 160MHz as ch. 153 got only contiguous 4 channels 149-161?
Could only be done with 80+80 using 36-48 as second range.
Dont think this router will support this configuration.
IMO you would need to set 36 or 100 and then using DFS channels you'll get other problems and only 200mW instead of 1W transmit power which are only for ch. 149-165.

 

[Hawk]

In order to use 160 mhz you need to use all channel from 36 to 64, that will create 160 wide band channel. Also channel with different power level is not allowed, to create channel bonding all channels must be operating on same power level.

160 mhz wide channel is not possible on 149 + channels, not enough contiguous block of space.

 

[NEO2070]

In order to use 160 mhz you need to use all channel from 36 to 64, that will create 160 wide band channel. Also channel with different power level is not allowed, to create channel bonding all channels must be operating on same power level.

160 mhz wide channel is not possible on 149 + channels, not enough contiguous block of space.

so then the 160 mhz is just for AX devices or do AC devices benefit as well?

 

[Hawk]

so then the 160 mhz is just for AX devices or do AC devices benefit as well?

160 benefits both type standards, however client must support 160 wide band as well. One such devices is Intel AC 9260 which support 160 Mhz

 

[RMerlin]

so then the 160 mhz is just for AX devices or do AC devices benefit as well?

AC as well. My smart phone is only 802.11ac, but does support 160 MHz wide channels.

 

[Odkrys]

AC as well. My smart phone is only 802.11ac, but does support 160 MHz wide channels.

GT-AC2900 looks to support 160Mhz.
It has identical hardware spec with RT-AC86U.
Can you skim the part of code when its source code released?

 

[JGrana]

Given the discussion above, what is the recommended settings (Channel #) for:

20/40/80 Mhz
and
160Mhz.

I recently purchased an AX88U to replace an AC68U (which replaced an AC88U that had a a non-functional 2.4 Ghz radio...).
I am using the AC68U and AC88U in Media Server mode.
Right now I am at 20/40/80Mhz Bandwidth with Control Channel 48.

 

[RMerlin]

GT-AC2900 looks to support 160Mhz.
It has identical hardware spec with RT-AC86U.

GT-AC2900 shouldn't support 160 MHz, it's the same wifi chip as the RT-AC86U AFAIK.

I could plug mine to test with my phone, just in case, but from what Asus told me when they sent me one was that it's basically the RT-AC86U, with RGB lighting, and the ability to wall mount.

 

[RMerlin]

Given the discussion above, what is the recommended settings (Channel #) for:

20/40/80 Mhz
and
160Mhz.

I recently purchased an AX88U to replace an AC68U (which replaced an AC88U that had a a non-functional 2.4 Ghz radio...).
I am using the AC68U and AC88U in Media Server mode.
Right now I am at 20/40/80Mhz Bandwidth with Control Channel 48.

160 MHz would require the use of all lower channels, so which channel you chose won't matter much - you will be interfering with ALL of them anyway...

Keep 160 MHz disabled unless you actually have 160 MHz clients that can benefit from it. No point for instance in using 160 MHz with a phone when the Internet connection might only be below 100 Mbps anyway.

 

[JGrana]

Thanks for the tip (and reality check). I don't presently have any 160 Mhz clients AND my internet feed is only 110Mbits. So, I will leave 160 alone for now.
On the Media Bridge front, I am getting a solid 1950Mbits between the AX88U and AC88U (on 5 Ghz) and 289Mbits to the 2.4 Ghz AC68 all running 384.11b1. Not bad.

 

[RMerlin]

Thanks for the tip (and reality check). I don't presently have any 160 Mhz clients AND my internet feed is only 110Mbits. So, I will leave 160 alone for now.
On the Media Bridge front, I am getting a solid 1950Mbits between the AX88U and AC88U (on 5 Ghz) and 289Mbits to the 2.4 Ghz AC68 all running 384.11b1. Not bad.

Looks like you were right, it does support 160 MHz channels. That's surprising, I thought it was the same SoCs as the AC86U.

 

[Odkrys]

Looks like you were right, it does support 160 MHz channels. That's surprising, I thought it was the same SoCs as the AC86U.

It is specified in Asus product page.
I guess unless GT-AC2900 has newer revision 4366 than RT-AC86U, RT-AC86U is also able to do 160mhz.

 

[RMerlin]

It is specified in Asus product page.
I guess unless GT-AC2900 has newer revision 4366 than RT-AC86U, RT-AC86U is also able to do 160mhz.

Apparently the BCM4366 (and thus BCM4366E) always had 160 MHz support...

https://www.pcmag.com/news/330885/broadcom-rolls-out-new-5g-wi-fi-chips

If only BCM stopped being so frigging paranoid and started publishing some USEFUL specs on their own website, we wouldn't have to chase around digging up such basic information.

My guess is the RT-AC86U didn't have it enabled because at the time it didn't support DFS channels.