Linksys WRT1900AC First User Reports

[stevech]

Also I'd be lying if I didn't mention how sexy the WRT1900AC looks.

Beauty is, as they say, in the eyes of the beholder.

 

[jalyst]

Can we plz cease the buying discussion, not all of us live in North America.
Aside from that, the focus of this thread was outlined, & buying is not part of it.
By all means start a dedicated "Buying WRT1900AC" thread if you want...

 

[speedingcheetah]

Tim has already made it crystal clear what the focus of this thread is to be; experiences using the device.
My point is simple, & the pattern here @SNB is regular, when something diverges too much, you spin it off.

I seemed to have misinterpreted your post(I glanced at it too briefly on my phone). I also mixed up what thread I was looking at....sorry about that

Yea..things get off topic to easily..(some on mods on other fourms are very active and quickly remove off topic posts)....SNB seems to be lax in that area of cleaning up threads.

 

[jalyst]

NP, misunderstandings happen, I can see how my post could easily be read into more than was intended.

TBC, I'm only going by exactly what I've observed mods do in the last few wks with various spin-off's etc.
Plus what Tim said earlier in this thread a few times already when things diverged; IIRC the same users.

But we're all human ;-) Anyway, lets end it here, back to the topic at hand...

*UPDATE*
Considering you've deleted your post I've now also deleted my response, hopefully that'll "reduce noise".

 

[thiggins]

Mainly for 5GHz wireless. I've tried a couple of the AC1750 class routers and 5GHz wifi was inconsistent. Same issue w/ the R7000 (overrated and over-hyped IMO). I'm hoping that the WRT1900AC solves this issue.

Can you say more about the 5GHz performance "inconsistent"? Disconnects? Range problems?

If the inconsistency is with N clients, you may find the same with the WRT. This is the nature of 11ac right now. Vendors are pushing on to higher streams and MU-MIMO, vs. making what they have more stable and interoperable.

But since it is a third vendor approach (Marvell), you might as well see how they do.

 

[TC777]

Mainly for 5GHz wireless. I've tried a couple of the AC1750 class routers and 5GHz wifi was inconsistent. Same issue w/ the R7000 (overrated and over-hyped IMO). I'm hoping that the WRT1900AC solves this issue.

Also I'd be lying if I didn't mention how sexy the WRT1900AC looks.

I don't agree. If anything the WRT1900AC is the one being overhyped.

Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk

 

[dsring]

I purchased the WRT1900AC a couple of days ago. No real issues so far. I do like the simplicity of its QOS and GUI. I am getting improved range on 5 GHz than I had with my RT-N66U. After limited testing, one interesting thing is that I noticed is that I am getting better range on 5GHz channel 157 than I am on the other channels. I did have to power cycle the router once due to not being able to log into the router.

 

[stevech]

the power limits and rules on DFS (dynamic freq. selection) and APC (automatic [TX] power control) differ from country to country.

Channels in the unlicensed area of 5.4GHz are more restrictive. I think the conventional channel numbers for this are less than #100. (The FCC / gov does not define channel numbers.)

Channels 149 and up should be the equivalent (in performance); in the US (Canada too?) I don't think there are DFS/APC requirements.

Below, scroll down to the 5GHz band. Note how Japan, France, much of the EU is more restrictive than many others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WLAN_channels

All WiFi prouducts have firmware that is region specific so it can impose the power, DFS and APC rules. Without doing so, the regulatory authority for that region won't issue type acceptance for use as an unlicensed transmitter. Some countries have new rules about power or operation at all, outdoors.

 

[cmillar6]

Just read PC World's review of the AC1900 and it has it besting the AC68u by as much as 30% Probably client related but seems to be a sharp contrast to SNB's review.

 

[stevech]

I think Tim uses a consistent set of clients and propagation / multipath situation.
I wouldn't be surprised if most of the popular press reviews are irregular, or worse, in these regards.
Especially PC world as they have to operate on the cheap these days.

 

[hewligun]

I think Tim uses a consistent set of clients and propagation / multipath situation.
I wouldn't be surprised if most of the popular press reviews are irregular, or worse, in these regards.
Especially PC world as they have to operate on the cheap these days.

Pcworld he talked about everything he used. I wouldn't call any of it cheap. And he presented interesting house elements with his home theater room.

 

[lexist2112]

Thiggins review and PC worlds review are both great.

We really see how this router works in a sterile environment versus in real world application. At the end of the day, what "we" care about is how well does this router work in our network. If any of this helps influence our decision making, terrific.

 

[rmiller1959]

CNET Review

Another review with which to compare:

http://www.cnet.com/products/linksys-wrt1900ac-wireless-router/

 

[thiggins]

Pcworld he talked about everything he used. I wouldn't call any of it cheap. And he presented interesting house elements with his home theater room.

Michael Brown's test methods look good, similar to the open air method I used to use. Only thing missing is the actual measurement method for throughput.

 

[njweb]

I purchased the WRT1900AC a couple of days ago. No real issues so far. I do like the simplicity of its QOS and GUI. I am getting improved range on 5 GHz than I had with my RT-N66U. After limited testing, one interesting thing is that I noticed is that I am getting better range on 5GHz channel 157 than I am on the other channels. I did have to power cycle the router once due to not being able to log into the router.

Thanks for the feedback.
How about 2.4 GHz performance (range especially) compared to the N66U?
I typically run LAN Speed Test from 3 separate locations with each router on both bands and put the results (file write and read throughput, signal strength as well as Speedtest.net download and upload speeds).


As soon as I get back home from my current location I will try mine out.
Been waiting patiently for that moment.

 

[hewligun]

Another review with which to compare:

http://www.cnet.com/products/linksys-wrt1900ac-wireless-router/

Interesting... it seems the sterile environment SNB uses really shows the nighthawk as being top notch. In the real world applications it seems the Linksys and 68u fair better. Pretty strange.

I think at the end of the day the wrt1900ac, 68u and r7000 are all great routers.

 

[thiggins]

Interesting... it seems the sterile environment SNB uses really shows the nighthawk as being top notch.

I don't think the data shows that at all.

In 2.4 GHz, the WRT1900AC is equal to or better than both the NETGEAR and ASUS at strong to medium signal levels, but not lower signal levels.

In 5 GHz, all three routers take turns in the lead with strong to medium signal levels, with the WRT1900AC again dropping below the other two as signal levels decline.

As I said in the review, results are close enough to merit trying it out if you are considering it. But I would not expect significantly better (or worse) performance.

 

[njweb]

Just read PC World's review of the AC1900 and it has it besting the AC68u by as much as 30% Probably client related but seems to be a sharp contrast to SNB's review.

One interesting comment in the PC World review is something along the lines of
2.4 GHz performance is not as good but that we should be using 5 GHz anyway and that he only uses 2.4 GHz it for legacy single-band clients.

I am a bit surprised by this observation since many of us have discussed the following given the nature of 2.4 GHz (longer effective range at the expense of slower throughput in some situations) versus 5 GHz (shorter effective range, albeit with higher throughput within the effective radius):

The fact that anyone with a more challenging environment (larger home, lots of walls or other obstacles, general non-linear path between router and wireless clients etc.) will likely need to use 2.4 GHz (as opposed to 5 GHz) for wireless clients located at some of the further locations (relative to the router's location in the home).


Does anyone else find the reviewer's observation, regarding reportedly solely needing 5 GHz, surprising?

 

[hewligun]

One interesting comment in the PC World review is something along the lines of
2.4 GHz performance is not as good but that we should be using 5 GHz anyway and that he only uses 2.4 GHz it for legacy single-band clients.

I am a bit surprised by this observation since many of us have discussed the following given the nature of 2.4 GHz (longer effective range at the expense of slower throughput in some situations) versus 5 GHz (shorter effective range, albeit with higher throughput within the effective radius):

The fact that anyone with a more challenging environment (larger home, lots of walls or other obstacles, general non-linear path between router and wireless clients etc.) will likely need to use 2.4 GHz (as opposed to 5 GHz) for wireless clients located at some of the further locations (relative to the router's location in the home).


Does anyone else find the reviewer's observation, regarding reportedly solely needing 2.4 GHz, surprising?

I actually took the approach of putting as much on the 5ghz this time around on my r7000. And for example my iphone was only showing 2 bars instead of 3 on 2.4ghz the speed was way faster in the 5ghz range. So I think these newer routers just extend the range in 5ghz to negate using 2.4ghz unless its legacy. Thats just my take so far. only about 10 days in though.

 

[njweb]

I actually took the approach of putting as much on the 5ghz this time around on my r7000. And for example my iphone was only showing 2 bars instead of 3 on 2.4ghz the speed was way faster in the 5ghz range. So I think these newer routers just extend the range in 5ghz to negate using 2.4ghz unless its legacy. Thats just my take so far. only about 10 days in though.

Thanks for the feedback.
So, just to confirm, you had a weaker signal on 2.4 GHz (2 bars) than 5 GHz (3 bars) when using your iPhone? Was this relatively close to the router?

I can't wait to try mine out and run tests on both bands in my usual 3 test locations so I can compare them to my RT-AC66U results:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10577



By the way, my last sentence had a typo which I have since fixed (I meant of course just 5 GHz being needed according to the reviewer).
I see you knew what I meant of course.