NETGEAR WNDR3700 Reviewed

[pallec]

Hi,

Just got me a WNDR3700. Fantastic router, but I am very disappointed with the performance of the 5Ghz band.

My router is placed on first floor, and on second floor I am not able to get a usefull signal. We are talking max. 15 feet through a wooden floor..

No problems with 2.4Ghz - full signal.

Is 5Ghz really that bad. Not very usefull to have a wireless band, if you need to be in the same room as the router..

Is this just how it performs?

Thanks

 

[dpeagle]

Hi,

Just got me a WNDR3700. Fantastic router, but I am very disappointed with the performance of the 5Ghz band.

My router is placed on first floor, and on second floor I am not able to get a usefull signal. We are talking max. 15 feet through a wooden floor..

No problems with 2.4Ghz - full signal.

Is 5Ghz really that bad. Not very usefull to have a wireless band, if you need to be in the same room as the router..

Is this just how it performs?

Thanks

have you tried different channels and different security settings. also is it broadcasting at 100%

 

[pallec]

I am using WPA2-AES, which should be the only good option for an 'n' router.

Transmit power is at 100%.

It is set at channel 36. I have not tried other channels, so I will give that a go.

What useful distances are you experiencing?

 

[claykin]

I am using WPA2-AES, which should be the only good option for an 'n' router.

Transmit power is at 100%.

It is set at channel 36. I have not tried other channels, so I will give that a go.

What useful distances are you experiencing?

What is the client in your notebook? Many have horribly designed 5Ghz circuits. Also some notebook OEM's use a "universal" antenna design for notebooks with single and dual band. These are often not optimized for 5Ghz.

Even with a great sensitive 5Ghz radio, it will bleed off very quickly in comparison to 2.4Ghz. The 5Ghz wave is much shorter and less penetrable through solid material. This is a fact of RF that won't change until someone figures out a way to make much more sensitive radios.

I would be delighted if the FCC would open up another wifi band in the <2Ghz frequency band.

 

[pallec]

I have two notebooks (Acer and Medion) and they both use the 'Intel WiFi 5100AGN'. I have also tried my sons Toshiba notebook (not sure about the client).

Result is the same with all 3 notebooks.

I also tried all the different 5Ghz channels, but no difference.

 

[dpeagle]

i am using this linksys usb adapter (http://www.shoplinksys.com/REFURBIS...VproductId77157805VVcatId543906VVviewprod.htm). this is a cisco recertified refurb for under $30.00 shipped. it comes with a docking station and waranty. it has been doing ok. it might be worth a try.

 

[rpwoodman]

yellow, and i think it should also have a big number sticker on it... hth...

Cool - thanks chum

 

[claykin]

I have two notebooks (Acer and Medion) and they both use the 'Intel WiFi 5100AGN'. I have also tried my sons Toshiba notebook (not sure about the client).

Result is the same with all 3 notebooks.

I also tried all the different 5Ghz channels, but no difference.

The Intel 5100 should be OK, but then there's the variable of the antenna used by Acer and Medion. Have you tried the latest Intel wifi driver?

Have you thought about relocating the WNDR3700? Or, it just might be that 5Ghz is not going to work in your application.

 

[Chaplin]

Does that mean to change the 5GHz mode from "up to 300Mbit" to "up to 130Mbit"? If so, shouldn't I be shooting for 300Mbit?

I understand that dual-band doesn't necessarily give more speed, but my client (an Intel 4965AGN) can only to 130Mbit in 2.4GHz, whereas it can do 300Mbit in 5GHz -- so, I was expecting the 300Mbit connection over 5GHz to substantially outperform the 130Mbit connection in 2.4GHz (provided that I have an 'excellent' 5 bar signal).

But even with 5 bars, the 300Mbit connection is usually quite a bit slower than the 130Mbit connection.

Thanks for any thoughts! -Scott

Interressant!

Tim??? Explication...

 

[claykin]

Interressant!

Tim??? Explication...

turnstyle claims he cannot connect at >130Mb/s with 2.4Ghz. Why? Maybe he needs to upgrade his Intel wifi driver? If his notebook uses an OEM tool to control wifi, maybe its buggy (many are). Whenever possible I usually try to run the reference Intel drivers with Intel connection utility. They work best.

I would also visit DSL reports and run the Tweak test tool. Maybe RWIN, MTU, etc are out of range for this type of connection.

I would even check the notebook OEM to see if they have a BIOS update for the motherboard. Run Windows Updates to make sure its up to date.

So, there's many reasons why turnstyle may not be able to connect at 300Mb/s @ 2.Ghz and why his 5Ghz throughput is poor.

 

[thiggins]

turnstyle claims he cannot connect at >130Mb/s with 2.4Ghz. Why? Maybe he needs to upgrade his Intel wifi driver?

As far as I know, Intel has not removed the no-300mbps-in-2.4GHz limitation on the 4965.

 

[claykin]

As far as I know, Intel has not removed the no-300mbps-in-2.4GHz limitation on the 4965.

Interesting. Intel is talking out of both sides of their mouth. This first link doesn't make any reference to "no channel bonding" in 2.4Ghz for the 4965 (at least not that I saw in my quick scan).

http://www.intel.com/network/connectivity/resources/doc_library/tech_brief/316286.pdf

This webpage explains channel bonding and discusses its limitations in 2.4Ghz. Note the bottom of the page mentions it applies to the 4965. So, do they support it or not?

http://www.intel.com/support/wireless/sb/CS-025343.htm

This document (page 8) claims no channel bonding in 2.4Ghz. Weird.

http://download.intel.com/network/c...Intel_Next-Gen_Wireless_N_Reviewers_Guide.PDF

I feel like I'm dealing with a politician.

 

[Chaplin]

In 2.4 mode 4965AGN does no do channel bonding

Double-Wide Channels
Draft-N effectively creates more room for data with a double-wide spectrum channel. Double-wide channels are created by bonding together two 20MHz wireless communication channels into a 40MHz channel (Figure 2). This channel bonding increases the data rate because data rate is directly proportional to channel band-width. 802.11a/b/g networks use a single 20MHz channel. Due to the limited available bandwidth in the 2.4GHz frequency, the higher-bandwidth 5GHz frequency best sup-ports channel bonding. Intel supports channel bonding only in the 5GHz frequency.

 

[vasgyuszi]

Dear experienced Guys!

What dou you think, would it be run the following configuration? And if would, how should I set the second router, to serving as bridge?

The config I was imaging:

NAS--LAN--Router1(as router)--AIR--Router2(as bridge)--LAN--Mediaadapter

The tutorial http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...onvert-a-wireless-router-into-an-access-point not helped, because I want to operate the second router as a bridge and not having connected by wire to router1. Is this possible at all?

Currently I operate instead of router2 a real bridge, but it has only internal antennas. That kind of disadvantage can be avoided by usage of a router, I think. The bandwidth is now (5 GHz, 5 feet plus a wall between them) 40-45 MBit/s to the router and 35-40 MBit/s to the bridge. My goal is to get a little bit higher download speed to not running out of HD streaming capabilities.

Thank You;
vasgyuszi

 

[thiggins]

You can use a router as a bridge only if the router supports that mode or if you load alternative firmware like DD-WRT that is supported on that router.

Internal vs. external antennas won't make a big difference unless you install higher-gain antennas.

With only a single wall between, I'd drill a hole, run a cable and be done with it...

 

[vasgyuszi]

Sh_t, You have right, I mean with the hole

The equipments are the DIR-825 b1 and the DAP-1522.
The flat I do not own, so I would'nt drill through like a cheese, but truth be told, looks already like a chees because of the crappy Ikea furniture. One more hole does'nt matter
Couple of months agoe I was drilling through the wall between the kitchen and the child room by an accident... I was to install one more wall cupboard and than happened.

What do You think: shall I try to fit the DAP-1522 firmware onto the DIR-825? Or is this a crappy idea.

If the config of two routers (one as router and another as bridge) would go, I don't know, how can determine the bridge to which network of the router should he connect? Because the equipments are dual band simultanous radio routers.
Within the current application is just simple, because the DAP-1522 has'nt simultanous capability, so I have to set one particular network to being connected to that. Any changes shall be done manually. But how would be that work by a two router config?

Best regrds,
vasgyuszi

 

[thiggins]

Drill the hole. Patch it when you leave. Don't try to load the DAP-1522 firmware onto the DIR-825. It won't work.

 

[vasgyuszi]

Thanks again
I'll do it like You've to advise me.
Best regards,
vasgyuszi

 

[BMW]

Best Readyshare Upload

I am happily using the Readyshare feature of this router but I joined the community to as a specific question.

The download via HTTP over the internet works great, but what is the easiest way to do uploads from the internet? I would rather not use FTP as that requires a ftp client. I would like the ability to upload small files from wherever I am to the Readyshare drive directly. I am only looking for small amounts of data, nothing huge.

I hope I am making sense.

Thanks

BMW

 

[build6001]

DHCP Option 66 support

I just ordered my WNDR3700 base on the great review and information on this site. I have a couple of questions that I can't seem to find answers to.

1. I work out of my home office and use Windows Deployment Services to quickly image machines for testing and simulation. WDS uses DHCP options 66 and 67 (bootp) to allow machines to boot off the network for imaging. Can I set these DHCP options on the WNDR3700?

2. Assuming the answer to 1 is no, I'll just continue using my existing Windows DHCP server. However, I'd still like to use the guest network functionality on the WNDR3700. Is it possible to disable DHCP on the router for the 'internal' networks, while leaving it enabled for the guest networks?