Purchase ASUS RT-AC68U or pay more for RT-AC68P?

[willwhitworth]

I've been doing my research on routers since it's time for an upgrade. I've decided to purchase a router that uses Merlin's firmware.

Based on what I've read, the ASUS RT-AC68U is a great router and fully supported by Merlin. However, I've seen that there is a newer model (RT-AC68P) that goes for about $50 more. The improvements are listed as:

• V2 revision of Broadcom-based AC1900 router with a faster processor and improved storage throughput.
• Faster USB 3.0 storage performance than the 68U.

I'm wondering if some of you with experience with these different revisions can tell me if it's worth the increased price to get the newer revision. Does the faster processor improve the wireless range/speed dramatically?

Thanks for any input you can provide!

 

[hggomes]

RT-AC68P, no doubts about it.

Range is the same, CPU is a little faster.

The best purchase for the price is RT-AC56U, if you intend to expend more money go for RT-AC68U or P paying those extra $50.

 

[willwhitworth]

Sweet! I found out I have $45 in credit on my Best Buy account, so that made the decision easy for me. I just picked up the RT-AC68P.

 

[docta_v]

The RT-AC68P is worth it for the better USB 3.0 performance. Especially if you're a minidlna or samba user.

I recommend using the 378.53 or 378.55 beta firmware. There are some issues on this model with 378.54 that are fixed in 55 beta.

 

[willwhitworth]

Thanks! I just flashed 378.55_beta1 and it's working great!

 

[noric]

How is the AC68P's usb 3.0 better than AC68U's one?
Thanks.

 

[willwhitworth]

How is the AC68P's usb 3.0 better than AC68U's one?
Thanks.

Take a look at this review: http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...1900-gigabit-router-reviewed?showall=&start=1. He explains this under the Storage Performance section.

 

[noric]

Thanks.

 

[L&LD]

If you do use the USB attached storage option and have a compatible external USB drive that can give you the extra speed, $50 extra may be worth it. Look at the link provided previously to see what was used to test the storage performance (a 10K RPM 300GB Velociraptor). If you have anything less, the performance reached may be substantially lower.

Overall, I would save the money to put towards a much better solution (a QNAP or Synology NAS) if network attached storage performance is of primary importance. Yes, a proper NAS is much more expensive. But when matched to the proper workload and expectations, it is the better choice in the long run.

 

[noric]

If you do use the USB attached storage option and have a compatible external USB drive that can give you the extra speed, $50 extra may be worth it. Look at the link provided previously to see what was used to test the storage performance (a 10K RPM 300GB Velociraptor). If you have anything less, the performance reached may be substantially lower.

Overall, I would save the money to put towards a much better solution (a QNAP or Synology NAS) if network attached storage performance is of primary importance. Yes, a proper NAS is much more expensive. But when matched to the proper workload and expectations, it is the better choice in the long run.

It probably comes down to everyone's personal needs. Personally I wouldn't spend one and a half times the money just for the the increased usb speed. FOR ME, 30MB/s is already pretty decent, also considering that I mainly use Wi-Fi laptops.
And for the slightly improved soc, that's a very minor improvement, you can always overclock if you need some more juice.

However, why do you say "compatible"? Shouldn't every usb 3.0 enclosure and every modern hard disk reach 70MB/s?

 

[L&LD]

'Should' and 'does' depends on more than wish and want.

The chipset, the specific hard drive or the quality of the flash (nand) drive or ssd used and the quality of the cable to connect everything is more important than what the router's hardware is capable of.

 

[followmsi]

I do have both devices .. RT-AC68U as main router and one RT-AC68P as media bridge.
On both devices there is a hard disk connected, using minidlna and samba services only.

In my case the performance of the P version is very bad !

USB 3 disk connected to the USB 3 port is reaching 35 MB/s max ... Both ways .. Downloading/Uploading.
Tested from wired PC where the same USB 3 disk is running with at least 80 MB/s.

I use Merlin firmware too.

Maybe original asus firmware behaves different.
Needs to be tested.

 

[RMerlin]

I do have both devices .. RT-AC68U as main router and one RT-AC68P as media bridge.
On both devices there is a hard disk connected, using minidlna and samba services only.

In my case the performance of the P version is very bad !

USB 3 disk connected to the USB 3 port is reaching 35 MB/s max ... Both ways .. Downloading/Uploading.
Tested from wired PC where the same USB 3 disk is running with at least 80 MB/s.

Disable the option to reduce USB3 interference, under Wireless -> Professional.

 

[followmsi]

Disable the option to reduce USB3 interference, under Wireless -> Professional.

Thanks for your help.

nvram set usb_usb3=1
nvram commit
reboot

This increased USB3 speed from 35 MB/s to approx. 45 MB/s (up) and 55 MB/s (down) !

But it´s far away from the values in this article below .. ( already mentioned in this thread )

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...reless-ac1900-gigabit-router-reviewed?start=1

To be honest, for me it´s enough, as I know it´s not a dedicated NAS storage, it´s still a router.

 

[RMerlin]

Thanks for your help.

nvram set usb_usb3=1
nvram commit
reboot

This increased USB3 speed from 35 MB/s to approx. 45 MB/s (up) and 55 MB/s (down) !

But it´s far away from the values in this article below .. ( already mentioned in this thread )

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...reless-ac1900-gigabit-router-reviewed?start=1

To be honest, for me it´s enough, as I know it´s not a dedicated NAS storage, it´s still a router.

My firmware uses a far more recent version of Samba, which will have a performance impact of around 5-10 MB/s slower than the stock firmware.

Performance will also vary based on the filesystem, the USB enclosure, the disk used, etc...

 

[followmsi]

My firmware uses a far more recent version of Samba, which will have a performance impact of around 5-10 MB/s slower than the stock firmware.

Performance will also vary based on the filesystem, the USB enclosure, the disk used, etc...

Thanks for the infos !

Quite happy now