router advice

[L&LD]

Pretty sure the word "basic" and "dont need to put much into making firmware" explains it. I was explaining why tp-link routers seem to run smoothly.

No, doesn't explain that they have potentially huge security holes that should have been patched decades ago in their routers.

Basic does not mean non-security.

 

[System Error Message]

No, doesn't explain that they have potentially huge security holes that should have been patched decades ago in their routers.

Basic does not mean non-security.

Perhaps its because china wants to be able to hack into your homes

 

[ikomrad]

If you don't have clients that have 3 antennae (or, the ones that do are not used constantly for high speed transfers within your network), then the RT-AC56U is better because;

The RT-AC66U is based on the equivalent hardware as the RT-N66U. Slower processor and a much older 'AC' design (first gen).

The RT-AC56U is based on the equivalent hardware as the RT-AC68U. Faster processer, better designed radio circuitry (as witnessed in range and throughput in actual, real world, use).

And that is even with it's internal antennae.


If you think the internal configuration is hindering performance or range,

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/asuswrt-merlin-3-0-0-4-374-38-is-out.14691/page-19#post-99500

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/asuswrt-merlin-378-55-3_hgg-final-mod.26524/page-2#post-199549


As to whether you should replace your 'AC66U with an RT-AC56U? Not without testing fully in your environment.

But you will get a few more features to use that the older router can't handle because of the lower performance processor it has (AiProtection being one such feature, for example). You should also get faster VPN speeds as well.

If you can use your 'AC66U as an AP to light up a remote corner of the areas you use WiFi in, this low cost 'upgrade' is a no brainer, imo.

If you want a single router that offers more of everything that your 'AC66U can do and more, the RT-AC3100, RT-AC88U and the RT-AC5300 are the better long term options if you're really pushing your network and you have many 3 antennae/3 stream clients that you use to the max.

Of course, you could also wait for the latest Asus batch of routers that will be introduced soonish too.

This is a game that never ceases to be fun (and expensive).

Thanks for explaining the differences between the ac66u and the ac56u. I would not have expected a device with a lower model number to be more powerful than a later model.

Then again, Apple put a weaker processor in its 2015 MacBook than in the previous year's MacBook Air, so it does happen.

My wireless router covers about 976 sqare feet and the clients are all antenna-less laptops, phones, home automation( Amazon Echo, Nest, Wemo) devices , and gaming consoles.

I'm pretty happy with the stock firmware features. Coverage could be better, but if I have 2 Ap's I would not need that as coverage would be split between them. Asus' s free dynamic dns and vpn server both meet my needs, so no problem there. It even supports a guest network which is great when friends are over.

It would be nice to have an faster cpu and a real dns server built into the router. Also, I'm interested in system and device motioning , so
SNMP support would be a nice addition .

How difficult is it to install RMerlin? I used to run dd-wrt on old linksys routers so I'm ok with custom firmware with a good track history.

 

[coxhaus]

I like the Cisco RV320 router. It is very fast for me with low latency. I have had a hard time getting my pfSense PC running on an old Xeon server motherboard to run as fast. The only way I have achieved the low latency is to off load the Intel NICs. I am now approaching the same snappiest which I call low latency. Running the DSLreport's speedtest on a TWC 300 megabit connection I have hit 358 megabit down. I have never had the RV320 lock up for me.

The biggest selling point for me in the RV320 router is ACLs, access control lists, which I use for all sorts of things. There were several in place when I ran the speedtest. I would not buy a router without ACLs. I cannot function without ACLs. I do not want to have to program iptables on a router. I just want to be able to enter a rule and have it work, no programing involved.

There is someone asking on ASUS forum how to block the second router from a stacked set to not be able to access PCs on the first routers network. This is easy with ACLs. You just block the local network of the first router. I have to have ACLs on my router.

PS
I have heard the ERL has a faster processor than the RV320. But what I also think is the RV320 has lower latency than the ERL which is measured by the router graphs on this site. This is why the RV320 measures higher.

There are 2 components to me which make a router great and they are bandwidth and latency. You can have one without the other. But both makes it great. This to me is what is so good about the router graphs. This is in terms of through put not features. Features have to play a part also.

This is why hardware acceleration is such a big selling point. You get both great bandwidth and latency. But to get this you have to give up firewall features which slow down your router. The trick is to have the most firewall features and great bandwidth with great latency. This is the best of all.

 

[System Error Message]

i think asus routers do have an actual DNS server in it, but to configure it like a server you would need console.

 

[ikomrad]

I like the Cisco RV320 router. It is very fast for me with low latency. I have had a hard time getting my pfSense PC running on an old Xeon server motherboard to run as fast. The only way I have achieved the low latency is to off load the Intel NICs. I am now approaching the same snappiest which I call low latency. Running the DSLreport's speedtest on a TWC 300 megabit connection I have hit 358 megabit down. I have never had the RV320 lock up for me.

The biggest selling point for me in the RV320 router is ACLs, access control lists, which I use for all sorts of things. There were several in place when I ran the speedtest. I would not buy a router without ACLs. I cannot function without ACLs. I do not want to have to program iptables on a router. I just want to be able to enter a rule and have it work, no programing involved.

There is someone asking on ASUS forum how to block the second router from a stacked set to not be able to access PCs on the first routers network. This is easy with ACLs. You just block the local network of the first router. I have to have ACLs on my router.

PS
I have heard the ERL has a faster processor than the RV320. But what I also think is the RV320 has lower latency than the ERL which is measured by the router graphs on this site. This is why the RV320 measures higher.

There are 2 components to me which make a router great and they are bandwidth and latency. You can have one without the other. But both makes it great. This to me is what is so good about the router graphs. This is in terms of through put not features. Features have to play a part also.

This is why hardware acceleration is such a big selling point. You get both great bandwidth and latency. But to get this you have to give up firewall features which slow down your router. The trick is to have the most firewall features and great bandwidth with great latency. This is the best of all.

On the Asus ac66u, I clicked on 'enable firewall' and then clicked on 'apply'. piece of cake. Iptables and acl's are useful when you need them, most home users do not.

 

[coxhaus]

On the Asus ac66u, I clicked on 'enable firewall' and then clicked on 'apply'. piece of cake. Iptables and acl's are useful when you need them, most home users do not.

That will not work because router 2 is a member of router's one network.

PS
If you want to help the guy the thread is posted in the ASUS forum.

 

[ccm001]

"Reviving" this thread to say thanks again to L&LD!

I bought the ac56u and am now very happy with its range and through speed on both bands. At first I wasn't impressed, kids thought things seemed slower than before, even went out and bought a tp-link archer c7 to try - wasn't all that impressed with it either. Then I came back to this thread, installed the "unethical" HGG firmware and WOW, that made a noticeable difference for me in range and speed. I didn't even mention anything to the family, and I was asked the next day if I did anything different because the wi-fi seemed really fast. Needless to say the archer c7 got returned and I am now an Asus convert. So thanks!

 

[Duminica]

installed the "unethical" HGG firmware

Why is that particular firmware considered unethical?

A link would do.

Thanks

--edit--
Don't mind me, found the discussions regarding hggomes, curiosity satisfied.
Cheers