TP-Link Archer C9 review?

[microchip]

It appears the C9 is out and can be bought on various stores. Any chance of a review?

 

[thiggins]

It appears the C9 is out and can be bought on various stores. Any chance of a review?

Not quite really shipping yet. Review unit is coming once it is released next week.

 

[DoctorA]

It appears the C9 is out and can be bought on various stores. Any chance of a review?

Looks like can be purchased as pre-order on Amazon and this is one brief user review posted. Not extensive evaluation though.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00PDLRHFW/?tag=snbforums-20

 

[paraplu]

Using the C9 for two weeks now as access point, with an uptime of one week, after playing.
Very stable, and good, consistent, performance with my AC clients (air2, s5, intel7260) as well as with all my 2.4 clients. AC performance is as expected (speedtest.net: RX between 300 and 400 Mbps, TX between 200 and 300 Mbps, with 2-antenna mobile devices).

Had to play a bit with placement and antenna direction before getting solid results around my house.

At certain difficult 5Ghz-range spots (dead with ac87u) this one still rocks, similar to R7000. What I like is the low latency, internet just feels more snappy compared to ac87u and r7000 both stock. Ping tests result in 6ms, compared to 12ms for the other 2 routers. Still not sure why, but I am pleased.

BTW This router keeps cool on-the-touch; probably being energy-efficient.

Some cons: no dfs (eu) channels, and loosing the wan port in AP-mode. Defining a dummy static wan to reduce constant dhcp lookups.

Note that I am not using any features, other then access point.

Also looking forward to a professional review of this product.

 

[carlos pan]

archer C9 review?

does the actual C9 review had come yet??

 

[microchip]

does the actual C9 review had come yet??

Haven't seen anything yet, but the C9 can be bought in my local shop for 155 Euro's so it's definitely out at least in Belgium

 

[kilgannon]

ABT was briefly selling the TP-Link Archer C9 for $143, so I snagged one. Just got it up and running this weekend. I'm only using it as an access point. I wish the interface made it easier to switch over to an AP mode and still allow the use of the WAN port like other routers I've used in the past. So far so good though. I briefly had the Archer C7, and I can already tell the C9 has better 5GHz range. I haven't pushed it hard, but it's been speedy and no resets needed in my limited and non-strenuous use.

I'd love to start seeing more documentation and conversation around the Archer C9. Everyone seems pretty quiet about it so far... since not many people probably have one yet and may not plan on it with some of the more powerful announcements coming later this year.

 

[Runamok81]

I'd love to start seeing more documentation and conversation around the Archer C9.

Count me in as one of those anxiously awaiting a proper review. I just ordered an Archer C9 as well. Been scouring the net and doesn't look like anyone has done any true testing on this hardware. It has similar Broadcom (BCM4709) guts as the Asus RT-AC68 and Netgear R7000, but my I'm hoping it can edge out the Netgear R7000. Let's see that review!

 

[thiggins]

Test data is in the charts and Rankers. Review up shortly.

 

[kilgannon]

Test data is in the charts and Rankers. Review up shortly.

Review up... and quite depressing. I guess I should be happy I only spent $143 on it. I'm using it solely as an access point, so I've disabled any and everything extra I possibly can. My hope is that if it's not working on DHCP, firewalling, hosting USB media, guest networking, etc., that it will improve performance, distances, and reliability.

 

[thiggins]

Review up... and quite depressing. I guess I should be happy I only spent $143 on it. I'm using it solely as an access point, so I've disabled any and everything extra I possibly can. My hope is that if it's not working on DHCP, firewalling, hosting USB media, guest networking, etc., that it will improve performance, distances, and reliability.

Those features have nothing to do with range performance.

The C9 is not a bad product at all. It's just not leaps and bounds better than other products out there.

I've said it before: Looking for a uber-router that significantly outperforms products that are already out there, especially in (relatively) mature AC1750 and AC1900 classes is a fool's errand.

Products in a given class tend to be more alike than different, especially when you look at average performance, as our tests tend to do.

 

[kilgannon]

Can you explain why (or your theory why) the Archer C7 beats out the Archer C9 in most benchmarks?

 

[Runamok81]

Those features have nothing to do with range performance.

The C9 is not a bad product at all. It's just not leaps and bounds better than other products out there.

I've said it before: Looking for a uber-router that significantly outperforms products that are already out there, especially in (relatively) mature AC1750 and AC1900 classes is a fool's errand.

Products in a given class tend to be more alike than different, especially when you look at average performance, as our tests tend to do.

Perfect timing on the review, unfortunately for TP-LINK ... after reading it ... my Archer C9 went straight back to Amazon. Hard to justify $169 when the Netgear R7000 can be had for $175. I get that the C9 still tracks near it's competitors, but I'm part of PC enthusiasts community. We thrive on bragging rights and benchmarks. Purchasing "bottom of its class" gear just won't satisfy us.

 

[kilgannon]

Perfect timing on the review, unfortunately for TP-LINK ... after reading it ... my Archer C9 went straight back to Amazon. Hard to justify $169 when the Netgear R7000 can be had for $175. I get that the C9 still tracks near it's competitors, but I'm part of PC enthusiasts community. We thrive on bragging rights and benchmarks. Purchasing "bottom of its class" gear just won't satisfy us.

It's worth noting that Amazon now lists it for $149.99. It sounds like you'll be returning it, but if not, they might reimburse you on the price difference.

 

[thiggins]

Can you explain why (or your theory why) the Archer C7 beats out the Archer C9 in most benchmarks?

Actuallly, it doesn't.

If you plot the two products side by side and use the "Profile" benchmarks, you will see each product has strengths and weaknesses depending on band, direction and signal level (attenuation).

Why? The biggest difference is 2.4 GHz uplink where the C7 V2 has higher maximum throughput at strong signal levels. The difference here is most likely due to the change in chipset for the 2.4 GHz radio.

 

[kilgannon]

Updated firmware Archer C9_V1_150122.

 

[InspectHerGadget]

Those features have nothing to do with range performance.

The C9 is not a bad product at all. It's just not leaps and bounds better than other products out there.

I've said it before: Looking for a uber-router that significantly outperforms products that are already out there, especially in (relatively) mature AC1750 and AC1900 classes is a fool's errand.

Products in a given class tend to be more alike than different, especially when you look at average performance, as our tests tend to do.

I've had issues on 5GHz with my Nokia 1520 and iPad Air 2 with my AC87U even with the latest Merlin firmware. It just seems flakey even though I don't have issues with my Microsoft Surface Pro 3. The Surface though doesn't get moved to different locations much though.

This C9 looks like a really solid router and on Amazon, it seems it has a clean slate when it comes to connection and wireless issues while the other Netgear/Asus latest routers hover around 30% with one star and two.

I use the TP-Link W8960 for my customers and I've sold probably 100 of them and have maybe had problems with one or two of them which is an excellent result.

I think maybe TP-Link is undervalued.