TP-Link Introduces Intel-based Router

[Makaveli]

So are you saying the Blue Cave isn't any good? What would be the best setup over two floors according to you? Price range max 400 euros/ 450 USD.

Don't be fooled by marketing spending close to $500 USD on a single router to cover 2 floors is not ideal.

 

[sfx2000]

Dual core CPU typically around 1.5Ghz intel atom based arch

The Lantiq SOC is MIPS based, interesting arch as they did use MIPS hypervisor approach (it's a quad core, but only three cores are available, the fourth is hidden and running the hypervisor).

 

[RMerlin]

So are you saying the Blue Cave isn't any good? What would be the best setup over two floors according to you? Price range max 400 euros/ 450 USD.

It's not good if your focus is on anything related to CPU performance (i.e. VPN or USB disk sharing). I can't comment on its wireless performance as I don't have an environment to properly test that.

 

[System Error Message]

The issue here isnt what you think, its that tp link is releasing a router using an overpriced SoC. I say overpriced compared to other tp link routers based on other SoCs. intel's positioning in this market has been poor and one of the mistakes intel always does when trying to compete with ARM is price their SoC higher or make it more expensive to develop for. Take an intel vs ARM tablet for example, for the same price, the ARM tablet will give a better experience than intel.

The reason for this is something you can see, intel releases a chip so cut down on the SoC part while still retaining the atom core, now a dual core atom at 1.5Ghz no doubt with hardware crypto and packet engine can no doubt be a good router and do VPN fast, even things like usb disk share, but the price is another matter. What tplink has to do is add their own wifi via PCIe (another bunch of red tape) and a switch whereas many broadcom and qualcomm offerings include wifi and switch as part as the SoC with only the physical having its own chip. If intel keeps pricing itself higher than its competitors, it will never be able to compete in the consumer network segment.

Comparing this intel SoC to a usual intel ATOM chipset or SoC it is lacking many things. It has the core and some extra things but thats it, it has no advantages other than that over another SoC. For instance intel could re purpose its IGP for some hardware acceleration. The intel ATOM isnt really a slow chip when used as a router and is used in many NAS and pfsense builds, but those at least came with a decent chipset, something one argued works better. With this SoC, it only has a single memory channel and not even at full speed either so it is also lacking in memory bandwidth, and to add to the insult intel calls it anyWAN. If an SOC is called anyWAN i would expect something like my CCR in which it has many many CPU connected ports capable of supporting any network config you want.

Intel as usual trying to move into a market and failing because they price themselves out of it.

 

[sfx2000]

The issue here isnt what you think, its that tp link is releasing a router using an overpriced SoC. I say overpriced compared to other tp link routers based on other SoCs. intel's positioning in this market has been poor and one of the mistakes intel always does when trying to compete with ARM is price their SoC higher or make it more expensive to develop for. Take an intel vs ARM tablet for example, for the same price, the ARM tablet will give a better experience than intel.

Keep in mind that the Intel/Lantiq based designs have been competitively priced...

Note that the Phison/BlueCave, and now the TP-Link - they are all based on the same Intel branded chipset - which is not x86 based.

I'd like to see Intel open up the source for Lantiq - but given what it is - MIPS, I don't think they'll do it - upstream concerns.

Still just nice to see that Intel is exploring this market with what they have...

 

[RMerlin]

The Deco mesh systems.

Interesting, these are based on OpenWRT.

I can't find any trace of the Trend Micro code in it however.

 

[sfx2000]

Interesting, these are based on OpenWRT.

Orbi has a lot of OpenWRT under the hood with QCA secret sauce...

 

[phusebox]

Don't be fooled by marketing spending close to $500 USD on a single router to cover 2 floors is not ideal.

Ann tips to what is?

 

[sfx2000]

Ann tips to what is?

ASP for the TP-Link -- $170USD...

 

[phusebox]

ASP for the TP-Link -- $170USD...

ASP?

 

[sfx2000]

ASP?

Average Sales Price...

 

[phusebox]

Average Sales Price...

Still don't know what wifi solution to get then to cover 2 floors. TP Link seems to have hundreds of models (exaggerating).

Are they that much better than Asus or Netgear?

 

[sfx2000]

Still don't know what wifi solution to get then to cover 2 floors. TP Link seems to have hundreds of models (exaggerating).

Are they that much better than Asus or Netgear?

That's another thread/topic perhaps...

 

[verbage]

I know this is an old thread, but I am wondering if anybody has some real world experience with this router--the Archer C2700 (not C2600!!!)? It seems to be end-of-life in that is in not listed in TP-Link Archer's current lineup as of today (see https://www.tp-link.com/us/home-networking/wifi-router/), but it still has an active product page (see https://www.tp-link.com/us/home-networking/wifi-router/archer-c2700/), and there is even a recent firmware release for it from 2020-01-17 so just ~2 months ago. I ask because I am looking for a backup router in case of emergency, and I see I can get this for ~$100.

I do have a Netgear R7800 that I use normally, but the NVRAM just failed, and I am waiting for an RMA swap. In the meantime, I swapped in old faithful, an Asus RT-N66U that I had used prior to the R7800, but sadly this morning, it gave up the ghost (completely dead--no LEDs whatsoever, and AC adapter is putting out good voltage). While I expect my replacement R7800 to arrive sometime this week, since the RT-N66U is now kaput, well, I do want to have another decent backup especially given life in the age of coronavirus with a family who freaks out over when "the Internet doesn't work"

This Archer C2700 seems to have decent specs, indeed, similar to the R7800, but there is very, very little information available about it around the web. There is plenty about the Archer C2600 (Broadcom-based), which seems reasonable, but very little about the C2700, which is Intel-based. I saw comments earlier in this thread about the CPU of the C2700 being a bit anemic, but since this will be a backup once I get my replacement R7800, then that might not be too much of an issue. Plus, I would not use it for VPNing or USB disk sharing--just for routing traffic. Seems like a relatively decent backup router for $100, but for sure, I'd be happy to hear about anybody's real world experience with it beforehand.

 

[Andrew LB]

What about the new TP-Link Archer AX50? (AX3000). Intel GRX350 SoC Its selling for $149 on amazon.

- Intel AnyWAN GRX350 SoC dual core
- Intel Wav654 Wi-Fi 6
- 2.4ghz Qorvo QPF4216B
- 5ghz Skyworks SKY85743-31

 

[thiggins]

No TP-Link routers support OFDMA. TP-Link will not provide any information on when they expect to support it.

 

[calvin tran]

For me it is more of reusing older chips that would no longer be good for a PC, e.g., the BOM cost of a most mobile CPUs, are in the sub $10 range, where the bulk of the cost is recovering the research and development cost before the chip is obsolete. I was thinking that while they may be obsolete for a PC, they may still be good for router if the goal is to offer some networking hardware, but with a strong focus on USB storage where a user may be able to sustain over 100MB/s for both reads and writes.

CPUs for PC are not typically lower power chips and not desinged specifically for networking task.