What is dual core ?

[huotg01]

Neither are mine, but then I got scared by the horde of users complaining about the 2.4GHz problems with that model.

Originally Posted by enr00ted in another thread:
[...]
Based on your future proof aproach, I'd say decide between the AC68U and the Nighthawk. Avoid the AC66U, usb 2.0 is awfull. Also I can't recommend the AC56U, (wich is almost the same as AC68U, but cheaper) until someone can confirm, that as of today, the problems it had are solved.
[...]

As I already told you in another thread:

For your information:
The USB 3.0 may generate a Radio Frequency Interference on 2.4 GHz Wireless Devices. There is a very good article here about that problem: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2423604,00.asp
ans also (for those more technical): http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/...nce-paper.html

Therefore that situation is not specific to ASUS.

That said, under that aspect, the ac68u is similar to the ac56u, and I think that, quite strange, the shielding is a little bit better on the ac56u port...

Again, this is unrelated to ASUS.

ASUS, for one, add a switch to minimize interference. I suppose that by minimizing inteferences you in fact make your usb3 port act as a usb2 port... Talking for myself, I don't care about it as I don't care to much about the 2.4 band.

Please also note that interference could appears anywhere along the "chain", on any device using usb3: port, wire, connectors

Please be careful about what you say...

 

[Lethasniper007]

Can you help me on setting up Qos on the rt ac68u , my download speed is 250 mb and my upload is 20mb. I need the highest bandwith for 2 Xbox 360 consoles and lowest for the lap top and smart phones. Do I just enable the qos box? Do I need to insert the down load and upload ? Please help thanks.

 

[System Error Message]

wifi is always problematic that i dont entirely rely on it. USB 3 isnt really that useful because all these routers cant do SAMBA that fast. Its only useful if the router gave direct access to the drive which is what tplink does with their routers but is limited to 1 client at a time. The only case where the router itself can benefit from USB3 if it is something linux is good at and SAMBA isnt one of it. One example would be using a usb3 networked interface or a drive with native linux file system for something other than SAMBA.

Dont forget that while the CPU gets busy with your usb3 drive it also has to perform NAT, firewall, QoS and VPN for some at the same time. Multicore is just used as gimmick saying that it can do multiple things at the same time which it cant if NAT and firewall use both cores when you have really fast internet. CPU is also used to bridge wifi and wire together because wifi isnt connected to the switch chip.

 

[enr00ted]

As I already told you in another thread:
Please be careful about what you say...

Sorry, but what did I say ?

 

[sfx2000]

wifi is always problematic that i dont entirely rely on it. USB 3 isnt really that useful because all these routers cant do SAMBA that fast. Its only useful if the router gave direct access to the drive which is what tplink does with their routers but is limited to 1 client at a time. The only case where the router itself can benefit from USB3 if it is something linux is good at and SAMBA isnt one of it. One example would be using a usb3 networked interface or a drive with native linux file system for something other than SAMBA.

Dont forget that while the CPU gets busy with your usb3 drive it also has to perform NAT, firewall, QoS and VPN for some at the same time. Multicore is just used as gimmick saying that it can do multiple things at the same time which it cant if NAT and firewall use both cores when you have really fast internet. CPU is also used to bridge wifi and wire together because wifi isnt connected to the switch chip.

I would agree - most of the USB3 implementations are throughput limited at the moment - as stated, Samba is running on the CPU, and many of the ARM dual-core solutions at the moment are using the ARM Cortex-A9 - which has abysmal memory performance compared to MIPS, PPC, X86 and EVEN other ARM cores... and the memory controller performance is extremely important in SOHO based routers, esp. on the high end where one might have Samba, OpenVPN, BitTorrent, and of course a GUI, which forces a lot of context changes between userland and kernel space (most routing happens in kernel space, but OpenVPN is userland).

Marvell, for example, still does ARMv5 for Kirkwood, Avastar, and Orion, and they have excellent performance in both single and dual core environments (WRT1900ac for example is dual-core), and going back in time a bit, the Marvell based Airport Extreme N can sustain 30MB, and that's a 5 year old platform...

I've not been impressed by the claimed dual-core performance claims - when running benchmarks, the data doesn't show it.

oh well... the Marketeers generally win...