WRT1900AC(S?) vs R7000

[xtremesniper]

I've been browsing these forums for a while but I haven't found a post that's similar enough to my needs, so here I am posting one myself.

I need:
1. Range - My current Hitron wireless N modem/router does not provide enough range to reach the whole house, especially on the 5GHz channel. My old WRT54G worked much, much better at this.

2. Speed - I have a 100/10 cable connection, and I'd like to make sure I maximize that as best I can on either channel.

3. Stock firmware - I used to fiddle with my hardware but these days I just need something that does what I need it to do out of the box

Most of the devices in the house are wireless N capable (if not AC) but currently because of the dismal range of the Hitron, all but one are connected to the 2.4 GHz channel which also barely reaches some rooms.

I've narrowed it down to the WRT1900AC (but not sure about the latest ACS model) vs the R7000.

I'm disappointed that the 1900ACS review says it has dismal 2.4 GHz performance, and the Router Ranker tool shows that the R7000 is the top for both 2.4 and 5 GHz range, where the WRT is further down the list.

Any advice would be awesome.

PS: I am not against third-party firmware. But from what I have been reading, it looks to be more hassle than it used to be worth these days. I used stock firmware on the WRT54G for years with no problems.

 

[RogerSC]

Well, I find that stock firmware is getting dumber and dumber. They assume that you only want to set up the router, and never do anything with it after that. Which makes it harder to debug router, network and client problems when they come up. So I seldom use stock firmware anymore, I want the monitoring capabilities and extensibility of third-party firmware. Like dd-wrt for the WRT1900AC and XVortex's RMerlin port and Shibby's Tomato ARM for the R7000.

I have both the WRT1900ACv1 and the R7000 and find them to both be capable routers. The R7000 with XVortex's RMerlin firmware port is hard to beat, though. There is finally some dd-wrt firmare for the WRT1900ACv1 and WRT1900ACv2 that's allowing that router to really shine some, too. I find that they're comparable here. I guess if I had a problem choosing between them, and the reviews didn't help, I might buy both routers and keep the one that worked better for me. Or buy the one that looks better in the reviews, try it, and if it didn't do what I needed return it, and buy the other one. Although having them both to compare at the same time is really useful.

Not a big fan of stock firmware, though, for any of the 3 wireless-1900AC routers that I have. Generally speaking, just not what I'm looking for in capability and features.

 

[xtremesniper]

I can appreciate the love for third-party firmware, but at this point I am very much that guy who just sets up the router and doesn't do anything with it after that. Which is why I want to buy a router based on how it performs with stock firmware. Aside from debugging problems, what are you missing from stock firmware? Does performance change at all?

Good point with the idea to just buy them and try it out; I may have to do that... But I was hoping for some input on why the WRT1900AC is ranked lower than the R7000 in most of the rankings and whether its really that much better overall.

I'm typically a Linksys kind of guy so I'm leaning toward the WRT1900AC but the recent fumbling of v1, v2 and ACS is confusing and frustrating, given the regression in 2.4 GHz performance and probably also range.

 

[sfx2000]

I can appreciate the love for third-party firmware, but at this point I am very much that guy who just sets up the router and doesn't do anything with it after that. Which is why I want to buy a router based on how it performs with stock firmware. Aside from debugging problems, what are you missing from stock firmware? Does performance change at all?

Concur - AC1900 class devices - the factory firmware hits 90 percent, heck, probably 99 percent of most people's needs... The contributions of the open source community - we're seeing it first hand, and proprietary enhancements on top of that...

At this point - going FOSS/Bareback with OpenWRT/DDWRT is an adventure... but one path that most folks don't need to go down..

 

[sfx2000]

I'm disappointed that the 1900ACS review says it has dismal 2.4 GHz performance, and the Router Ranker tool shows that the R7000 is the top for both 2.4 and 5 GHz range, where the WRT is further down the list.

The 2.4GHz performance on the WRT1900acs has more than a few folks puzzled considering where the WRT1900acV1 was, as the V1 was a solid performer there..

Site tests the defaults as provided by the OEM - fair enough...

 

[xtremesniper]

The 2.4GHz performance on the WRT1900acs has more than a few folks puzzled considering where the WRT1900acV1 was, as the V1 was a solid performer there..

Site tests the defaults as provided by the OEM - fair enough...

Right, so I can easily go out and buy a v1 if I knew that it was the for-sure bet... But the confusing part is that SNB only reviewed v1 and ACS.

I can't find any review for v2, and based on what some people in the forums are saying, no one can seem to tell what the difference between v2 and ACS is. So does that mean that v2 suffers from the same 2.4GHz performance issues as ACS?

From a specs perspective, going with v2 or ACS seems like a no-brainer. But all that is for nothing if performance suffers overall...

 

[Trip]

First off, at equivalent transmit power you generally see less range but more bandwidth when moving from G to N to AC wifi, which explains the coverage drop you noticed when moving from the 54G to the N model. The same would occur again when moving from N to AC, except that now the manufacturers are using more powerful radios with amplifiers to offset the range shortcomings, or at least a good bulk of the difference. Still, there's often no substitute for more radios vs a single radio for certain scenarios where you're trying to provide both coverage and bandwidth...

So I'd start with the R7000, make sure you're updated to the latest stock firmware and see if it can get the range and bandwidth you desire. If not, run cat6 or powerline/moca to the place(s) where you want additional coverage and use your old N router there, set as an AP. If that still isn't enough, drop in as many N or AC-class APs as are needed. If routing flakes out on the R7000, religate it to AP duty and drop in a gigabit wired router to handle that role.

Many ways to skin the cat here, but a single all-in-one, of any brand/model, may not be enough.

 

[xtremesniper]

First off, at equivalent transmit power you generally see less range but more bandwidth when moving from G to N to AC wifi, which explains the coverage drop you noticed when moving from the 54G to the N model. The same would occur again when moving from N to AC, except that now the manufacturers are using more powerful radios with amplifiers to offset the range shortcomings, or at least a good bulk of the difference. Still, there's often no substitute for more radios vs a single radio for certain scenarios where you're trying to provide both coverage and bandwidth...

So I'd start with the R7000, make sure you're updated to the latest stock firmware and see if it can get the range and bandwidth you desire. If not, run cat6 or powerline/moca to the place(s) where you want additional coverage and use your old N router there, set as an AP. If that still isn't enough, drop in as many N or AC-class APs as are needed. If routing flakes out on the R7000, religate it to AP duty and drop in a gigabit wired router to handle that role.

Many ways to skin the cat here, but a single all-in-one, of any brand/model, may not be enough.

Thank you for the explanation about the relation between bandwidth/transmit power/range, and also the experimentation method suggestions. It makes sense.

Unfortunately I wouldn't be able to use my current N router as an access point because it is my modem/router which I would have to put into bridge mode to facilitate the connection to the new router. However, I suppose I could use my old WRT54G as an access point if I really have issues...

I do appreciate that one mega-router is probably not going to be the solution, but I'd like to entertain the thought because the house isn't necessarily huge and I've had success with wifi range in the past. If I really need to, I could experiment with moving the router location before dealing with APs. My issue with APs is that from what I've read (and my own experiences at work) devices like to cling onto APs even if there is a stronger one closer until it fully drops out. That would just make the situation worse.

Did you suggest the R7000 because you've had experience with both the R7000 and the WRT1900AC?

EDIT: Oh, the post I was replying to keeps disappearing. I'm not sure why...

 

[Trip]

Ah, I forgot the Hitron is also your modem. Most likely best kept as a bridged modem (routing/firewall/wifi off), if you don't plan on acquiring a new modem.

I've only spent limited time with both, troubleshooting SOHO networks in separate use-cases, and neither gave me any trouble. The R7K *should* be more stable though... at least I'd like hope that after 2 years and 13 firmware updates they've finally been able to stabilize their own product.... right?!? The WRT, now in a second hardware revision, with a fresh bug-squashing cycle to go through, just inspires less confidence. It doesn't mean it couldn't do the job, or even be *less* bug-ridden, but the law of averages still pushes me towards the R7K.

If it comes up short on range, extra APs may be the best solution. Regarding zero hand-off, even if you're running a wifi mesh that does it properly, you still can't control how crappy certain clients are at roaming and re-connection (ie. early iPhones, certain tablets of any OS, etc). Short of buying something like Ubiquiti UniFi, you should still be able to achieve reasonable levels of success with properly-overlapped standalone APs. But more on that later, if the R7K or whatever you choose falls short.

 

[FloorPizza]

xtremesniper, I'm very much a noob when it comes to networking/wifi, but I can at least relate my experiences with the R7000.

When I first bought the router (right after it's debut) the stock firmware was very buggy. I had been running various versions of Kong's DD-WRT right up until this last week. I've read around the 'net a bit, and reports are that the latest stock firmware is rock solid. So I flashed it, and it has been working flawlessly for about five days now.

I have a CenturyLink supplied C2000T handling the internet connection, DHCP server, and four hard wired ethernet devices in the den, then I have the R7000 handling wireless duties. Reports around the internet say that the stock firmware will give you better wireless than the third party options. I can neither confirm nor deny this; I've gotten good wireless results from both.

Other than the nasty, unstable early stock firmware, I have *loved* my R7000. It may not be able to handle the entire 1Gbps fiber internet connection in my house, but then again, it wasn't designed too, either. For what it was made to do, it does very well. The range and speed on the 5ghz radio are wonderful (at least, IMO). I get around 150mbps to my family room's wifi devices, which is faster than your internet connection. Assuming you're able to get similar speeds (I go through three walls, and a distance of about 20 feet), your internet connection speed will be the bottleneck, not your 5ghz wifi.

But as others haven mentioned, it's not a bad idea to either run some cat-6 cable or even do a powerline connection so that you can locate your wifi AP in a more optimized position in your house.

TL;DR: I'm having zero issues using my R7000 as a wired/wireless AP with stock firmware.

 

[FloorPizza]

Ah, I forgot the Hitron is also your modem. Most likely best kept as a bridged modem (routing/firewall/wifi off), if you don't plan on acquiring a new modem.

I've only spent limited time with both, troubleshooting SOHO networks in separate use-cases, and neither gave me any trouble. The R7K *should* be more stable though... at least I'd like hope that after 2 years and 13 firmware updates they've finally been able to stabilize their own product.... right?!? The WRT, now in a second hardware revision, with a fresh bug-squashing cycle to go through, just inspires less confidence. It doesn't mean it couldn't do the job, or even be *less* bug-ridden, but the law of averages still pushes me towards the R7K.

If it comes up short on range, extra APs may be the best solution. Regarding zero hand-off, even if you're running a wifi mesh that does it properly, you still can't control how crappy certain clients are at roaming and re-connection (ie. early iPhones, certain tablets of any OS, etc). Short of buying something like Ubiquiti UniFi, you should still be able to achieve reasonable levels of success with properly-overlapped standalone APs. But more on that later, if the R7K or whatever you choose falls short.

Yup, Trip, they finally did. Wow, the early firmware for the R7000 was a complete nightmare. I was set on giving AdvancedTomato a go here a few days back, but after seeing how well the stock firmware has been performing, I'm taking the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" route now. Latest version of the the R7000 stock firmware has been rock solid for me. No dropped connections on either 2.4ghz or 5ghz band, no random router reboots, nada.

 

[Trip]

Thanks for the feedback, FP. That's excellent to hear. I'd prefer not to even bring up third-party options in most recommendations -- keeps things simpler all the way around -- but knowing how poor the factory stuff can be, especially for gear that's new to market, I think it would almost be irresponsible not to in certain cases.

So yeah, as long as stock is stable, I'd always stay with it, unless of course it lacks a feature(s) you'd like to run on the box.

 

[xtremesniper]

Thanks for the info, @FloorPizza. I think what really throws me off is that these routers have been on the market for quite some time, and they don't typically get re-reviewed after the initial run. As an example, even though SNB continues to recommend the R7000 and other AC1900 routers, I have yet to find any re-test based on more recent firmware.

So most of the noise online about the R7000 is to stay away from the stock firmware because people only make noise while things are broken, then they disappear once it starts working fine. Meanwhile, the WRT1900ACS was reviewed since it is a new model, but based on my reading, I believe that the WRT1900AC v2 should have the same 2.4 GHz performance drop as the ACS, but there are no reviews anywhere to confirm that theory and I don't have a test-bed to find out for myself.

All this makes me confused because I'm sure if I buy one of these routers I'll most likely be happy as long as I can max my internet connection and have enough range for my house. But the specifics like the degraded 2.4 GHz performance is something I don't have the capacity to test for myself. I guess it's all just a moot point, but if I'm spending $200+ on a router I'd like to make sure I'm not buying something faulty. These things have been on the market for so long and the price is still way up there. At least Linksys is releasing some revisions, whereas Netgear has been cashing in on one version (from what I know) with no new version or price drop in sight.

EDIT: Another side-note is that the ACS model is nowhere to be found in Canada, even on Linksys' own website. So it's either v1, v2, or R7000 for now unfortunately.

 

[Trip]

That's why I often suggest separating routing from wireless -- buy a well-reputed wired router and separate access point(s), or all-in-one(s) set as access point(s). A bit more setup work required and more plugs in the wall, but often better overall performance and ease of swapping out discrete components. With all-in-one replacements, you have to scrap the farm every time. Not such a big deal for the average Joe, as he only tends to go through this process only so often, but still unnecessary and less cost effective in a lot of cases. The one counterpoint is that the all-in-one keeps things simple, and on that reason alone I'd still probably go ahead with the R7K. If it dumps the bed as a router, AP, or both, you can augment via the method above and still hopefully put it into a role that it can perform well.

 

[netwrks]

I have a R7000 running in router mode, with Xvortex firmware, off of a Hitron, bridged 100/10. No issues at all. Stable firmware. Lots of gaming, Skype, iDevices, Multiple Netflix / Shomi streaming, MajickJack phones. Running with QoS off. No USB stuff. Actually use one of the USB ports for USB powered fans. Also have a R7000 running in AP mode, running the same firmware connected to a UBNT PoE5 port, connected to another Hitron, 100/10 Bridged. Soon, both R7000's will be hanging off the UBNT router, as AP's. Xvortex / Merlin firmware site.

The nice thing about the Xvortex firmware is that there is more configurable options. It's also easy to upgrade to, and easy to go back to stock firmware, if you decide to fall back. The R7000 is a stable piece of hardware, with good wireless range. Sadly, the NG firmware lacks configurable options. IMO, the stock firmware is too simplistic, for the price point.

 

[xtremesniper]

@Trip, it makes sense to separate the components out like that, though my usage is probably not heavy enough to really justify it at this time. I've been playing around with the position of my Hitron modem-router and I've found that it seems to emit wireless signals mostly out from its sides. So I've literally been just rotating the router around into different angles to see how it affects my wifi, and you know what? All of a sudden I've got wifi in the dead zones, just by rotating the unit by around 45 degrees.

I'm going to continue doing some testing and playing around with it, but if the new found range holds up, I might just put off buying a router even further still.

@netwrks Thanks for your input. With all these testimonials about the R7000 and the fact that there is only 1 version of it has been making me seriously consider giving the R7000 a try over the WRT.

 

[jed]

I typically enjoy "messing" around with 3rd party firmwares, but I am looking for stability when doing so.

To that end, I bought/sold about 6 AC routers before going with the R7000, and I'll tell you why - Shibby's Tomato is deadpan easy to install, and once on, does give me more features and is stable as hell. No messing around with TFTP, reset buttons, etc, to install Tomato, nothing to do but download 2 files from Shibby, then right from the stock firmware, upload the files and its done.

For us, the R7000 just works, and I can mess around with 3rd party features with zero effort installing it.

 

[xtremesniper]

@jed When playing around with those AC routers, did you test them with their stock firmware as well?

Also, is there any easy way to revert back to default stock firmware for both the R7000 and the WRT1900AC? I'm worried that I'd void my warranty and not be able to revert back.

 

[htismaqe]

I tested the R7000 and WRT1900AC extensively and for me, I find the Linksys to be superior. The 4 antennas gives it more even coverage while it's performance is just slightly behind the R7000 at extreme range.

I've flashed OpenWRT and now DD-WRT on the WRT1900AC. I flashed DD-WRT previously on the R7000. Reverting was simple - just follow the instructions.

 

[jed]

@jed When playing around with those AC routers, did you test them with their stock firmware as well?

Also, is there any easy way to revert back to default stock firmware for both the R7000 and the WRT1900AC? I'm worried that I'd void my warranty and not be able to revert back.

I haven't received a WRT as of yet, I know when I played with an EA6900, the wireless transfer speed difference with AC was substantial, but did not compare between AC routers. In fact, in one residence I have my old WRT54GL setup as a router and the EA6900 as a WET.

Sorry, I did not test between stock and Shibby, as for me, its a non-issue. I only have a 25Mbps connection which will not saturate it either way. To revert back, Shibby has the appropriate file listed to go back to stock.