Review Netgear Orbi 870 Wi-Fi 7 mesh router review: Solid performance can’t mask high price and feature regression

I understand the value of the 10G WAN port, but question the value in having 10G LAN ports. If you have a niche application that requires 10G, why aren't you using fiber?
 
I understand the value of the 10G WAN port, but question the value in having 10G LAN ports. If you have a niche application that requires 10G, why aren't you using fiber?
10GbE on the LAN side is quite useful, though companies that provide it, really need to provide at least 2 10GbE ports on the LAN side. For example, I like having 10GbE for my NAS build, as well as my main gaming PC, and then leaving the other wired devices on 2.5GbE

Beyond that, 5GbE would also be good since with 2.5GbE if you do a wired backhaul between the satellite units, then the 2.5GbE becomes a bottleneck since the MLO backhaul the newer Orbi devices, can easily saturate 2 2.5GbE devices at once under good conditions.
The Orbi 970 allows for a better wired backhaul, though it does not have enough 2.5GbE ports for a sufficient number of devices. Ideally they should have at least given the Orbi 970 satellite units 1 10GbE port, 2 2.5GbE ports, and 4 1GbE ports. My reasoning for this is more for wired IOT devices that users may want to locate in different areas. For example, Many IOT hub devices use a wired connection (e.g., the Arlo smart hub), and users may want more flexibility in the locations of devices like that.
 
10GbE on the LAN side is quite useful, though companies that provide it, really need to provide at least 2 10GbE ports on the LAN side. For example, I like having 10GbE for my NAS build, as well as my main gaming PC, and then leaving the other wired devices on 2.5GbE

Beyond that, 5GbE would also be good since with 2.5GbE if you do a wired backhaul between the satellite units, then the 2.5GbE becomes a bottleneck since the MLO backhaul the newer Orbi devices, can easily saturate 2 2.5GbE devices at once under good conditions.
The Orbi 970 allows for a better wired backhaul, though it does not have enough 2.5GbE ports for a sufficient number of devices. Ideally they should have at least given the Orbi 970 satellite units 1 10GbE port, 2 2.5GbE ports, and 4 1GbE ports. My reasoning for this is more for wired IOT devices that users may want to locate in different areas. For example, Many IOT hub devices use a wired connection (e.g., the Arlo smart hub), and users may want more flexibility in the locations of devices like that.
I'm assuming that 95% or more of these units will be sold to home users serving on average 4 or fewer concurrent users across a 3-router mesh network. I don't see this as a product targeted at business users were installing more that 10 routers in a single network is quite common.
 
I understand the value of the 10G WAN port, but question the value in having 10G LAN ports. If you have a niche application that requires 10G, why aren't you using fiber?
A few simple reasons.

If your desktop PCs have wired 10G, and you have more than 1 PC in the same room, it saves you from having to get a 10G switch for that room to get the best speed possible. 10G does make a difference for large transfers. And if your PCs already have the adapters, why not take advantage of it?

I prefer copper to fiber because it's interoperable on equipment with 10/100/1G, the cost of equipment is lower (often, it's "free" on premium motherboards now), crimping ends is much easier, and importantly, the cable is much, much more rugged.

And of course, if your internet is > 2.5G, you get an instant, free half gigabit per second bonus. I, for instance, have a 3G fiber internet service. I understand it could go to 5, or as high as 10 in the future.

Incidentally, I have the Orbi 850 system with 1 base and 4 satellites, 3 with wired backhaul and 1 with wireless backhaul. I have looked at the 970, but I haven't upgraded because of the insane cost (especially with replacing 4 satellites, too - it kills me that the 970 can't use RBS850 satellites at a lower speed); also because some people seem to have problems with it. The 850 has actually been pretty good to me, only occasionally needing a reset; also, some of my devices transition from node to node poorly. However, it's worked as well as anything else I've ever had, and I'm a bit loathe to replace it with a super-expensive system that could be finicky, or give me very limited actual, functional gains.
 
overpriced underperforming, feature starved, consumer trash, too much time spent on the fancy app interface
To be fair, unlike most other mesh routers, the Orbi has a fairly complete browser interface and doesn't require the app at all. There are two things I hate about most mesh systems - the requirement to use the app, and the requirement to sign in with an account connected to the vendor.

The feature set is generally pretty good too,on Orbi. But overpriced... No argument there.
 
To be fair, unlike most other mesh routers, the Orbi has a fairly complete browser interface and doesn't require the app at all. There are two things I hate about most mesh systems - the requirement to use the app, and the requirement to sign in with an account connected to the vendor.

The feature set is generally pretty good too,on Orbi. But overpriced... No argument there.
If I am required to connect to the internet to set up the router, my assumption is that the device has been compromised. Even worse is the requirement to provide identification such as phone number or e-mail address. I want a router that powers up with no working internet, including WIFI, that allows me to load firmware with a flash drive and set it up with a TTY type connection to my PC or secure device before connecting to the internet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Talys1767

TRENDING THREADS