[SOLVED] Which of these two routers should I buy

[jay2]

Hi guys, I'm on toob internet a uk-based 1 GB job. Their service is amazing but the Wi-Fi coverage is terrible I'm looking at either one of these two routers please advise which is the best to use

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B089YXY2YH/ref=sspa_mw_detail_0?ie=UTF8&psc=1

or

https://www.amazon.co.uk/TP-Link-MU...uPWNsaWNrUmVkaXJlY3QmZG9Ob3RMb2dDbGljaz10cnVl

thank you

 

[Hellfire13]

I would go with the first link as it is AX standard which supports both 2.4ghz (wider coverage) and 5ghz (faster speed), whereas the second link is AC standard with only 5ghz support.

 

[bill001g]

This depends on your end devices. If you don't have wifi6 the first one might be slower.

In general I am going to bet run the same speed in most cases.

There are 2 features that make wifi6 faster. The first is the ability to run a wide 160mhz radio band. This primary feature that lets wifi 6 run faster. The second is the use a QAM1024. This attempt to pack more data into the signal. Unfortunately it only works well close to the router...likely only in the same room.

With the router you picked it only supports 80mhz channels (just like 802.11ac). This is because of complex radar avoidance rules and making it easier to use in countries that don't allow 160mhz. Note most end devices also do not support 160mhz.

This means you have lost the major speed boast wifi6 give. If you do not have perfect signals it will drop back to qam256 which is the same as 802.11ac. So in effect the router becomes a 802.11ac router with a number 1200.

The second router in theory at least might be faster. This depends on if your end device can take advantage of 3x3 mimo to run 3 overlapping signals rather than 2.

Realistically the only real options is wait until wifi6e is more supported by end devices. This has a new radio band on 6ghz that make it easier to get 160mhz bands and there is so much bandwidth you have less chance of your neighbors stomping on your signals.

 

[jay2]

Waiting isn't an option the route to I have with this company is terrible

 

[jay2]

I have Wi-Fi 6 enabled devices such as PS5 and Samsung Galaxy Ultra I also be using my computer via ethernet cable anyway got Sky Q as well I'm not sure if that's a Wi-Fi 6 standard apart from that it would just be any mobile phones or tablets really

 

[bill001g]

Even a extremely cheap router can run close to 1gbit internet using ethernet.

There will likely be very little difference. You will likely get similar performance on either router. Used to be more of a issue people would spend $300 on a wifi6 router and find out it ran no better than a $50 802.11ac router.

Now the pricing is so close on the lower end wifi6 routers it is more a personal choice more than a technical one.

 

[jay2]

Only my computer will use an ethernet connection everything else will be on Wi-Fi so is it worth paying the extra money and getting the more expensive one or is the one that was actually more expensive and in a sale better it looks to me like the more expensive one out of the sale is better

 

[bill001g]

So what exact feature do you think makes the more expensive router better.

Both router will likely have very similar wifi transfer speeds.

Even if it was a bit faster does that really matter. Most application only use what they need have a faster connection does not make them run better. If you watch say netflix it only transfers at say 25mbps for 4k video. It does not care if you have a 1gbit connection it will only use what it really needs.
Things like online games only use about 1mbps when you play. The only thing where transfer speed makes a big difference is large file downloads and these you should have connected via ethernet.

You have to be careful about believing newer is always better. To really use all the fancy features of wifi6 you need much better equipment. You need a router that can do 160mhz radio channels. Most those have numbers on them over 3000. You also need end devices that can run 160mhz. Almost no phones or tablet does.
I don't know about game consoles. On a desktop you can buy 160mhz cards if you look around. I will ignore the fact that you can't really use 160mhz channels because your neighbors stomp on the signals so badly.

You are in effect comparing a bottom end wifi6 device with a mid range wifi5 (802.11ac) device. The only reason to consider wifi6 is there likely will be longer term support once wifi6e replaces both 802.11ac and wifi6.

 

[jay2]

Thanks Steve answer my question I'll buy the Wi-Fi 6 so I'm futureproof