Question Will buying a router give me better WiFi ?

[Davidino]

My internet provider provides us with a modem with built in router, but like other many people in my country. We know its a bad router. For example, we pay for 900 mbps but we receive 300 via ethernet and 30 via wireless. I found a double router/wifi extender on my local store for sale. The D-link covr 1200. I have a pc thats upstairs and has a bad connection, I want to use ethernet but hes too far away from my router. So would it help if I bought the two extenders, plugged one into my main modem/router and connected the other one to the network I created with my now new router. Place the second one next to my pc and connect my pc with ethernet.
So summed up, would it be better to have this: crappy router-bad connection-pc
Or this: new router-wifi repeater-ethernet-pc

 

[bill001g]

It is very strange that you only get 300mbps on ethernet when you have a 900mbps plan.

What you first should try is to put the router into bridge mode so it only runs as a modem. You will need to have only 1 pc connected to the device and likely have to power cycle the modem to get it to connect to the pc.

If you can not get 900mbps doing it this way you need to talk to the idiot ISP. If the modem is somehow not delivering the speed no router will make that better.

To use your own router you will need to run it in bridge/modem mode anyway just to avoid some of the NAT issue having 2 routers in the path.

None of this is likely going to fix your wifi issue. It is hard to say for sure without digging though specs but in general all routers put out the same maximum allowed power level. They more or less have the same coverage.
The house you live in is likely the problem, the building itself is absorbing the wifi signals.

Placing a bridge/router/extender device in your room does not solve the problem. It will get the same crappy signal as your Wifi card and will just send it to the pc over ethernet rather than internally or via USB. The only way it might help is if you could run the ethernet cable maybe outside the room, or some other place in the room that gets better signal. No way to say for sure, people that have for example concrete walls get almost no wifi signals. Almost all the signals bounce around and come in via the doors or something.

 

[Davidino]

It is very strange that you only get 300mbps on ethernet when you have a 900mbps plan.

What you first should try is to put the router into bridge mode so it only runs as a modem. You will need to have only 1 pc connected to the device and likely have to power cycle the modem to get it to connect to the pc.

If you can not get 900mbps doing it this way you need to talk to the idiot ISP. If the modem is somehow not delivering the speed no router will make that better.

To use your own router you will need to run it in bridge/modem mode anyway just to avoid some of the NAT issue having 2 routers in the path.

None of this is likely going to fix your wifi issue. It is hard to say for sure without digging though specs but in general all routers put out the same maximum allowed power level. They more or less have the same coverage.
The house you live in is likely the problem, the building itself is absorbing the wifi signals.

Placing a bridge/router/extender device in your room does not solve the problem. It will get the same crappy signal as your Wifi card and will just send it to the pc over ethernet rather than internally or via USB. The only way it might help is if you could run the ethernet cable maybe outside the room, or some other place in the room that gets better signal. No way to say for sure, people that have for example concrete walls get almost no wifi signals. Almost all the signals bounce around and come in via the doors or something.

Is it possible that my provider doesnt give me what I pay for or that the modem is so bad it cant keep up with the WiFi speeds. My provider uses the same modem for many years which means when u buy internet, theres a chance the provider gives u a modem from 6 years ago. Thats why many people of my country suggest buying a new router, because the built in router most of the time cant keep up with the WiFi speeds u pay for.

 

[kanewolf]

Is it possible that my provider doesnt give me what I pay for or that the modem is so bad it cant keep up with the WiFi speeds. My provider uses the same modem for many years which means when u buy internet, theres a chance the provider gives u a modem from 6 years ago. Thats why many people of my country suggest buying a new router, because the built in router most of the time cant keep up with the WiFi speeds u pay for.

WIFI will be slower than a wired connection until the 6E standard becomes common (it isn't, yet).
Can you provide a model number for the ISP provided router ? That will let us look up specs and give you a better idea on any possible improvements.

 

[gggplaya]

A super cheap router can limit the WAN speeds, even with hardware NAT. But it would have to be a really cheap router. Most modern routers are gigabit capable as long as you turn off extra features like QOS.

Sometimes turning ON CTF(cut through forwarding) will help get you the full speeds.

 

[Davidino]

WIFI will be slower than a wired connection until the 6E standard becomes common (it isn't, yet).
Can you provide a model number for the ISP provided router ? That will let us look up specs and give you a better idea on any possible improvements.

I didnt see model number anywhere, but I think its this: CH7465LG-ZG

 

[gggplaya]

The Compal 7465 is on the list for Intel Puma modems. If you're getting ping spikes, that's why. There's absolutely nothing you can do other than replace the entire unit. Don't even use it for bridge mode. Here's a list of bad modems: https://approvedmodemlist.com/intel-puma-6-modem-list-chipset-defects/

 

[Davidino]

A super cheap router can limit the WAN speeds, even with hardware NAT. But it would have to be a really cheap router. Most modern routers are gigabit capable as long as you turn off extra features like QOS.

Sometimes turning ON CTF(cut through forwarding) will help get you the full speeds.

How do I turn CTF on?

 

[bill001g]

There is not consistent name for CTF. Some routers have no ability to set it. It is a feature that lets the NAT be done in hardware. Most times it is on by default and turning on certain features like parental controls or QoS etc disable it without them telling you.
The simplest way tends to be to factory reset the router and then only set the password and wifi stuff. If you turn on other features you should be able to detect the performance issue and turn them back off.

Not sure what happens when you factory reset a modem/router. If you are going to mess with the device I would first try the simpler set it to bridge mode so it is only a modem. That will pretty much eliminate the router as bottleneck. Although over simplified a modem just converts between ethenret and coax so it should not slow traffic. I can not find a manual in English so I can not help much to locate a setting that would let you put the device into bridge mode.

The ISP I suspect can do it remotely.

 

[Davidino]

The Compal 7465 is on the list for Intel Puma modems. If you're getting ping spikes, that's why. There's absolutely nothing you can do other than replace the entire unit. Don't even use it for bridge mode. Here's a list of bad modems: https://approvedmodemlist.com/intel-puma-6-modem-list-chipset-defects/

I searched up reviews of my modem, it had 1 star out of 5 and the only reason it got 1 star is because we got it for free from our provider.
Most cons were:
With high traffic the network becomes instable
Puma 6 chipset
High energy usage
Ping jitter
Buffer bloat
Software is buggy
Features arent usable
Doesnt save changes to settings
Packet loss
Latency

And many more
Should I get a new modem then or router or both?

 

[Davidino]

There is not consistent name for CTF. Some routers have no ability to set it. It is a feature that lets the NAT be done in hardware. Most times it is on by default and turning on certain features like parental controls or QoS etc disable it without them telling you.
The simplest way tends to be to factory reset the router and then only set the password and wifi stuff. If you turn on other features you should be able to detect the performance issue and turn them back off.

Not sure what happens when you factory reset a modem/router. If you are going to mess with the device I would first try the simpler set it to bridge mode so it is only a modem. That will pretty much eliminate the router as bottleneck. Although over simplified a modem just converts between ethenret and coax so it should not slow traffic. I can not find a manual in English so I can not help much to locate a setting that would let you put the device into bridge mode.

The ISP I suspect can do it remotely.

Most likely the ISP wont do anything, theyll just give u another crappy modem and say the problem is solved. But, I have so many cons that its better to buy a new moden right?
List of cons:
With high traffic the network becomes instable
Puma 6 chipset
High energy usage
Ping jitter
Buffer bloat
Software is buggy
Features arent usable
Doesnt save changes to settings
Packet loss
Latency

Another person commented that the intel Puma chip is so bad that its better to replace the whole thing. But if I replace the whole thing and something goes wrong my provider wont help anymore because I dont use what they gave me.

 

[bill001g]

You have to be careful the puma chipset bug has mostly been patched by intel and the ISP will have rolled out the patch. The guys who wrote the puma testing tool have tweaked it so it still shows problem but the actual issue that was causing lag in games has been resolved. So with a very artificial test case you can still see a so called puma problem but nobody has a actual test that show there is a problem when you run traffic like games did. The actual games that they were having issues with no longer see the problem which is why it is considered "fixed" by most people.
Slow speed is not a symptom of the puma chipset issue it is mostly a jitter packet loss issue.

Many of the so called cons are functions with a router and not a modem. You likely want a separate modem and router if you can afford it.

Most those are someone opinion about it being buggy or unusable. This is very much a personal preference in what feature you want. I mean you can load third party firmware on to a router and that has all kinds of bugs and is massively complex to configure BUT you do it because you consider the factory software is lacking some feature. For most people they are going to leave everything set default and not use any fancy features.

Things like jitter/latency/packet loss are normally caused by internet issues. Anyone who tries to claim one has better wifi than the other only testing their house they can not prove that you get the same results in another house. The house and the end devices you own cause far more difference than difference between routers.

And to end bufferbloat is another things that testing sites like pretend is a problem. Bufferbloat is a good things for every application except games. It allows you to fully utilize your internet speed and reduces packet loss. The scam here is the testing sites are not actually testing bufferbloat they are testing if you have the QoS configured correctly to avoid it. Almost no router has this ability without third party firmware. They will claim bufferbloat on even a 1gbit connection. Bufferbloat only happens when you have exceeded your internet bandwidth. The real problem is you are trying to use too much bandwidth and rather than drop the data it is being buffered. The only real solution is to buy more bandwidth. Using fancy routers to solve this problem means you can not buy more bandwidth and you have no other method to control the usage of traffic by other people in your house.

If you are overloading a 900mbps internet connection you have a far bigger problem. This is mostly a solution for someone who has less than 100mbps connection and even then the bufferbloat software is going to put a massive load on a consumer router trying to keep up.

 

[Davidino]

You have to be careful the puma chipset bug has mostly been patched by intel and the ISP will have rolled out the patch. The guys who wrote the puma testing tool have tweaked it so it still shows problem but the actual issue that was causing lag in games has been resolved. So with a very artificial test case you can still see a so called puma problem but nobody has a actual test that show there is a problem when you run traffic like games did. The actual games that they were having issues with no longer see the problem which is why it is considered "fixed" by most people.
Slow speed is not a symptom of the puma chipset issue it is mostly a jitter packet loss issue.

Many of the so called cons are functions with a router and not a modem. You likely want a separate modem and router if you can afford it.

Most those are someone opinion about it being buggy or unusable. This is very much a personal preference in what feature you want. I mean you can load third party firmware on to a router and that has all kinds of bugs and is massively complex to configure BUT you do it because you consider the factory software is lacking some feature. For most people they are going to leave everything set default and not use any fancy features.

Things like jitter/latency/packet loss are normally caused by internet issues. Anyone who tries to claim one has better wifi than the other only testing their house they can not prove that you get the same results in another house. The house and the end devices you own cause far more difference than difference between routers.

And to end bufferbloat is another things that testing sites like pretend is a problem. Bufferbloat is a good things for every application except games. It allows you to fully utilize your internet speed and reduces packet loss. The scam here is the testing sites are not actually testing bufferbloat they are testing if you have the QoS configured correctly to avoid it. Almost no router has this ability without third party firmware. They will claim bufferbloat on even a 1gbit connection. Bufferbloat only happens when you have exceeded your internet bandwidth. The real problem is you are trying to use too much bandwidth and rather than drop the data it is being buffered. The only real solution is to buy more bandwidth. Using fancy routers to solve this problem means you can not buy more bandwidth and you have no other method to control the usage of traffic by other people in your house.

If you are overloading a 900mbps internet connection you have a far bigger problem. This is mostly a solution for someone who has less than 100mbps connection and even then the bufferbloat software is going to put a massive load on a consumer router trying to keep up.

I now have a modem with built in router as you know, but theres an option to use an external router via an internet port. Would the so called cons be solved if I buy the router/wifi extender I mentioned in my post? Its the only thing I can afford at the moment so if its not a good router I wont buy it.

 

[bill001g]

Not sure what that option is. If it disables the current router function then maybe.

The first thing to try is to plug a pc into that port and see what happens. It should then be running with no router at all which should give you your best test results. Of course it is not a long term solution because you do not have wifi and can only connect 1 machine. Still it is the very best test to see if your internet can actually get the faster speeds you pay for.

If plugging the pc directly in works well then you should be able to use a inexpensive router. BUT no matter how much you pay the coverage on a router is based on how your house is built more than anything else. A more expensive router "might" run faster but the signal will not go farther.
Still there are to many variables to predict, your end wifi might be the problem and not the router.

Your best method to get better coverage is to not use wifi to begin with. Running a long ethernet cable is not a option for most people. If you have coax cable in both rooms you can use a technology called MoCA that can get gigabit speeds. There is also powerline networks but you will be lucky to get 300mbps but it will still be faster than your current wifi.


Still step 1 is to try to find a way to plug the pc directly in without the router function. You should be able to get the 900mbps numbers the ISP is selling you. Depends if they will charge you but having a tech come out and prove he can get the promised speed using his pc would at least show that the slowness is caused by the ISP equipment.

 

[Davidino]

Not sure what that option is. If it disables the current router function then maybe.

The first thing to try is to plug a pc into that port and see what happens. It should then be running with no router at all which should give you your best test results. Of course it is not a long term solution because you do not have wifi and can only connect 1 machine. Still it is the very best test to see if your internet can actually get the faster speeds you pay for.

If plugging the pc directly in works well then you should be able to use a inexpensive router. BUT no matter how much you pay the coverage on a router is based on how your house is built more than anything else. A more expensive router "might" run faster but the signal will not go farther.
Still there are to many variables to predict, your end wifi might be the problem and not the router.

Your best method to get better coverage is to not use wifi to begin with. Running a long ethernet cable is not a option for most people. If you have coax cable in both rooms you can use a technology called MoCA that can get gigabit speeds. There is also powerline networks but you will be lucky to get 300mbps but it will still be faster than your current wifi.


Still step 1 is to try to find a way to plug the pc directly in without the router function. You should be able to get the 900mbps numbers the ISP is selling you. Depends if they will charge you but having a tech come out and prove he can get the promised speed using his pc would at least show that the slowness is caused by the ISP equipment.

I tried using ethernet again and it gave me 300 mbps again, but then I thought it could be a faulty cable or faulty internet port. So I tried another port and another cable and that gave me ≈ 850 mbps. Btw, it didnt disable the router. Also, if I use an external router I will have two networks and my current router wont be disabled. Since I have multiple people living in my house, having two networks would be a good solution I think. That would fix the problem of an unstable network, because of high traffic.
Since I now get the speeds I pay for the only problem left are the so called cons. Would buying the covr 1102 ac1200 fix that? It has 2.4 ghz and 5 ghz and can get speeds upto 1200 mbps. So that fits with the speeds I pay for.

 

[Davidino]

Not sure what that option is. If it disables the current router function then maybe.

The first thing to try is to plug a pc into that port and see what happens. It should then be running with no router at all which should give you your best test results. Of course it is not a long term solution because you do not have wifi and can only connect 1 machine. Still it is the very best test to see if your internet can actually get the faster speeds you pay for.

If plugging the pc directly in works well then you should be able to use a inexpensive router. BUT no matter how much you pay the coverage on a router is based on how your house is built more than anything else. A more expensive router "might" run faster but the signal will not go farther.
Still there are to many variables to predict, your end wifi might be the problem and not the router.

Your best method to get better coverage is to not use wifi to begin with. Running a long ethernet cable is not a option for most people. If you have coax cable in both rooms you can use a technology called MoCA that can get gigabit speeds. There is also powerline networks but you will be lucky to get 300mbps but it will still be faster than your current wifi.


Still step 1 is to try to find a way to plug the pc directly in without the router function. You should be able to get the 900mbps numbers the ISP is selling you. Depends if they will charge you but having a tech come out and prove he can get the promised speed using his pc would at least show that the slowness is caused by the ISP equipment.

Btw, I only have one coax cable and thats downstairs. And my main pc is upstairs

 

[bill001g]

The 1200 is a lie number. They add the 2.4g and 5g speed together even though a device can only use 1. They add the transmit and receive speed together. This is like calling a ethernet cable 2gbit but a ethernet cable can actually do that but wifi is half duplex and only 1 device can transmit at a time. Then this is some optimum number you can only get in lab conditions. You will get far less when you have walls eating the signals. Maybe you get 150mbps but it depends on your house.

This is ignoring that fact that your end device also has to be able to support the encoding used by the router. If it isn't a ac1200 equivelnet number then it could be slower.

The ISP router you do not like actually has a better "number" than a 1200. It likely would be called a 1600 or 1650. The flaw is that your end devices would also have to support 3x3 mimo.

So unlike most other ISP devices that router is using a wifi chipset I have never seen before. Normally they use the same ones as more common routers which means they perform the same. So I went 1 step farther and actually found the FCC test results for your router. They are massive but if you dig around you will find the output power is around 29db on average. The maximum allowed is 30db. This means that this router and chipset are putting out very close to the legal maximum power like almost all routers you find now days.

https://fcc.report/FCC-ID/O2U-AP7465


What this means is you likely will see no difference in the wifi performance. You have to be suspect of any reviews you find. Most are completely non scientific unlike the FCC reports where they have page after page of the details on how they test it.