Wireless Networking: Nine 802.11n Routers Rounded Up

[Guest]

In my experience, wireless router testing should include simultaneous traffic running between the router and multiple clients. That's where must of the "N" routers seem to have problems. Bandwidth sharing seems to be a big problem these days especially when the clients are coming and going either on purpose or as a result of dropouts.

 

[Doomsy2006]

I've got the WRT160N and it has been my primary router for some time. While I have some issues with having to restart my network every 3 months or so, it has given me the best performance out of any of the previous routers I have owned.

Other Routers Owned:

Dlink Netgear 2Wire Motorola -

All subpar compaired to this Wireless N Linksys router. Although Tom's tested a newer model I use one of the first Wireless N post draft models and it still works great.

Go Linksys

 

[Onus]

I'm not surprised at all that Belkin was in the toilet. They're on my personal permanent "Do Not Buy" list for past (similar) problems with a variety of products, including their routers. There's always a better choice available.
I'm using a [recertified] Linksys draft-n router (I think it's the WRT160N), and my wife can stream video while I'm playing Guild Wars and neither of us has a problem. For a while, we did have some dropouts, but a firmware update seems to have fixed that. My connection is wired, and hers is using a cheap Encore draft-n PCI adapter.

 

[S4Rs]

I have Verizon Fios, and I have heard that their routers actually cant keep up with the 25/25 connection i get. Would the built in Firewall of the Linksys provide the same amount of protection if I turned off all management of the Fios Actiontec router, and then connected it straight to the Linksys which would run all my home networking?

 

[S4Rs]

I have Verizon Fios, and I have heard that their routers actually cant keep up with the 25/25 connection i get. Would the built in Firewall of the Linksys provide the same amount of protection if I turned off all management of the Fios Actiontec router, and then connected it straight to the Linksys which would run all my home networking?

 

[gonchuki]

Why not test with the TP-Link 941ND which has 3 antennas and doesn't cost that much more? Comparison seems kind of rigged as you picked a cheap ass model to compete against $150+ routers, some having even 6 and 8 antennas.

 

[cadder]

I bought a Linksys and it didn't work at all. I took it back and traded for a DLink and it works perfectly.

 

[Kewlx25]

Fixes for this review:
#1. 3700 looks very bad in here when it should be tied for Best, not slightly under. Probably Netgear's fault on something since other routers are fine, but essentially, we're getting invalid data which is worse than no data.

#2. Where's the many device check? Other reviews showed HUGE difference when 8+ devices were hooked up and slamming the AP.

#3. WAN to LAN performance

#4. May be even add a subjective test where you stream a high bandwidth video over wireless while having 8+ other devices constantly transferring. Then note visual blips/stutter/etc issues.

 

[jsrudd]

Just logged onto Newegg and people hate that the Linksys 610N.

 

[Zenthar]

If you look at NewEgg, most, if not all Wireless N routers aren't able to score over 50% of complete user satisfaction (5*) ...

 

[MikeD096]

I am disappointed with Tom's Hardware's decision to use matching brand adapters for the router testing. This provides no consistency in the results, and does not accurately reflect real world situations. 99% of users will be using built-in Intel adapters.

Since the adapters used to test the routers were not consistent, this is not an accurate router-to-router comparison.

Based on the above statements, I'm personally ruling this article as pointless and null as it does not accurately depict how I, or the rest of the world, would be using the routers. Its severely disappointing that Tom's has wasted so much time and effort on this router article, only for it to be completely pointless by not providing real world, consistent results.

I would like to ask Toms to seriously consider reevaluating all routers using a consistent platform in order to provide its readers more accurate real world results.

 

[williamvw]

Dear readers,

Clearly, the choice of whether to test with a single independent client adapter or a "matching" adapter from each vendor was faced early in the planning stage for this article. As I mentioned in the story, I took the latter road, knowing that I would face criticism for doing so. However, the choice was made both to avoid potential accusations of incompatibility as well as to reflect this site's bias toward desktop technologies. As many of you have pointed out, a round of testing done with a single (probably Intel) integrated adapter would be very appropriate for reflecting performance on notebooks.

Reader feedback is what drives many of our testing decisions, and future wireless networking pieces may well include both types of testing. In any case, it sounds like a follow-up piece taken from a notebook perspective may be in order as we head into the summer and gravitate more outside.

As always, many thanks for your input. We're listening.

 

[allengorden]

In my experience with linksys routers throughout the years, they keep making early firmwares that keeps disconnecting the line. Later firmwares prove to solve this problem. I don't know why they keep making the same mistake. It takes a really long time for them to make new firmwares. Caused a lot of frustrations to me & my colleagues and friends. They only prove their worth after a year of production after the new firmwares come out.

 

[pawntec]

WHAT? no sonciwall wireless routers? oh well....X-D

 

[jasperjones]

we required that vendors provide us with a “matching” client adapter. The last thing we wanted was for testing to get derailed by accusations of “well, our router has issues with that XYZ adapter” or some such thing.

it's already been said but this is a bad idea (at least run a 2nd test with a common adapter). i'm truly disappointed about this review.

 

[coupe]

Very good review. However if the Netgear and adapter don't work well with each other can we get a follow up on this?

 

[androticus]

You awarded a major recommendation to a products that has 23% 1-start feedback on Newegg.com -- that is one of the worst records for any major product. Go there and read all the hassles, overheating, failures, etc. that people have had with the Linksys product. caveat emptor

 

[Guest]

William,

I think the issue at hand here is less about notebook/desktop than about controlling your test variables to isolate your results. As it stands, this whole review could very well be taken as an Adapter roundup as opposed to a router comparison. If anything, settle on a single brand's USB adapter and use that as a baseline for all router testing. Non-Interoperability should be a non-starter these days with 802.11n.
I also think using Intel's wifi link is a great non-biased third party wifi adapter for testing and any results attained would have legs to stand on its own.

 

[linkinparkfan007]

i use my dlink dir-615 rock solid with more and more devices piling up with load on it

 

[drutort]

if i cant put third party firmware i usually stay away from it not saying that when there is third party firmware that it works perfect, but at least you get a 2nd option and you can always go back linksys wrt350n has been really good for me with dd-wrt

i bought some cheap netgear re-certified dual band which are not bad running ddwrt, for 1/3 the price of new also cheap asus one seems ok though issue with ddwrt atm, so going back to stock

 

[JohnnyLucky]

I haven't had much luck with wireless routers. For some reason performance is better with a hardwired router.

 

[pacala]

"Without question, the Linksys WRT610N emerges as the obvious winner of this roundup, and there’s no reason to think that the carbon copy E3000 won’t follow suit. As a result, the WRT610N wins our rare and coveted Recommended Buy award"

This is utterly ridiculous. You tested combinations of routers and adapters and then you're giving "a rare and coveted" award for the router. At the very least you should have given the award to the router and adapter pair. BTW, I wasn't able to find in your article the name of the adapter you used for the 610 router.

For what it's worth I have a Netgear 3700 and I use a D-Link DAP-1522 wireless bridge as my wireless adapter. The results are really good - 60-70Mbps when transferring files with FTP, both for the download and the upload, using the 5GHz band and a 40MHz wide channel, at a distance of about 70 feet, through three walls.

 

[rhuysamen]

I wonder why you did not include a Buffalo product?

 

[mayne92]

[citation][nom]cag404[/nom]I just replaced my Linksys WRT600N with the Netgear WNDR3700. I have not used the WRT610 that is reviewed here, but I can say that the difference in routers is noticeable. The reason I replaced the router was that the WRT600N was dropping my port settings used to provide remote access to my home server, and I got tired of it. Wanted to try a different router so I went with the Netgear based on a favorable Maximum PC review. Glad I did. It has a snappier feel and I get a stronger signal throughout my two-floor house. The Netgear has not dropped my port settings for my home server yet. Also, I didn't like that fact that Linksys abandoned the WRT600N with no further firmware updates after about the first or second one.[/citation]
I just bought the Netgear WNDR3700 I couldn't be happier with no problems so far. Set up my home server...working like a charm...

 

[PGHammer]

While Linksys makes great routers, the default firmware leaves much to be desired. More often than not, it takes third-party firmware (such as Tomato, DD-WRT, and OpenWRT/X-WRT) to really unlock their true potential. I am hoping that the E3000 (which replaced the WRT-610N) retains the compatibility with DD-WRT/OpenWRT/X-WRT sported by the 610N (I have an older WRT54GS which has X-WRT that *used* to be my primary router before it was replaced with a wireless-N router).