Linksys WRT1200AC Dual-Band Gigabit Wi-Fi Router Reviewed
- Thread starter thiggins
- Start date
sfx2000
Part of the Furniture
It's a beast on the LAN ain't it?
Thanks for including the board shots, pretty much what I expected... it's going to be a bit spendy for an AC1200 class router, but much of that is the higher BOM costs associated with the Marvell design (Discrete LAN Switch, Discrete Radios, etc...).
I would expect Linksys at some point to release a cost-reduced version 2 of the WRT1900ac... (FWIW, Fry's was offering them in the store here in San Diego for $200 last weekend , not refurb, new in box)
Thanks for including the board shots, pretty much what I expected... it's going to be a bit spendy for an AC1200 class router, but much of that is the higher BOM costs associated with the Marvell design (Discrete LAN Switch, Discrete Radios, etc...).
I would expect Linksys at some point to release a cost-reduced version 2 of the WRT1900ac... (FWIW, Fry's was offering them in the store here in San Diego for $200 last weekend , not refurb, new in box)
sfx2000
Part of the Furniture
My comments from the other thread...
My guess is that it's the same or similar mainboard as the WRT1900ac - Armada XP clocked up a bit - double the RAM is good, as I've felt that the WRT1900ac was a bit short considering the rest of the design. I haven't seen anything that would confirm if there was a SO-DIMM slot, but I think this is unlikely. Space on the board is one thing, but so is the cost-adder of the socket and the SO-DIMM itself.
It is a cost reduced design, and the one thing I would expect is that the WiFi chip daughterboard will go away, and the WiFi baseband/MAC/RF sections would be on the main board - for a 2 stream design, it makes sense. Now whether the WiFi chipsets remain Marvell, or something else, that remains to be seen..
I dunno. I don't think they are feeling any pricing pressure. Otherwise why introduce the MOST expensive AC1200 class router AND the most expensive AC1900 router (except for the ASUS RT-AC68P at $200 for Best Buy shoppers who don't know any better).
sfx2000
Part of the Furniture
More margin
I've said it before, and I'll repeat - the WRT1900ac, and now the WRT1200ac - this is a very different device from the cookie cutter Broadcom/Atheros devices... not sure if it makes a huge difference overall, but it's built to a different level.
Just looking at the boards - there's a lot more gubbins inside there with the discrete SoC, Switch, Radios compared to other vendor designs, and most of it is relatively high performance, and we see this first hand with the LAN/WAN and SMB numbers...
I would say BOM costs alone, they're probably twice what the competing devices are, and that drives the prices that Linksys charges for these two models...
I agree this is odd. But I did confirm link rate before the start of each test.
When I get a replacement router today, I'll verify spectrum use with the 20 MHz mode test setting.
Newbie question. Why is automode in 2.4Ghz slower? Confused.
Thanks. So I should keep a router in 40Mhz or 20Mhz for better download rates?
If auto mode is operating properly (obeying 20/40 MHz coexistence), it should automatically back off to 20 MHz mode if there are interfering networks in range.
40 MHz mode helps only with strong signals and has the downside of colliding with neighboring networks in areas where there are a lot of networks. It also has the downside of reducing maximum range because the connection will drop sooner at low signal levels.
My recommendation has always been to use 20 MHz bandwidth mode if you are in an area with a lot of networks.
40 MHz mode helps only with strong signals and has the downside of colliding with neighboring networks in areas where there are a lot of networks. It also has the downside of reducing maximum range because the connection will drop sooner at low signal levels.
My recommendation has always been to use 20 MHz bandwidth mode if you are in an area with a lot of networks.
sfx2000
Part of the Furniture
In the 2.4GHz tests - are you using B/G/N-Mixed or Auto (which includes VHT20/VHT40, aka TurboQAM)?
The standard test method uses Channel 6 and 20 MHz bandwidth mode in 2.4 GHz. I don't force operating mode because settings are different for each router. I just leave the defaults.
I'm using a NETGEAR R7000 in bridge mode as the client. The only controls available are band and security. When I test routers that support QAM-256 in 2.4 GHz, I see link rates that confirm that operation.
sfx2000
Part of the Furniture
Hmmm... just wondering if one should either not use a single source that supports non-standard extensions of 802.11n, or have another test unit that just looks at the 802.11n (and earlier) capabilities - this is so that the 2.4GHz results are honest...
There's not a lot of desktop clients that support TurboQAM/VHT20/VHT40 modes - and even then, there's two approaches - one is to use the 11ac VHT elements in the beacon, and the other approach is to use Vendor Specific Attributes in the beacon to indicate the extended capabilities offered by Turbo...
There's not a lot of desktop clients that support TurboQAM/VHT20/VHT40 modes - and even then, there's two approaches - one is to use the 11ac VHT elements in the beacon, and the other approach is to use Vendor Specific Attributes in the beacon to indicate the extended capabilities offered by Turbo...
sfx2000
Part of the Furniture
The whole TurboQAM issue in 2.4GHz is not-settled, Broadcom does it one way, and testing with a Broadcom based device will favor review units compared to other vendors...
Or just don't test TurboQAM/VHT20/VHT40 modes... leave it to 802.11n/g/b only... as that is what most folks have installed..
Just my opinion...
sfx
Or just don't test TurboQAM/VHT20/VHT40 modes... leave it to 802.11n/g/b only... as that is what most folks have installed..
Just my opinion...
sfx
