Linksys WRT1900AC AC1900 Dual Band Wireless Router Review

[isamudaison]

Yes I saw that referenced by Lom in a dramatic sort of way over at dd-wrt forum...
I don't see how it's unequivocal evidence that they're not working with OpenWRT, or doing any sort of F/OSS.



This sorta thing is sooo common in collaboration between Co's & F/OSS communities that it's not even funny any more.
It could devolve into a longer-term systemic issue on Belkin's part, or, it could be a "storm in a teacup" (which is so often the case), we just don't know yet.

Agree, it should be extremely interesting to see how this plays out (I guess I'm too jaded after 10+ years of dev'ing to be optimistic about the whole thing ).

@thiggins - Did you see an option anywhere in the firmware to enable 'master browser / wins server' like you can with tomato firmware?

 

[thiggins]

@thiggins - Did you see an option anywhere in the firmware to enable 'master browser / wins server' like you can with tomato firmware?

No. You have to enter \\IPADDRESS to connect

 

[Shikami]

I haven't been retesting other current routers with alternative firmware. Previous tests have always shown no performance improvement via alternative firmware. Is your experience different?

With Broadcom, this may be this case. However, there seems to be a possibility with Marvell and Linksys concerning this SoC/router that they may support the accelerated features in OpenWRT, which Broadcom wouldn't. But also OpenWRT is a different beast, and may need an insight from you. I think it would be very beneficial, and and helpful to the consumer.

Personally, as for PCMag, and other testing sites I do not trust them. I will read them due to the fact that sometimes some information is passed on down. However, this has been the ONLY place I trust to review when concerning networking products.

 

[thiggins]

Personally, as for PCMag, and other testing sites I do not trust them. I will read them due to the fact that sometimes some information is passed on down. However, this has been the ONLY place I trust to review when concerning networking products.

I appreciate your confidence in SNB, Shikami. But, as you know, wireless performance is highly dependent on many factors.

We try to be as careful as possible to maintain test conditions to provide an apples-to-apples comparison among products. But our chamber-based process is only one data point and an admittedly idealized one, at that.

 

[Shikami]

But, as you know, wireless performance is highly dependent on many factors.

Funny thing is, I do not care about 802.11x . I do, understand the "mixed bag" of results that you will get with wireless, and I inform others of this all the time. But there is a more trust worthy approach here and from you than what you would get from say PCMag, CNet, et al. I trust your reviews for technical reasons

 

[hewligun]

Funny thing is, I do not care about 802.11x . I do, understand the "mixed bag" of results that you will get with wireless, and I inform others of this all the time. But there is a more trust worthy approach here and from you than what you would get from say PCMag, CNet, et al. I trust your reviews for technical reasons

Do you honestly think other sites are fudging numbers? I highly doubt that. Products that give direct results I very much doubt they lie on numbers. sure they can be biased on features and appearance, but i dont see them lying on results.

 

[legitposter]

Do you honestly think other sites are fudging numbers? I highly doubt that. Products that give direct results I very much doubt they lie on numbers. sure they can be biased on features and appearance, but i dont see them lying on results.

It's become well known in the video game industry that many mainstream game reviews and scores are heavily influenced by the game developer's link to the game reviewer's advertisers. I see no reason to believe this does not also occur in other tech industries as well.

This is not a jab at PCMag, CNET or any of the mainstream outlets that have reviewed the wrt1900AC. It's just me reminding everyone that ALOT goes on behind the scenes, in meetings and phone calls, to shape these reviews as needed for the businesses involved.

 

[Razor512]

For the review, I would have expected the esata read speeds to be a little higher, especially considering what it was able to do for the write speeds



I hope that the company releases as much information as possible, in addition to some source code so that the router has the best chance possible to get good performing and stable 1st and 3rd party firmware, and not largely become a buggy and abandoned mess like with the WNR3500L V2.

Without good support, the less common issues simply get ignored, for example how well can a router handle being in an environment where other routers may exist. (all of my routers from the crappy actiontec ones, to my R7000 handle it perfectly, (that is all except the WNR3500L V2, which literally cannot function reliably on certain channels if a couple other access points are nearby (only a little over 150 access points)

Link to some of my test results when seeking help: http://www.myopenrouter.com/forum/t...ted-wifi-environments-while-many-others-can./

For many of the newer routers, especially the AC ones, the companies that made the routers, feel a need to make it pretty much impossible for 3rd party firmware to be fully optimized to get the most out of the router.

All in all, I really want this router to bring back the good ol days of the WRT54GL but much better. If the router is relatively easy to develop for, then it will be supported for a very long time. (compared to many other routers that I have seen, the WRT54GL is the longest supported router with firmware updates still being made for it, especially with tomato)

 

[thiggins]

For the review, I would have expected the esata read speeds to be a little higher, especially considering what it was able to do for the write speeds.

eSATA and USB 3.0 results were about the same, both write and read. I am not surprised by this, since a lot depends on how good the drivers are. Also depends on what version of SATA is supported.

Update: Linksys says the eSATA port supports SATA II, i.e. 3 Gbps raw data rate. USB 3.0 is 5 Gbps raw data rate.

 

[hewligun]

It's become well known in the video game industry that many mainstream game reviews and scores are heavily influenced by the game developer's link to the game reviewer's advertisers. I see no reason to believe this does not also occur in other tech industries as well.

This is not a jab at PCMag, CNET or any of the mainstream outlets that have reviewed the wrt1900AC. It's just me reminding everyone that ALOT goes on behind the scenes, in meetings and phone calls, to shape these reviews as needed for the businesses involved.

A video game site is subjective though. These wireless routers are showing results with hard numbers. If pcworld is fudging the numbers who is to say SNB wasent? I dont think they are. Especially when 3 sites are all coming up with similar numbers.

 

[KGB7]

It's become well known in the video game industry that many mainstream game reviews and scores are heavily influenced by the game developer's link to the game reviewer's advertisers. I see no reason to believe this does not also occur in other tech industries as well.

This is not a jab at PCMag, CNET or any of the mainstream outlets that have reviewed the wrt1900AC. It's just me reminding everyone that ALOT goes on behind the scenes, in meetings and phone calls, to shape these reviews as needed for the businesses involved.

Exact same thing can be said about SNB! There is alot going on at SNB that WE dont know about.

So you can't just choose and pick who to trust and who you dont, you either have to throw them all in the same bag or not. But until you have clear, solid and factual evidence to back up such claims; that SNB is influenced by the industry, then you need to put the pitch forks and tin foil hat away.

 

[thiggins]

Let me see if we can get this back on topic to talk about more interesting things.

All the sites mentioned, SNB included, are advertiser supported. I can't speak to the editorial policies of other sites. But in SNB's case, we're a very small operation and I own and run the business.

There's not a lot behind the curtain, guys. I have no editorial or advertising director telling me what to cover or how to cover it. I do most of the testing personally to ensure consistency and that methods are properly followed. I collaborate with only a few people who I trust and edit everything they write... usually with a heavier hand than I would put up with .

Ad sales are handled by an agency that I am in regular contact with, mostly to provide advice about general traffic trends and possible new ad positions and methods.

I have been covering the consumer networking business since pretty much the start (anyone remember the UMAX router?). So I'm known by all the major companies in the business and I am told that SNB is highly respected because manufacturers know their products will get a tough, but fair review.

Manufacturers know they can't buy a good review or even product coverage through advertising or any other means. They also know that our test methods are as fair and non-biased as we can make them and objective with focus on facts and analysis driven by data.

That's how SNB has earned their respect and trust. That's how I hope to continue to earn yours.

 

[Poseidon]

Exact same thing can be said about SNB! There is alot going on at SNB that WE dont know about.

So you cant just chose and pick who to trust and who you dont, you either have to throw them all in the same bag or not. But until you have clear, solid and factual evidence to back up such claims; that SNB is influenced by the industry... you need to put the tin foil hat away.

Well said. Two out of SNB's top 3 rated AC1900 routers (NG R7000 and Linksys EA6900) performed horribly in my environment. Wireless (both 2.4 and 5) were erratic and both required reboots every few days. The Asus RT-68U performed well but their software is hit or miss and often crippled the router's performance with every new update release.

I picked up the Linksys WRT1900AC "Beast" and it has been rock solid thus far. I'm noticing better wireless performance (especially on my Apple devices) and not a single hiccup yet. I'm loving this thing.

This was the 4th ranked router on SNB but in my own personal experience, it bests the R7000, EA6900 and the RT-AC68U.

 

[hewligun]

Let me see if we can get this back on topic to talk about more interesting things.

All the sites mentioned, SNB included, are advertiser supported. I can't speak to the editorial policies of other sites. But in SNB's case, we're a very small operation and I own and run the business.

There's not a lot behind the curtain, guys. I have no editorial or advertising director telling me what to cover or how to cover it. I do most of the testing personally to ensure consistency and that methods are properly followed. I collaborate with only a few people who I trust and edit everything they write... usually with a heavier hand than I would put up with .

Ad sales are handled by an agency that I am in regular contact with, mostly to provide advice about general traffic trends and possible new ad positions and methods.

I have been covering the consumer networking business since pretty much the start (anyone remember the UMAX router?). So I'm known by all the major companies in the business and I am told that SNB is highly respected because manufacturers know their products will get a tough, but fair review.

Manufacturers know they can't buy a good review or even product coverage through advertising or any other means. They also know that our test methods are as fair and non-biased as we can make them and objective with focus on facts and analysis driven by data.

That's how SNB has earned their respect and trust. That's how I hope to continue to earn yours.

I trust and respect your reviews and I trust the other sites as well. I think when things point to hard numbers from testing, its hard to lie. But i guess anything can be done. But as KGB7 said, I also view as many as possible to get a general consensus on something and base a purchase off that.

 

[KGB7]

It's odd that there is very little user feed back even though the router was flying of the shelves.


Tim,

I was just thinking and realized that no one has done an outdoor tests with any routers in the past. I think it would be interesting to see how well a router does in open space with no indoor restrictions at various distances.

 

[thiggins]

I was just thinking and realized that no one has done an outdoor tests with any routers in the past. I think it would be interesting to see how well a router does in open space with no indoor restrictions at various distances.

Might be interesting, but of little practical use for consumer indoor routers, since they are not used outdoors....

 

[Shikami]

Do you honestly think other sites are fudging numbers? I highly doubt that. Products that give direct results I very much doubt they lie on numbers. sure they can be biased on features and appearance, but i dont see them lying on results.

You are assuming; this is the problem. With my experience and knowledge of hardware I can make the SNB charts a nice read and I can also translate how the flow of packets will be on my network from them. Also, I am biased against these sites due to the fact that they never present the information in a more technical manner that I wish it to be presented as. They also miss points that are critical that Tim does address more often in his reviews then they all do combined (except the audible aura that the Broadcom's AC chips have). As I said before, I do read their reviews for little bits of information that can get passed on down. But overall, I prefer Tim's reviews for his testing models and software used.

 

[Razor512]

It's become well known in the video game industry that many mainstream game reviews and scores are heavily influenced by the game developer's link to the game reviewer's advertisers. I see no reason to believe this does not also occur in other tech industries as well.

This is not a jab at PCMag, CNET or any of the mainstream outlets that have reviewed the wrt1900AC. It's just me reminding everyone that ALOT goes on behind the scenes, in meetings and phone calls, to shape these reviews as needed for the businesses involved.

It depends on how the testing is done. sites like smallnetbuilder detail their testing method. When the testing method is not detailed, then it is possible to benchmark or generate reports that will be biased, there are many ways to collect statistics that will use sound math, but will be biased high or low.

This pretty much goes above and beyond what the other sites are doing so that you can have a better idea of how the items are tested and what issues (if any) the process will have.

For example:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-howto/32082-how-we-test-wireless-products-revison-7

 

[RTN]

eSATA and USB 3.0 results were about the same, both write and read. I am not surprised by this, since
a lot depends on how good the drivers are. Also depends on what version of SATA is supported.

Update: Linksys says the eSATA port supports SATA II, i.e. 3 Gbps raw data rate. USB 3.0 is 5 Gbps raw data rate.

Linksys WRT1900:

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/62...11ac-smart-wireless-router-review/index6.html

Asus RT-AC68U, SMB, USB3.0 speed - over 50 MByte/s

http://www.foxnetwork.ru/index.php/en/component/content/article/146-asus-rt-ac68u.html

 

[Mordred]

Linksys WRT1900:

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/62...11ac-smart-wireless-router-review/index6.html

Asus RT-AC68U, SMB, USB3.0 speed - over 50 MByte/s

http://www.foxnetwork.ru/index.php/en/component/content/article/146-asus-rt-ac68u.html

Why do I get the feeling, that they all don't want to publish results with HW acceleration turned off, in the article:

http://www.foxnetwork.ru/index.php/en/component/content/article/146-asus-rt-ac68u.html

he mentions CTF but no one ever publishes any LAN-WAN test with CTF turned off. In a real world setup I was never able to use CTF. It is basically the benchmarking mode like on graphic cards, pure cheating.
These options wouldn't be there if it worked reliably.