NETGEAR Debuts AC3200 Nighthawk

[RMerlin]

See here for the current discussion about it:

http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showthread.php?t=17972

 

[connorm]

thats the idea. most people would rather just have a completely different firmware that is much different. rather then trying to fix something that already sucks like the asus GUI, something im not a fan of.
i know that alot of people like myself want tomato on the WRT-1900AC. and i think Victek recently started working on it

 

[sm00thpapa]

Just like in Asus firmware where is this AI Raidar they always talking about. I seen a switch on the 56U but not on the N66U. False advertisement.

 

[roldogg]

So, is this router on the market yet, and if so, has anyone tried it? Supposed to be AC3200, but it's a tri-band router, 1-2.4Ghz & 2-5Ghz bands, 600/1300/1300. Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't this the same speed as the R7000? Would the only benefit for this router over the R7000 is that it would allow many more devices to connect before you notice a drop in speed, but if there was only 1 user, it wouldn't be any faster than the R7000, right?

 

[KevTech]

That's OpenWRT, not Linksys's own firmware.

I know it is not Linksys/Belkin firmware.

Did you read the first post?

They are obtaining code from linksys and marvell.

Linksys has provided OpenWrt with an initial code release that enables open source firmware development. OpenWrt has requested some patches to provide more open source functionality at the Wi-Fi driver level that requires cooperation from Marvell. Marvell is working on the usable driver and getting the required approvals through GPL.

 

[RogerSC]

I know it is not Linksys/Belkin firmware.

Did you read the first post?

They are obtaining code from linksys and marvell.

You should read the thread on OpenWrt forum, it'll help calibrate your expectations *smile*:

https://forum.openwrt.org/viewtopic.php?id=50173

[Sorry for the off-topic post.]

 

[Sky1111]

Guys am I missing something here? Looks like Netgear R7500 has a faster CPU and it comes with dual USB 3.0 ports?

Assuming DD-WRT support, will OpenVPN client have better performance on R7500?

 

[RMerlin]

I know it is not Linksys/Belkin firmware.

Did you read the first post?

They are obtaining code from linksys and marvell.

I followed the OpenWRT saga for weeks before giving up, so yes, I am well aware of the actual situation. AFAIK, Belkin never delivered the promised source code for the wireless driver (look at the date of the post you linked). Right now, the only OpenWRT builds available are those pre-compiled by Belkin, or those manually compiled by enthusiasts. The OpenWRT core devs are still waiting for the missing source code, and they also rejected a lot of patches that Belkin had submitted for inclusion in OpenWRT because it didn't meet their coding requirements.

RogerSC's link should clarify things.

 

[sm00thpapa]

Only $299.99? That's crazy.....

 

[sm00thpapa]

Why? What is the appeal?

Sorry Tim saw this late. 4x4 got my curiosity. All these AC3200 routers are a marketing scam for noobs to buy their product. Just my opinion.

 

[Razor512]

Sorry Tim saw this late. 4x4 got my curiosity. All these AC3200 routers are a marketing scam for noobs to buy their product. Just my opinion.

Somewhat agree, while there is a benefit to it (able to enjoy dual band for both 802.11n and AC while still allowing for AC devices to have their own dedicated wifi radio, it does nothing to improve single device speed.

They should have gone with a 4 stream or more wifi adapter or if possible, a 6 stream 802.11ac radio, that would allow real world gigabit speeds over wifi under good conditions.

As it is now, it is a huge price premium for only a small performance boost that will only show its self when you have both new and legacy wifi clients on the network.

I would much rather see a $300 version of the R7000 with 4 10GbE ports, along with a line of PCI-e 10 GbE adapters that are not insanely overpriced, thus moving wired networking a head a little for the consumer market.

 

[sm00thpapa]

Somewhat agree, while there is a benefit to it (able to enjoy dual band for both 802.11n and AC while still allowing for AC devices to have their own dedicated wifi radio, it does nothing to improve single device speed.

They should have gone with a 4 stream or more wifi adapter or if possible, a 6 stream 802.11ac radio, that would allow real world gigabit speeds over wifi under good conditions.

As it is now, it is a huge price premium for only a small performance boost that will only show its self when you have both new and legacy wifi clients on the network.

I would much rather see a $300 version of the R7000 with 4 10GbE ports, along with a line of PCI-e 10 GbE adapters that are not insanely overpriced, thus moving wired networking a head a little for the consumer market.

I agree with you as well on the 10GB ports. It seems the AC87U and R7500 are the best bet for 4x4 streams. This two 5 GHz band seems fishy and a scam to take your money. This guy I spoke to was all excited like oh man I can't wait to get 3.2GB per second download. I tried to explain to him that it has 3 radios of 600Mbps, 1300Mbps and another 1300Mbps radio. He couldn't comprehend that and kept saying no you're wrong they say it has 3200 Mbps. So I'll be waiting for the true 4x4 stream routers. Good luck to every one who spends their hard earned money on this sales gimmick. Again this is my opinion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[thiggins]

So, is this router on the market yet, and if so, has anyone tried it? Supposed to be AC3200, but it's a tri-band router, 1-2.4Ghz & 2-5Ghz bands, 600/1300/1300. Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't this the same speed as the R7000? Would the only benefit for this router over the R7000 is that it would allow many more devices to connect before you notice a drop in speed, but if there was only 1 user, it wouldn't be any faster than the R7000, right?

Shipments start July 11. Please read the article linked on the first page of this thread for the answers to your other questions.

 

[thiggins]

Higher link rate isn't going to solve anything for most devices, which are 1x1.

Dream on for 10GbE. Too expensive, too hot and too small a market.

 

[RMerlin]

I see a market for both AC2350 and AC3200 devices. If you have a lot of 5 GHz devices or have to share that band between a 802.11ac and a 802.11n device, then an AC3200 will prove to be a better improvement than an AC2350 device. Your 802.11n device will not slow down your 802.11ac device if both of them are streaming at the same time.

I agree that the marketing can be misleading - but that's nothing new. Plenty of folks also wrongly assumed that an AC1900 router implied that they could reach 1900 Mbps with a single device, or that simultaneous dual-band implied that a client could connect to both bands at the same time. People need to stop assuming that a number means what they WANT it to mean, and do some light research before buying a product - the answers are all out there on the web.

 

[azazel1024]

I see a market for both AC2350 and AC3200 devices. If you have a lot of 5 GHz devices or have to share that band between a 802.11ac and a 802.11n device, then an AC3200 will prove to be a better improvement than an AC2350 device. Your 802.11n device will not slow down your 802.11ac device if both of them are streaming at the same time.

I agree that the marketing can be misleading - but that's nothing new. Plenty of folks also wrongly assumed that an AC1900 router implied that they could reach 1900 Mbps with a single device, or that simultaneous dual-band implied that a client could connect to both bands at the same time. People need to stop assuming that a number means what they WANT it to mean, and do some light research before buying a product - the answers are all out there on the web.

I agree.

When it comes down it it, most user setups would see more benefit from something like a tri-band 3:3 router than they would with one that is actually 4:4. How many client devices have 4:4 or would ever? MAYBE a small handful of PCI-e desktop cards. I doubt you'll ever see a 4:4 card in a laptop, with the possible exception of a very botique setup...and even then I question. There just is not a lot of space on a half height mini-PCIe card and not much more on a full height. That plus finding space to stick in 4 antennas in a laptop.

Heck, these days I'd bet laptops with 3:3 adapters in them probably account for less than 10% of the market. The number of tablets and phones right now with more than 2:2, AFAIK is 0%.

So about the only instance where it might benefit is bridged or possibly PCIe adapter for a desktop setups.

I'll grant 4:4 MU:MIMO will have some distinct benefits...but that takes something extra to make 4:4 useful for most people.

I am very intrigued by XStream/Tri-band. However, I think MU:MIMO would have more direct user benefits supposing quick and wide spread client adoption. In the short term XStream/Tri-band would have a lot more user benefits. Actually...if you wanted to save some cost/space, a tri-band 2:2 might be better suited. A drop from 6 antennas to 4 would save space/cost/complexity and frankly most clients are looking at 1:1 or 2:2 anyway. At least until MU:MIMO the advantage of 3:3 for most users does not exist.

I am very happy with my WDR3600s which are 2:2. I don't have a single client that is more than 2:2 right now...though I do have one 2:2 11ac client...so I wouldn't mind if they were 11ac capable, but I have no desire for a 3:3+ router/AP of any sort unless they are MU:MIMO capable...because I doubt highly I'll ever own more than a 2:2 client. I do have a LOT of clients though. So Tri-band/MU:MIMO (or both in one!!!) would be very nifty/nice.

 

[azazel1024]

I do want to start seeing routers/APs have the ability to do link aggregation soon though. Switches that are capable of doing that aren't very expensive. A number of NAS (especially anything high end and even most medium and some lower end) have dual NICs and can at a minimum do fail over and a lot actual link aggregation. Not hard to build a server with dual NICs.

I'd think other than firmware validation, the cost would be little to none for router/AP manufacturers to incorporate that. Otherwise those wired ports are going to be a bottle neck very soon.

 

[thiggins]

People need to stop assuming that a number means what they WANT it to mean, and do some light research before buying a product - the answers are all out there on the web.

The web? The answers are right here @ SNB!

 

[thiggins]

I do want to start seeing routers/APs have the ability to do link aggregation soon though.

Where do you see the bottleneck that requires link aggregation? Individual connection delivered throughput is well below 1Gbps.

 

[htismaqe]

I'll say it again.

I'd rather see multiple 2.4Ghz bands in a router than multiple 5Ghz bands. Probably not practical for the average user but would fit my situation perfectly.