ASUS announces the new Quad-Band ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000 ushering in 10GbE

Status
Not open for further replies.

Maverick009

Regular Contributor
Looks like Asus has their new king of wireless routers coming out with the announcement of the ROG Rapture GT-AXE16000 Quad-Band Router that not only adds an extra wireless band, but also adds 2 10GbE ports to boot along with the Quad 1GbE and WAN 2.5GbE ports. This is quite an upgrade and IMO, ushers the move towards 10Gb Ethernet. Hoping this also means switches will continue to move towards multigig 1Gb/2.5Gb/5Gb/10Gb solutions with prices finally breaking full ground. Now price of the router does hit $649 but I think it is a balance price for what you get and considering this is fairly new tech with quad-band and multiple 10Gb ethernet ports added.


Seems between networking announcements and PC tech, it will be an interesting year. One can now only hope price/demand/supply starts to show signs of a return as well. Let's hear your thoughts....
 

L&LD

Part of the Furniture
Make this an RT-xx model, and this may be the price/performance king in the next year or so (RMerlin support required, to be so).

RoG GT models and their RGB ethic, 'look at me! look at me!' gaudy GUI, along with a price aimed at teens with rich parents, wasn't ever meant for mass consumption by post teenagers like myself. :)
 

Maverick009

Regular Contributor
Make this an RT-xx model, and this may be the price/performance king in the next year or so (RMerlin support required, to be so).

RoG GT models and their RGB ethic, 'look at me! look at me!' gaudy GUI, along with a price aimed at teens with rich parents, wasn't ever meant for mass consumption by post teenagers like myself. :)
I still beg to differ. The GT series is their highend branding and in most cases carries premium quality hardware. This router looks to be deserving of the name. Also keep in mind it is aimed at gamers first and foremost, so the RGB and GUI match that philosophy ( I also happen to not mind it lol).

As for Merlin, I could still see a possible Merlin WRT firmware that supports it as a collaboration between him and Asus brought Merlin to a few GT routers including the GT-AX11000, which I own. I think hardware wise, this router is heavily loaded and the 2 10Gb ethernet ports are better than 1, plus Quadband wireless is a welcome addition over Tri-band.
 

Maverick009

Regular Contributor
You just need $100 for an HP/DELL i5 SFF off eBay, migrate your firewall and next 2-3 generations home routers can't catch you. ;)


To get to feature parity, you may end up spending more in the short term. As for me, I have a custom PfSense Firewall Server currently with an old G41/Intel Q6600 Quad-Core/4GB DDR3 combo powering it and the OS installed on a small Sata SSD with an Intel Quad 1Gb NIC and Dual 2.5Gb Realtek powered NIC working quite well for me enough. From that I have my Netgear CM1200 plugged into 2 of the 1Gb ports on the Intel NIC running a LAGG to give me full bandwidth to my 1.2Gbps+ Comcast Xfinity speed. Another 1Gb port runs into my 24 Port Managed Gigabit Switch. I have a 2.5Gb connection to my Wireless ASUS GT-AX11000 router running as an Access Point, and the other 2.5Gb port runs directly to my main gaming PC. So basically all covered lol. If I was to get this router, It would be used as an access point and take advantage of the Dual 10Gb ports and Quad-Band wireless. Right now though I have no need for it. I was more or less making the case for those who might want it and no major need for advanced servers, firewalls, etc.

For me I will most likely look at upgrading the Pfsense hardware to possibly at least a 6-core CPU/DDR4 platform and add a least one Dual 10GbE Intel card first.
 

L&LD

Part of the Furniture
@Maverick009, I agree the hardware is specced top-notch, today. And I appreciate differing viewpoints, like your own.

However, as a company, Asus needs to build the products for the demographic they want to aim for.

Using LEDs and other gimmicky visuals isn't their core target, even if they may be the most lucrative (in percentage profits, not total revenue).

I am certain that the model I would be interested in is in the works as we speak. And I hope, with less of a markup. :)
 

Maverick009

Regular Contributor
@Maverick009, I agree the hardware is specced top-notch, today. And I appreciate differing viewpoints, like your own.

However, as a company, Asus needs to build the products for the demographic they want to aim for.

Using LEDs and other gimmicky visuals isn't their core target, even if they may be the most lucrative (in percentage profits, not total revenue).

I am certain that the model I would be interested in is in the works as we speak. And I hope, with less of a markup. :)

Exactly my friend. Different viewpoints are always good especially in the tech space. In this case though, they were building the demographic they were aiming for, which is the gaming community, as they are one of the biggest players in that market with just about every product, they build these days. I do believe they will build a non-rog version of the router at some point, but I have also noticed lately, that they remove some features or ports in order to better differentiate their router market now too, similar to their motherboard lineup. Overall, I believe it makes sense financially and optimistically, as they build the topend products now and then downsize from there to create options in every price point. Eventually some of the features make it as standard on the lower stack after an irritation or two. I just think from a pure hardware and tech standpoint, this is welcome news and begins to open the door to hopefully lower the entry into 10Gb Ethernet in the long run and in the lower aspect, more quad-band wireless setups.

@Tech9 not bad, but why go with a Dell R210 that has a quad-core CPU, when you can go 6-12 Core CPU with DDR4 memory on the cheap for about $170-350.00 if you look close enough ;)
 

L&LD

Part of the Furniture
Yes, it is '5000' better. :)

Looking forward to reviews. @thiggins?
 

RMerlin

Asuswrt-Merlin dev
I like quad-band. I want penta-band. 2.4Gz x 1, 5Ghz x 2, 6Ghz x 2.

Add a minimum 10GbE x 3. Make the rest 2.5GbE or 5GbE. 1Gb ports are dinosaurs.
Broadcom has no SoC with that kind of bandwidth available. Neither does Qualcomm AFAIK. 3 10 Gbps port + 2 2.5 Gbps ports means you need an SoC with 70 Gbps of internal bandwidth (more if you also include the wifi radio traffic. Four radios probably means an SoC with at least four PCI-E lanes available for interconnects).

You cannot have 2 6 GHz radios, because you cannot have two radios within the same frequency range.

Home networks aren't even 2.5 Gbps yet, there is currently zero viable market for 10 Gbps LAN within the home networking segment. 10 GBps is very much a business market at this time.
 

SomeWhereOverTheRainBow

Part of the Furniture
Broadcom has no SoC with that kind of bandwidth available. Neither does Qualcomm AFAIK. 3 10 Gbps port + 2 2.5 Gbps ports means you need an SoC with 70 Gbps of internal bandwidth (more if you also include the wifi radio traffic. Four radios probably means an SoC with at least four PCI-E lanes available for interconnects).

You cannot have 2 6 GHz radios, because you cannot have two radios within the same frequency range.

Home networks aren't even 2.5 Gbps yet, there is currently zero viable market for 10 Gbps LAN within the home networking segment. 10 GBps is very much a business market at this time.
Sounds like the features are blown out of proportion.. All I see is dollar signs, and buyers remorse. Either that or someone knows something we don't...
 

SoCalReviews

Very Senior Member
Broadcom has no SoC with that kind of bandwidth available. Neither does Qualcomm AFAIK. 3 10 Gbps port + 2 2.5 Gbps ports means you need an SoC with 70 Gbps of internal bandwidth (more if you also include the wifi radio traffic. Four radios probably means an SoC with at least four PCI-E lanes available for interconnects).

You cannot have 2 6 GHz radios, because you cannot have two radios within the same frequency range.

Home networks aren't even 2.5 Gbps yet, there is currently zero viable market for 10 Gbps LAN within the home networking segment. 10 GBps is very much a business market at this time.
Broadcom has no SoC with that kind of bandwidth available. Neither does Qualcomm AFAIK.

Not now. In time they will. It's coming.

You cannot have 2 6 GHz radios, because you cannot have two radios within the same frequency range.

I'm not sure why you couldn't have two radios with the option that one could be used for a lower band and one radio for the upper 6Ghz band to separate the traffic bandwidth. Maybe what you are saying is there is no need to do this or that they wouldn't do this. I read that future Wifi 7 features are projected to offer seamless band sharing across all three bands.

Home networks aren't even 2.5 Gbps yet, there is currently zero viable market for 10 Gbps LAN within the home networking segment. 10 GBps is very much a business market at this time.

I read about many people using 2.5Gbps and 10Gbps internet services. Yes the service is limited to fewer areas at this time and it is more of a business market but that was true for 1Gb internet services not too long ago. In the next five to ten years as the ISPs upgrade their infrastructure that will change.

As far as home LANs there are many forum members running 2.5Gbps right now and they are purchasing 10Gbps capable equipment for future proofing. With more professionals working remotely at home and away from the resources they have at work using very large files, doing 4K video editing, programming, etc. this segment is expanding faster than ever. The gaming market is also pushing the envelope with the need for lower latency high bandwidth internet service. 1Gb Ethernet has been around for more than twenty years. It's time to move on.
 
Last edited:

Maverick009

Regular Contributor
Broadcom has no SoC with that kind of bandwidth available. Neither does Qualcomm AFAIK. 3 10 Gbps port + 2 2.5 Gbps ports means you need an SoC with 70 Gbps of internal bandwidth (more if you also include the wifi radio traffic. Four radios probably means an SoC with at least four PCI-E lanes available for interconnects).

You cannot have 2 6 GHz radios, because you cannot have two radios within the same frequency range.

Home networks aren't even 2.5 Gbps yet, there is currently zero viable market for 10 Gbps LAN within the home networking segment. 10 GBps is very much a business market at this time.
I agree. I did not see needing 2 6Ghz radios either, if they are essentially giving you back the 2nd 5Ghz radio, as all 3 radios are for the 802.11AX standard, with 6Ghz just being the least congested. Now the 10Gbps Ethernet I did see as good reason even in a home network, but more or less for NAS and/or home gaming setups with large data to move (For me it would be useful for eventually also adding a steam cache to the mix), but for internet, the 2.5Gps port is more than enough as Internet companies are just hitting 1-1.2Gbps speeds in a reasonable price bracket at 2Gbps internet is still at a premium for most folks. Adding 2.5Gbps/5Gbps to the normal ports would be more for gimmicks and show for home networks and only really good where the motherboard also has identical ports, but as was said, that means the SOC needs to be powerful enough to handle the theoretical bandwidth that could be had if they went all out.... Probably would also be looking at a more expensive router than the $650 the GT-AXE16000 is aiming at. All good valid points :)
 

RMerlin

Asuswrt-Merlin dev
I'm not sure why you couldn't have two radios with the option that one could be used for the lower bands and one radio for the upper 6Ghz bands to separate the traffic bandwidth. Maybe what you are saying is there is no need to do this or that they wouldn't do this. I read that future Wifi 7 features are projected to offer seamless band sharing across all three bands.
Having two radios within a few centimeters of one another, covering a single band that you just cut in halves right in the middle will not work. First, filters aren't 100% "square", i.e. there is some leakage on both sizes of the covered spectrum, making the band be more slope-shaped than square-shaped. So, any channel that is near to the cutoff would still be causing issues with the other radio. That is not an issue with the 5 GHz band because there is a wide gap between the U-NII-2A and U-NII-2C bands. You cannot cut an available band right in the middle. And this would also effectively reduce the number of available 160 MHz channels, since you'd be cutting the band in two right in the middle.

I read about many people using 2.5Gbps and 10Gbps internet services. Yes the service is limited to fewer areas at this time and it is more of a business market but that was true for 1Gb internet services not too long ago. In the next five to ten years as the ISPs upgrade their infrastructure that will change.
So, you're complaining that hardware that won't exist for 5-10 years isn't available right now for the home market?

You are simply wishing for hardware that costs in the multi thousand dollars range right now out of a company whose market is the home user. That makes zero business sense. It's like complaining that AMD and Intel are only releasing 12 and 16 cores 5 GHz CPUs for your home machine, and that they should be releasing 64-core 7 GHz CPUs instead. That's not how technology works. The numbers aren't arbitrarily decided by the marketing department here.

These routers that Asus announced are already like 1-2 years ahead of what every other home router manufacturer has announced. They are even ahead of a lot of prosumer products. Technology doesn't evolve overnight, and products must match market needs. Right now, zero market needs for the kind of router you are asking for, and the technology doesn't exist in that market segment either. Unless you expect Asus to sell you a GT-AX99000 for 4999$ USD with the kind of specs you are asking for, and for it to actually sell more than 10 worldwide.

If you have need for business-level of hardware, then buy it from a manufacturer that designs products within that market segment. And expect to pay multiple thousand of dollars for it, because it's what that kind of hardware costs.
 

Maverick009

Regular Contributor
Broadcom has no SoC with that kind of bandwidth available. Neither does Qualcomm AFAIK.

Not now. In time they will. It's coming.

You cannot have 2 6 GHz radios, because you cannot have two radios within the same frequency range.

I'm not sure why you couldn't have two radios with the option that one could be used for the lower bands and one radio for the upper 6Ghz bands to separate the traffic bandwidth. Maybe what you are saying is there is no need to do this or that they wouldn't do this. I read that future Wifi 7 features are projected to offer seamless band sharing across all three bands.

Home networks aren't even 2.5 Gbps yet, there is currently zero viable market for 10 Gbps LAN within the home networking segment. 10 GBps is very much a business market at this time.

I read about many people using 2.5Gbps and 10Gbps internet services. Yes the service is limited to fewer areas at this time and it is more of a business market but that was true for 1Gb internet services not too long ago. In the next five to ten years as the ISPs upgrade their infrastructure that will change.

As far as home LANs there are many forum members running 2.5Gbps right now and they are purchasing 10Gbps capable equipment for future proofing. With more professionals working remotely at home and away from the resources they have at work using very large files, doing 4K video editing, programming, etc. this segment is expanding faster than ever. The gaming market is also pushing the envelope with the need for lower latency high bandwidth internet service. 1Gb Ethernet has been around for more than twenty years. It's time to move on.

Everything has a price, and although you bring up some valid points, there is only so far you can go before the price escapes the home needs. Most of the SOC chips for home/small business routers are built with limits in mind. Most major equipment is using full blown servers, or hardware specific routers, that usually consist of an X86 CPU or SOC, that allows them to achieve that theoretical bandwidth needed. Also, businesses are typically bringing in T1/3 connections or Fiber that can hit those target speeds, and possibly using QOS to spread the bandwidth to 100's if not thousands of machines that are used by their associates. You just do not see that in the common home, and the few that have access to 10Gbps or faster internet, is usually paying for a business line/connection to be placed in their homes at some premium (Think $300-$1000+ per month) which is not nowhere near where the common home user will pay.

That also can factor into why home network products have been slower to upgrade or implement features, and we are just beginning to see 2 10Gbps really be added and currently on the high-end at that and targeted at gamers, as they will pay that premium, to hopefully pave the way for 10Gbps to be the new normal eventually. Remember though 2.5Gbps/5Gbps/10Gbps have just started to become a normal feature on motherboards in the last few years, and still not a standard on the very low-end boards as of yet, and part of the reason it will still take time to become fully standard on a router.

If you want to go the multigig route with 1Gbps/2.5Gbps/5Gbps/10Gbps, then I would suggest going the custom route with building a Pfsense firewall and add multigig cards, with an adding an access point or more to the mix. That way you can customize to your hearts content in the price point you are comfortable with. That is the only way right now to get exactly what you want and have future expandability.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Latest threads

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top