ASUS RT-N66U Firmware Version 3.0.0.4.376.1071

[jim769]

How much better is the wireless strength and throughput compared to the rt-n66u on the 68u?

For me having owned both the N66 and the 68U i can say the N66 with the sdk5 driver has a better signal output on 2.4 Ghz but less throughput at distance compared to the 68U. With the sdk6 driver for the N66 its less signal. The 5 Ghz band on the 68U is far better then any firmware with the N66.

Bottom line the N66 is a great router but the 68U has much better hardware and just works better and faster. I will always keep my N66 for a back up as long as Merlin keeps supporting it.

 

[sm00thpapa]

For me having owned both the N66 and the 68U i can say the N66 with the sdk5 driver has a better signal output on 2.4 Ghz but less throughput at distance compared to the 68U. With the sdk6 driver for the N66 its less signal. The 5 Ghz band on the 68U is far better then any firmware with the N66.

Bottom line the N66 is a great router but the 68U has much better hardware and just works better and faster. I will always keep my N66 for a back up as long as Merlin keeps supporting it.

Amen Jim. I own a N66U and N66W. Both will always remain in my household.

 

[wouterv]

I have done another test with different firmware on 2.4 GHz.
Wireless Mode: Auto
Optimized for Xbox: unchecked.
b/g Protection: Unchecked.
Channel Bandwidth: 20 MHz.
Control Channel 11.
WPA2 Personal with AES.

The furthest device is a WRT54GL with DD-WRT, setup as Client Bridge (a wireless connection to the RT-N66U and a wired connection to the networked printer).
Between the RT-N66U and the WRT54GL are two concrete floors.
I have tested the follwing firmware versions:

• 3004.270
• 3004.374.5517
• 3004.376.1071

In between the different verions: return to factory defaults and manual configure the basics.

Below screen shots from the WRT54GL DD-WRT interface while the RT-N66U is running different firmware versions.
The shown MAC address is from the RT-N66U, the line shows the signal data.
Results:

• 3004.270: Signal -58, Noise -94, SNR 36, Quality 44%.
• 3004.374.5517: Signal -67, Noise -93, SNR 26, Quality 33%.
• 3004.376.1071: Signal -65, Noise -94, SNR 29, Quality 35%.

.270 Is the best, as known.
.5517 Seems to be the worst.
.1071 Is a little better then .5517.

[EDIT]
Test with the latest Merlin build is here:
http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showpost.php?p=129191&postcount=151

 

[sm00thpapa]

Thank you wouterv for your work and time spent on this. I want to know the reason why Asus went from a SDK5 driver to the SDK6 driver. Guess I'll be sticking to .270 for the life of the router. Glad .270 runs on the N66W as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[wouterv]

Thank you wouterv for your work and time spent on this. I want to know the reason why Asus went from a SDK5 driver to the SDK6 driver. Guess I'll be sticking to .270 for the life of the router. Glad .270 runs on the N66W as well.

There was more in between 3.0.0.4.270 and the current version.
Right after3.0.0.4.270 came 3.0.0.4.354 Beta, followed by 3.0.0.4.370, 3.0.0.4.372, 3.0.0.374.168 and 3.0.0.4.374.257 which all suffered connection issues on 5 GHz.
In between the 3.0.0.4.271/272 and 3.0.0.4.276 versions where released to support the newer hardware version of the RT-N66U (with updated flashrom).

Merlin launched his experimental "Pixie dust" version with the SDK6 drivers as magic fix for the 5 GHz problems.

Also Asus released experimental SDK6 builds for selected users and finally came up with 3.0.0.4.374.720 that formally introduced the SDK6 drivers. This solved the 5 GHz connection problems, but introduced the 2.4 GHz performance issues.

Next upgrades included a bunch of security fixes and other enhancements such as adapting Merlins IPv6 firewall. Other major fixes somewhere in the line are related to PPPoE and 3G/4G dongles.

Again Merlin launched special RT-N66U builds with modifications to enhance the performance on 2.4 GHz.
The next step would be that Asus adapts Merlins fix

Bottom line for me is that I want to have the security fixes and have reliable connections on 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz. Although the performance on 2.4 GHz is degraded, it is still sufficient for me.

 

[sm00thpapa]

I have .270, .271 and .276. I never saw .272 on the Asus website. Is there anyway you can send it to me?

 

[sm00thpapa]

Never mind I found the old thread. No such animal as .272. I'm a try .271 again.

 

[sm00thpapa]

Running .271 now. Range and performance is awesome.

 

[MarkyPancake]

Running .271 now. Range and performance is awesome.

What is the full firmware version number and do you have a link to the ZIP file?

 

[wouterv]

As followup for http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com/showpost.php?p=129071&postcount=144
Today I have also tested the latest Merlin build for the RT-N66U, I should have done that yesterday.
Every day is different, so I have added todays numbers for the 3004.376.1071 Asus build as well:

• Asus 3004.376.1071: Signal -66, Noise -94, SNR 27, Quality 34%.
• Merlin 3.0.0.4.374.43: Signal -62, Noise -94, SNR 32, Quality 39%.

.270 Is the best, as known.
.5517 Seems to be the worst.
.1071 Is a little better then .5517.
Merlin 43 Is a little better then .1071 (not as superior as .270)

 

[wouterv]

Running .271 now. Range and performance is awesome.

I believe to remember that .271/272 and .276 seemed a little worse for me and I sticked with .270 until the .720 came out that solved the 5 GHz issues for me.

The .271/272 mystery was that the download file was named 3.0.0.4.271, which installed as 3.0.0.4.272.

 

[sm00thpapa]

What is the full firmware version number and do you have a link to the ZIP file?

Google RT-N66U 4 shared. I put all the old firmwares there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[sm00thpapa]

I believe to remember that .271/272 and .276 seemed a little worse for me and I sticked with .270 until the .720 came out that solved the 5 GHz issues for me.



The .271/272 mystery was that the download file was named 3.0.0.4.271, which installed as 3.0.0.4.272.

Thanks. I have all 3 so I will play with them all. I loaded .271 and it says .271.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[KevTech]

Guess I'll be sticking to .270 for the life of the router.

You could also run merlins 3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5 build located in the sdk5 folder as it has the exact same driver as the stock 270.

Newer than the 270 by almost a year with fixes and extras 270 does not have.
For example, merlin wireless log shows you Rx/Tx Speed, RSSI and State which the stock 270 does not.

merlin 3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5
5.100 RC138.20
wl0: Jan 23 2013 15:25:28 version 5.100.138.20

stock 3.0.0.4.270
5.100 RC138.20
wl0: Jan 23 2013 15:25:28 version 5.100.138.20

Maybe wouterv can test but results should be the same as the driver is the same.

 

[sm00thpapa]

You could also run merlins 3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5 build located in the sdk5 folder as it has the exact same driver as the stock 270.

Newer than the 270 by almost a year with fixes and extras 270 does not have.
For example, merlin wireless log shows you Rx/Tx Speed, RSSI and State which the stock 270 does not.

merlin 3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5
5.100 RC138.20
wl0: Jan 23 2013 15:25:28 version 5.100.138.20

stock 3.0.0.4.270
5.100 RC138.20
wl0: Jan 23 2013 15:25:28 version 5.100.138.20

Maybe wouterv can test but results should be the same as the driver is the same.

Thanks Kev for the info.

 

[wouterv]

You could also run merlins 3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5 build located in the sdk5 folder as it has the exact same driver as the stock 270.

Newer than the 270 by almost a year with fixes and extras 270 does not have.
For example, merlin wireless log shows you Rx/Tx Speed, RSSI and State which the stock 270 does not.

merlin 3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5
5.100 RC138.20
wl0: Jan 23 2013 15:25:28 version 5.100.138.20

stock 3.0.0.4.270
5.100 RC138.20
wl0: Jan 23 2013 15:25:28 version 5.100.138.20

Maybe wouterv can test but results should be the same as the driver is the same.

Testing such an old version makes no sense, the result is predictable.
Having all security fixes included is my major concern together with an acceptable wireless perfomance.
I did my testing to have some numbers grouped with quite a objective test under the same conditions, with only different firmware versions.
As you can see, the results do change over time, even from day to day due to many variables like environmental conditions and neighbor equipment.
It is just sad that Asus does not manage to bring their famous RT-N66U back to the original level.
The very good thing of Asus is that they seems to continue with firmware upgrades.

The RT-N66U is still better then my previous main router, which was a Linksys E4200v2 (preceded by the WRT54GL). The E4200v2 performance on 2.4 GHz was really bad, it did not pass the two concrete floors, which was no problem for the WRT54GL. My Linksys experience ended after they simply ended the firmware upgrade support within a few months after I bought the E4200v2.
I tried a Netgear flagship for a few hours, but returned it due to a poor webinterface and the same bad 2.4 GHz coverage as the E4200v2.
The RT-N66U still performs better then the WRT54GL ever did (also due to 802.11n).

 

[KevTech]

Testing such an old version makes no sense, the result is predictable.

3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5 is from 11/30/2013 which is newer than 270, 271 or 276.

Was being build after the sdk6 driver started.

 

[jlake]

Testing such an old version makes no sense, the result is predictable.
Having all security fixes included is my major concern together with an acceptable wireless perfomance.
I did my testing to have some numbers grouped with quite a objective test under the same conditions, with only different firmware versions.
As you can see, the results do change over time, even from day to day due to many variables like environmental conditions and neighbor equipment.
It is just sad that Asus does not manage to bring their famous RT-N66U back to the original level.
The very good thing of Asus is that they seems to continue with firmware upgrades.

The RT-N66U is still better then my previous main router, which was a Linksys E4200v2 (preceded by the WRT54GL). The E4200v2 performance on 2.4 GHz was really bad, it did not pass the two concrete floors, which was no problem for the WRT54GL. My Linksys experience ended after they simply ended the firmware upgrade support within a few months after I bought the E4200v2.
I tried a Netgear flagship for a few hours, but returned it due to a poor webinterface and the same bad 2.4 GHz coverage as the E4200v2.
The RT-N66U still performs better then the WRT54GL ever did (also due to 802.11n).

"......back to the original level"? Hmmm.

This may be a case where if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck ......it's probably *allegedly* a duck.

I wouldn't hold your breath for the days of SDK5 range.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2046...tting-fraudulent-test-results-to-the-fcc.html

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2080...tgears-router-fraud-lawsuit-against-asus.html

Please note that although the RT-N66U isn't specifically mentioned, the article speaks of "other" ASUS routers.

 

[wouterv]

3.0.0.4.374.35_4-sdk5 is from 11/30/2013 which is newer than 270, 271 or 276.

Was being build after the sdk6 driver started.

My router is running Asus firmware 3004.376.1071.
The security fixes since 3.0.0.4.374.720 are serious enough for me (explained before) to stay up to date with the latest firmware.

 

[wouterv]

....
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2080...tgears-router-fraud-lawsuit-against-asus.html

"Asus quickly removed a number of older firmware updates for these routers from its website".
The artice defenitely explains why the 3.0.0.4.27x builds are removed and the oldest available build is 3.0.0.4.374.720 (the one introducing the SDK6 drivers).
As explained in a previous post, the RT-N66U still greatly suits my needs.
Case closed

Note:
I noticed the 3.0.0.4.276 GPL is still available, legally ok because that is just a bunch of uncompliled code.