Fork 380.57 HGG-FINAL

[alessandro893]

@alessandro893 and it cuz the antenna u use is for 2.4 only. 5 will be kinda bad cuz the antenna not support it. And 2.4 will get better cuz its directional antenna. Not omni directional antenna thats gonna spread

I have one directional 9dbi antenna with declared 5ghz support, and there are no difference in rssi between 2.4ghz tp-link antennas and special 5ghz antennas with same dbi.

 

[Matthew Patrick]

I have one directional 9dbi antenna with declared 5ghz support, and there are no difference in rssi between 2.4ghz tp-link antennas and special 5ghz antennas with same dbi.

So. Please speedtest next to the router when 1% and 100% . wanna see if the receiver overload gonna affect speed that much thx

 

[L&LD]

ac68u + 3 TPlink 2409a antennas
(one 2.4g wavelength distance between an antennas to prevent interference)

I made speedtest at 5ghz band:

10m from router in direct visibility without any barrier:

TX POWER %:_______RSSI:______NOICE:______SPEED:____MCS:

100_____________-51_________-95_______878 MB/S_____7

75______________-54_________-95_______702 MB/S_____5

50______________-56_________-95______ 702 MB/S______5



10m from router in direct visibility with a closed door as a barrier:

TX POWER %:_______RSSI:______NOICE:______SPEED:____MCS:

100_____________-56_________-95_______585 MB/S_____7

75______________-58_________-95_______527 MB/S______5

50______________-60_________-95_______527 MB/S______5

What client was connected with these tests?

And, those antennae are giving a very powerful boost already.

 

[Matthew Patrick]

What client was connected with these tests?

And, those antennae are giving a very powerful boost already.

I think his mbr (macbook pro) with AC card i believe

 

[alessandro893]

What client was connected with these tests?

And, those antennae are giving a very powerful boost already.

Tested on Macbook pro retina

 

[L&LD]

But with worse. I mean it still can get to gigabit speed or 500 mbit? 500mbit is fine though. . yea. Heat will not be an issue. Cuz the heatsink are very very huge. Lol

No, not Gbps speeds nor 500Mbps speeds at any reasonable distance and with normal obstacles (not just a direct line of sight between the router and the client).

But as I have posted before (search for the links I've provided and/0r posted in the thread here), the connection went from unusable (regardless of the indicated link speed) to very usable and stable. Even if the indicated speeds were below 48Mbps much of the time.

 

[Matthew Patrick]

No, not Gbps speeds nor 500Mbps speeds at any reasonable distance and with normal obstacles (not just a direct line of sight between the router and the client).

But as I have posted before (search for the links I've provided and/0r posted in the thread here), the connection went from unusable (regardless of the indicated link speed) to very usable and stable. Even if the indicated speeds were below 48Mbps much of the time.

Well gonna use 100% . but really really interested to test beside the router. And see if 1% and 100% tx really change the speed cuz we all hear receiver overload thing. But i didnt care about that ,that much[emoji14]

Tested on Macbook pro retina

 

[L&LD]

Well gonna use 100% . but really really interested to test beside the router. And see if 1% and 100% tx really change the speed cuz we all hear receiver overload thing. But i didnt care about that ,that much[emoji14]

100% at 'right next to router' is not recommended. That will damage something.

Don't forget that maximum throughput is not all I test for either. I want maximum throughput and lowest latency for my customers (a balanced) and myself too. When the network starts responding like I'm typing through molasses (and letters appear one by one, on screen), I don't care if the throughput is maxed out. That is a badly tuned network too.

 

[alessandro893]

100% at 'right next to router' is not recommended. That will damage something.

Don't forget that maximum throughput is not all I test for either. I want maximum throughput and lowest latency for my customers (a balanced) and myself too. When the network starts responding like I'm typing through molasses (and letters appear one by one, on screen), I don't care if the throughput is maxed out. That is a badly tuned network too.

Damage what ? ))))

 

[Matthew Patrick]

100% at 'right next to router' is not recommended. That will damage something.

Don't forget that maximum throughput is not all I test for either. I want maximum throughput and lowest latency for my customers (a balanced) and myself too. When the network starts responding like I'm typing through molasses (and letters appear one by one, on screen), I don't care if the throughput is maxed out. That is a badly tuned network too.

Damage what?

 

[alessandro893]

So. Please speedtest next to the router when 1% and 100% . wanna see if the receiver overload gonna affect speed that much thx

Speedtest near the router:

100% TX POWER:

1% TX POWER:

 

[Matthew Patrick]

Speedtest near the router:

100% TX POWER:

1% TX POWER:

What app u use to show on menubar the throughput? So. Its fine .

 

[alessandro893]

What app u use to show on menubar the throughput? So. Its fine .

WiFiSpy

 

[Matthew Patrick]

WiFiSpy

Btw. When 100% and next to router. Are u getting speed test. Net , the real dl ul speed from ur ISP?

 

[alessandro893]

Btw. When 100% and next to router. Are u getting speed test. Net , the real dl ul speed from ur ISP?

I can perform speedtest from my own server that connected via ethernet to router, but it gives 480-600 mbit/sec no more because it using ddr2 memory.

 

[Matthew Patrick]

I can perform speedtest from my own server that connected via ethernet to router, but it gives 480-600 mbit/sec no more because it using ddr2 memory.

Thats why

 

[alessandro893]

Btw. When 100% and next to router. Are u getting speed test. Net , the real dl ul speed from ur ISP?

SPEEDTEST MINI ON OWN SERVER (HACKINTOSH + OSX SERVER)

FILE TRANSFER THROUGH WLAN (AFP)

 

[Matthew Patrick]

SPEEDTEST MINI ON OWN SERVER (HACKINTOSH + OSX SERVER)

FILE TRANSFER THROUGH WLAN (AFP)

Ok. Thx so much for the test

 

[RogerSC]

Started with 380.57 HGG-FINAL on the RT-AC68P, which worked well for me. Except the 2.4GHz. wireless was wonky with CTF and FA enabled. Just like I saw with RMerlin's 380.57 2.4GHz. wireless. So I went back to 378.55.3_HGG-FINAL, and that works well also, and the 2.4GHz. is stable and useful. I'm really liking the wireless on these releases, they aren't "blasting", just a little more average signal strength. And the throughput is not suffering. Nor are the temperatures higher than I expect. So I'm really liking this.

Anyways, what I'm looking for, if it's available, is 380.57 HGG-FINAL with the old 378 wireless driver (from the older sdk) for the RT-AC68P. I read about that at one point, but haven't re-found how to get it. Is there any help for me? Can someone please tell me how to get that one?

Thanks.

 

[joegreat]

Anyways, what I'm looking for, if it's available, is 380.57 HGG-FINAL with the old 378 wireless driver (from the older sdk) for the RT-AC68P. I read about that at one point, but haven't re-found how to get it. Is there any help for me? Can someone please tell me how to get that one?

Download the firmware (again), unzip it and look what you got: Two versions of the firmware!