How's the Edimax br-6675nd Dual Band Router?

[staticfree]

So I saw this Edimax br-6675nd dual band 450 router on sale at newegg.com and ordered one. Why? It seems to offer a lot for the price of about $75 after a rebate offer they are giving right now. It seems to use most of the same chipsets as the highly rated Asus RT-N56u router except for one Ralink chipset is different for the 5Ghz band. This router however is a 450Mbps router (3 antennas) vs the Asus' 300Mbps 2 antenna design. I know Edimax is not as popular nor big a name as Asus, Dlink, Linksys, Netgear, etc. but it sure seems like it might be a strong Ralink chipset based router. Only con I see comparing it with the Asus N56u is that it only has 64MB RAM where the Asus has 128MB RAM. But that's all I notice in the specs that might make a difference somewhere.
Is there any interest or plans to get this reviewed and compared Tim?

 

[thiggins]

I rarely review Edimaxes. They compete primarily on price.

 

[staticfree]

I rarely review Edimaxes. They compete primarily on price.

I just received my new Edimax router this afternoon and I have to say for $75 this router is impressing me. It's been running since this afternoon into this evening now for about 8 hours straight and signals on both bands are solid. None of the "Internet Not Connected" issues I was having with other new high end routers I've tried). The signal strength is stronger too than my old standby router the Netgear WNDR3700v1. I only need and use my routers for their basic router functions and don't need the USB ports for NAS shares or fancy traffic monitors. This router looks like a real winner if it holds up longer term and I'll rate it a Best Buy too since it only costs $75 after mail in rebate.


Three dual band antennas, simultaneous 2.4Ghz/5Ghz bands, 5Ghz band is 450Mbps and 2.4Ghz band is 300Mbps (I just found out), so I don't know why they designate this router as an N900 router. I don't know how they can sell it so cheap. Maybe they skimped on parts quality inside? It does feel like it gets a bit warm in its compact little white enclosure. It has nice blue colored lights up front. It is Gigabit LAN ports as well as Gigabit WAN port. In other words its loaded with all the top end features. I don't know how it only costs $75 when it seems to work better than the high end Netgears right now.
The GUI interface is not all that bad and has enough adjustments and configurability to satisfy my routing needs. It does say it has limits of 15 PC's for ipaddress reservations and such. So I guess that's the only shortfall that bothers me with it. Signal quality wise though, it seems to be performing in my somewhat harsh RF neighborhood! And that works for me!

I really think you (and anyone else looking for a solid full 450Mbps MIMO speed router) should check this router out. Of course I have no idea how long this router will last in the longer term. I just hope it does for $75.
I found some extra detailed info on the specs of the chipsets used inside this router and cut and pasted it here FWIW:

Edimax BR-6675nD

Type: wireless router

FCC ID: NDD9566751028

Power: 12 VDC, 1.25 A
Connector type: Barrel plug

CPU1: Ralink RT3883
FLA1: 8 MB (Macronix MX29LV640EBTI-70G)
RAM1: 64 MB (Winbond W9751G6JB-25)

Expansion IF types: none specified

WI1 chip1: Ralink RT3883
WI1 802dot11 protocols: an
WI1 MIMO status: 3x3:3
WI1 antenna connector: U.FL, RP-SMA
WI2 chip1: Ralink RT3092
WI2 802dot11 protocols: bgn
WI2 MIMO status: 2x2:2
WI2 antenna connector: U.FL, RP-SMA

ETH chip1: Ralink RT3883
Switch: Realtek RTL8367R
LAN speed: 10/100/1000
LAN ports: 4
WAN ports: 1

Update:
Well I feel a little bit let down, now that I find out that this is not a 3 antenna router on both bands. It is just on the 5Ghz band that it is a 3 antenna design and only a 2 antenna design for the 2.4Ghz band. Guess that takes out some of the mystery to me why they could sell it at such a lower price. Oh well, it still is performing strong and I still am so far impressed and happy with its performance.

 

[sfx2000]

I rarely review Edimaxes. They compete primarily on price.

Most of the tier 1 brands are ODM and they compete on price:

Linksys/Cisco - Gemtek and others - http://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?SearchText=linksys+router&IndexArea=product_en&fsb=y

D-Link - Cameo and others - http://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?IndexArea=product_en&SearchText=d-link+router

Netgear - the link - http://www.alibaba.com/showroom/netgear-router.html

True Tier Ones - and vendors I recommend in the SOHO market...

Cradlepoint
Apple
Buffalo/Melco <- Melco is the parent

Getting back to the OP's question...

Most SOHO routers are based on reference designs provided by the chipset manufacturer - this is called a Board Support Package

Marvell, Broadcom, Atheros, Realtek, Ralink - they all provide this, and a WebGUI, along with some other gubbins, and a reference board layout.

Truth be told, the Ralink chipset isn't that bad - good enough ships at the right pricepoint.

Wrap the BSP and the reference board design, drive out the costs where you can with component selection, and skin the WebGUI with your branding, and you have a SOHO router - do a save-as to a Chinese contract builder/builders, do the logistics and marketing, and you have a product...

this is how it is...

Some OEM's try to improve on the chipset BSP - some do well, some struggle...

 

[staticfree]

Most of the tier 1 brands are ODM and they compete on price:

Linksys/Cisco - Gemtek and others - http://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?SearchText=linksys+router&IndexArea=product_en&fsb=y

D-Link - Cameo and others - http://www.alibaba.com/trade/search?IndexArea=product_en&SearchText=d-link+router

Netgear - the link - http://www.alibaba.com/showroom/netgear-router.html

True Tier Ones - and vendors I recommend in the SOHO market...

Cradlepoint
Apple
Buffalo/Melco <- Melco is the parent

Getting back to the OP's question...

Most SOHO routers are based on reference designs provided by the chipset manufacturer - this is called a Board Support Package

Marvell, Broadcom, Atheros, Realtek, Ralink - they all provide this, and a WebGUI, along with some other gubbins, and a reference board layout.

Truth be told, the Ralink chipset isn't that bad - good enough ships at the right pricepoint.

Wrap the BSP and the reference board design, drive out the costs where you can with component selection, and skin the WebGUI with your branding, and you have a SOHO router - do a save-as to a Chinese contract builder/builders, do the logistics and marketing, and you have a product...

this is how it is...

Some OEM's try to improve on the chipset BSP - some do well, some struggle...

Yes, I understand. Looks like they did well with this particular Ralink based model. It's kicking butt in my home right now. Not a blip of trouble since I fired it up new out of the box. Range is outstanding which is what I value most to keep connections up and reliable throughout the house upstairs and downstairs. This router is serving well so far. Just throwing this info out there. So don't be scared off by the low price I say.

 

[sfx2000]

Yes, I understand. Looks like they did well with this particular Ralink based model. It's kicking butt in my home right now. Not a blip of trouble since I fired it up new out of the box. Range is outstanding which is what I value most to keep connections up and reliable throughout the house upstairs and downstairs. This router is serving well so far. Just throwing this info out there. So don't be scared off by the low price I say.

If it works for you - awesome!

Ralink has it's plus points - very, very linux friendly on the client side...

The AP side, while perhaps not as cutting edge as the Broadcom, Marvell, and Atheros designs, it works. The challenge for Ralink is not the tech side, but the business side, where some ODM's and OEM's are not as up to speed as the Tier 1's with regards to the customer experience (which is important)...

 

[staticfree]

If it works for you - awesome!

Ralink has it's plus points - very, very linux friendly on the client side...

The AP side, while perhaps not as cutting edge as the Broadcom, Marvell, and Atheros designs, it works. The challenge for Ralink is not the tech side, but the business side, where some ODM's and OEM's are not as up to speed as the Tier 1's with regards to the customer experience (which is important)...

Well for some reason the RF environment where I am seems to be very Broadcom chipset unfriendly. Every router I've tried (regardless of low, mid or high end model) from all different Brand names that give me disconnect and lost internet connection issues were all Broadcom chipset based routers. Regardless of any new routers are cutting edge or not, this Ralink chipset based router simply performs and performs reliably and well. My Netgear WNDR-3700v1 Atheros chipset based router was performing really well in this same area too until recently where it all of a sudden started developing some issue where it would lose Internet connection on the 2.4Ghz band. Seems like after awhile these RF amps start getting weak and burned out from being on 24/7 x 3 years constant use. Well it lasted me long enough to be satisfied with it, but IMHO, this low power stuff should last much much longer!

One caveat of me recommending this Edimax BR-6675nd router though is that it is a plain simple router with no fancy functions like Guest Client Network, USB port sharing and such. I also noticed that it is missing IPV6 support. There is a letter included in the box that says the firmware/software is freeware under the GNU licensing and therefore it is not guaranteed nor warranted at all. They do have and offer the firmware source code for download from the Edimax support site. I downloaded it for storing FWIW in case I get ambitious enough one day to build a Fedora Linux system and set up a development environment to compile it and mess with it. I see various posts around the internet asking for DD-WRT support. So maybe one day they will get the DD-WRT firmware to open up all the functions that are not on the stock firmware.

Anyway, I will keep this very basic functioning router since it is performing 100% reliably for my basic connect and route needs along with some ipaddress reservation and port forwarding needs. It's doing all this for me well so far with decently strong signals that reach far into the house areas that my family uses laptops, Ipods. smartphones, Sony PSP, etc. devices.
I can say that no other router has done so well in signal range thus far for me.
The Netgear WNDR-3700v1 also reached all those areas and served well, but not as well as this Edimax seems to be doing right now. It could be the external antenna placement that gives it the advantage over the internal and less adjustable built in antennas used on the Netgears. Nevertheless, it works better whatever the reason. I would not put down the Ralink chipsets because of the reasons I expressed from my 15+ years messing with buying and trying out all sorts of wireless routers for my home use.

For those looking for a reliable solid signal that holds a connection even in very dirty RF environments, I recommend give this router a try. But be warned that its firmware is very minimal and does not offer all the fancy features of other high-end routers. Just simple reliable signal and connections that seem to not be bothered as much by RF interference. Broadcom chipsets may measure faster and better in clean RF environments but what good are they if they totally break down and lose connections in a normal noisy RF neighborhood? Right? So the routers that hold the connection up are the routers for me.

 

[thetoad30]

So maybe one day they will get the DD-WRT firmware to open up all the functions that are not on the stock firmware.

I wouldn't count on this. DD-WRT is long in the tooth, and their developers are totally engrossed in the fact that they are selling this firmware to their commercial partners - not bad for a business, for sure, but certainly well away from their roots as a user/community based firmware. I gave up on them recently for OpenWRT, and have not looked back.

For those looking for a reliable solid signal that holds a connection even in very dirty RF environments, I recommend give this router a try. But be warned that its firmware is very minimal and does not offer all the fancy features of other high-end routers. Just simple reliable signal and connections that seem to not be bothered as much by RF interference. Broadcom chipsets may measure faster and better in clean RF environments but what good are they if they totally break down and lose connections in a normal noisy RF neighborhood? Right? So the routers that hold the connection up are the routers for me.

Not that I'm trying to bash a router/AP that I haven't used, but it would concern me that this router may be a reason that other routers have problems in a dirty RF environment. If you just keep screaming, completely disregarding the RF rules for 802.11, then of course you will "win". Again, not saying that's happening here, but it certainly makes me think that maybe this router is not following all the WiFi rules.

 

[stevech]

Prior couple of posts argue that "If" the vendor's product does X then it's inferior.
The term "dirty RF" is used... that makes no sense.
802.11 is a carrier sense multiple access (CSMA) method. Broadcom is among the top 2 or 3 chip makers. Of course they do CSMA correctly. CSMS is essentially a "don't transmit on an in-use channel". The idea is that it's uncommon to make the wrong decision on "in-use". It will happen of course, and MAC layer error correction eliminates all but a tiny fraction of uncorrectable errors. These errors bubble up to the network layer. If the data is TCP based, or uses some other reliable datagram method, even that error is corrected.

RF is as we know a very imperfect medium.

It's not useful to talk about dirty-RF when the band is 60+MHz wide and there are at least 3 non-overlapping 20MHz wide channels to choose from.

I'd define dirty RF as using a spectrum swath that has persistent, interfering (CSMA faults) non-802.11 transmissions, such as an analog CCTV camera (legal, unfortunately, even without CSMA). Same for baby monitors. But if this is persistent, you'll know, and you can change channels. Ideally, 802.11 automates this frequency agility (but it does not, yet, in consumer WiFi - but pro WiFi does, though via proprietary means (Aruba, Cisco others).

Using a too-busy 802.11 spectrum swath is not a product fault. No more so that when Citizen's Band radios became almost useless due to overcrowding.

(I don't use the term channel because of the bad situation where channel numbers overlap in 802.11 which confuses most users) -

 

[staticfree]

I wouldn't count on this. DD-WRT is long in the tooth, and their developers are totally engrossed in the fact that they are selling this firmware to their commercial partners - not bad for a business, for sure, but certainly well away from their roots as a user/community based firmware. I gave up on them recently for OpenWRT, and have not looked back.



Not that I'm trying to bash a router/AP that I haven't used, but it would concern me that this router may be a reason that other routers have problems in a dirty RF environment. If you just keep screaming, completely disregarding the RF rules for 802.11, then of course you will "win". Again, not saying that's happening here, but it certainly makes me think that maybe this router is not following all the WiFi rules.

Hi, yeah I am not really a follower of the DD-WRT firmware mods and updates through time so I wasn't totally aware of them selling their wares to vendors. I thought GNU stuff was free and to remain free.
Anyway, fyi, I downloaded the Edimax firmware source code from their support download site and just for the heck of it, loaded it onto a Linux RHEL5 OS laptop I built. I ran the make and build to compile the source code and it finished successfully saying it bult the firmware version 1.09 image .bin file.
However Edimax latest firmware that came with the router and is on their download site is at version 1.13. So Edimax is not giving us the latest source code updates they have made. No matter the fundamental source code is out there for anyone that understands it to analyse and see if they are following the 802.11 rules for being a good neighbor. I myself don't know enough where to look for it at this time (although I am a software engineer myself)
It has crossed my mind that these Atheros and Ralink routers that don't have any problems in my home environment (whereas Broadcom based routers do have problems) might not be neighbor friendly and not following all the rules. But they work for me for now.
Either that or Broadcom designs their receivers to either be too sensitive (thus overloading easily) or their receives have poorer adjacent channel selectivity and thus are more easily interfered with. dunno really. All I know is that all the routers that always have connection issues for me in the past 12+ years all seem to be Broadcom based chipsets. So I have am afraid to splurge on a new high end router like the Asus N66u, Netgear WNDR4500, R6300, etc. routers now. I am so tempted to buy the ASUS N66u just to see if its Broadcom based chipset will perform any differently (as in better) for me. But I hesitate. Maybe that new Western Digital Atheros based router will be the one I go for... as soon as any word comes back from Tim that the 5Ghz bug is not hardware and can indeed be fixed by firmware update. Thanks!

 

[thetoad30]

Prior couple of posts argue that "If" the vendor's product does X then it's inferior.

I don't think that's ever been said. Not following standards, maybe. But not inferior.

The term "dirty RF" is used... that makes no sense.

Wrong. The term was "dirty RF environment". Completely different meaning.

802.11 is a carrier sense multiple access (CSMA) method. Broadcom is among the top 2 or 3 chip makers. Of course they do CSMA correctly. CSMS is essentially a "don't transmit on an in-use channel". The idea is that it's uncommon to make the wrong decision on "in-use". It will happen of course, and MAC layer error correction eliminates all but a tiny fraction of uncorrectable errors. These errors bubble up to the network layer. If the data is TCP based, or uses some other reliable datagram method, even that error is corrected.

And if you start messing with noise floors or "rejecting" valid signals as noise, then you can violate these algorithms.

It's not useful to talk about dirty-RF when the band is 60+MHz wide and there are at least 3 non-overlapping 20MHz wide channels to choose from.

It is too. You have all the individual channels, you have frequency bleed-over from other electronics, plus other wireless APs, plus you can have environmental factors such as metal walls and studs. All cause a non-clean signal (dirty RF environment).

I'd define dirty RF as using a spectrum swath that has persistent, interfering (CSMA faults) non-802.11 transmissions, such as an analog CCTV camera (legal, unfortunately, even without CSMA). Same for baby monitors. But if this is persistent, you'll know, and you can change channels. Ideally, 802.11 automates this frequency agility (but it does not, yet, in consumer WiFi - but pro WiFi does, though via proprietary means (Aruba, Cisco others).

That's my point. So you can have dirty RF, and a dirty RF environment.

Using a too-busy 802.11 spectrum swath is not a product fault. No more so that when Citizen's Band radios became almost useless due to overcrowding.

Correct. But you can fault a product that screams over the other transmissions by changing floors and rejecting valid signals just to get its transmission out.

(I don't use the term channel because of the bad situation where channel numbers overlap in 802.11 which confuses most users)

The overlapping causes most problems. If my neighbor is on channel 4, then channel 1 and 6 are unusable. If people would just alternate using 1, 6, and 11 we'd all be okay. And I won't use 11 unless I am in LOS of the AP, since it has been rumored to be broadcasting at less than half the strength as 1 and 6.

 

[staticfree]

Prior couple of posts argue that "If" the vendor's product does X then it's inferior.
The term "dirty RF" is used... that makes no sense.
-

If it will make you happier and clarify, you can substitute the words "busy" or "crowded" for the word "dirty" in my statement slang term of "dirty RF environment". All that was meant is that it is an area of much RF signals all competing with each other and interfering with each other. That's what was meant by "dirty RF environment". I think you are reading too deep into it man. That's all that it was meant to convey.

 

[stevech]

Correct. But you can fault a product that screams over the other transmissions by changing floors and rejecting valid signals just to get its transmission out.

"changing floors" means what? Not a technical/engineering term. A guess: It means changing the threshold for CSMA "signal is present". If this is done in product X's firmware, you're saying the vendor is intentionally not complying with IEEE or WiFi Alliance compliance requirements? Not following CSMA procedures will cause more transmission collisions with the net effect of reduced throughput performance due to the ACK timeouts which be the standard are long delays. Vendors could do this because rarely do product reviewers show throughput while there are other signals present. I guess the reviewers assume (rightfully) that the produce is per the IEEE and WiFi Alliance criteria. WiFi Alliance is supposed to withhold use of their Logo if the product is non-compliant - but the testing is mostly an honor system situation- as is FCC Part 15 compliance. IEEE nor its agent tests products.

The overlapping causes most problems. If my neighbor is on channel 4, then channel 1 and 6 are unusable. If people would just alternate using 1, 6, and 11 we'd all be okay. And I won't use 11 unless I am in LOS of the AP, since it has been rumored to be broadcasting at less than half the strength as 1 and 6.

Agree that overlapping channel RF is a big problem. But the channel is not UNUSABLE unless your neighbor's WiFi is very heavily used (channel utilization) most of the time. THis is rare. But it's unrelated to the earlier.. this is a different subject than talking about non-802.11 signals that foul up CSMA.

 

[thetoad30]

"changing floors" means what? Not a technical/engineering term.

Wrong. Changing noise floors. It is a technical term, but somehow you're insistant to read into words in this thread. Really, all my points are made, and I don't feel like arguing semantics with you.

A guess: It means changing the threshold for CSMA "signal is present". If this is done in product X's firmware, you're saying the vendor is intentionally not complying with IEEE or WiFi Alliance compliance requirements? Not following CSMA procedures will cause more transmission collisions with the net effect of reduced throughput performance due to the ACK timeouts which be the standard are long delays. Vendors could do this because rarely do product reviewers show throughput while there are other signals present. I guess the reviewers assume (rightfully) that the produce is per the IEEE and WiFi Alliance criteria. WiFi Alliance is supposed to withhold use of their Logo if the product is non-compliant - but the testing is mostly an honor system situation- as is FCC Part 15 compliance. IEEE nor its agent tests products.

And I'm curious as to what exactly is your point? You just confirmed exactly what I was saying...??? Nothing has to be WiFi compliant, and use of logos isn't strictly enforced, as you just said.

Agree that overlapping channel RF is a big problem. But the channel is not UNUSABLE unless your neighbor's WiFi is very heavily used (channel utilization) most of the time. THis is rare. But it's unrelated to the earlier.. this is a different subject than talking about non-802.11 signals that foul up CSMA.

Wrong. It's just as much related. I don't understand how you can say that WiFi interference is any different than, say, microwave oven or baby monitor interference. Interference in a frequency range is interference, no matter the source. Maybe WiFi interference can be dealt with differently because it can be identified, but it's still interference.

And no, if I'm on channel 1, and my neighbor is on channel 4, they overlap. If I'm trying to surf the internet and he is too, we'll collide. Pure and simple. Doesn't matter really if it's his WiFi or if he turns on a crappy microwave at the same time. Interference is interference.

 

[stevech]

And no, if I'm on channel 1, and my neighbor is on channel 4, they overlap. If I'm trying to surf the internet and he is too, we'll collide. Pure and simple. Doesn't matter really if it's his WiFi or if he turns on a crappy microwave at the same time. Interference is interference.

You're not considering that 802.11 is CSMA/CA.

 

[thetoad30]

You're not considering that 802.11 is CSMA/CA.

What's your point? It doesn't matter what you call it - I lose bandwidth and clear access to my channel.

 

[stevech]

Unlicensed bands.
Shared use.
That's about it.

 

[staticfree]

My Edimax BR-6675nd router burped on me last evening. The 2.4Ghz radio just started acting up. Laptop lost internet connection sporadically all of a sudden. After a while I could not even reconnect to the 2.4Ghz radio. In the meantime the 5Ghz band and LAN ports were working fine. No matter what I tried, my devices just refused to connect to the 2.4Ghz radio so something must have corrupted in the router for that band. After a power down reboot it came back up working strong and fine again. So the firmware may have a memory leak issue. It ran strong and fine for about 2 days before it choked.
I will see if this happens again after about 2 days usage again.

Then maybe not, since this prompted me to now buy the ASUS RT-N66u router to try out. I ordered it from newegg and their fast shipping looks like it will be delivered tomorrow evening. That means I won't let this Edimax run for another 2 days to find out if it will choke again.

ASUS Broadcom based router will be tested in my home environment and we'll see if it performs any better than my previous Broadcom chipset based routers. I am hoping that this one will work out for once.

 

[stevech]

School of Hard Knocks and common sense led me to use Cradlepoint routers in my job and at home (from eBay, cheap).

Plug in, configure, forget. Just runs. Unattended locations. At home it's just forgotten.

Same firmware base in all their products, unlike most consumer stuff.

Just my experience. Please don't flame.

 

[staticfree]

Received my Asus RT-N66U router this evening. Got it up and running right now and will see how it holds up. It does seem to be putting out an impressively strong signal on 2.4Ghz reaching futher out of my home than the Edimax did.
At first I had issues immediately trying to associate with the router on channel 11 (2.4Ghz band). It connected but had the "no internet" dilema.
So I put it on auto channel and rebooted it. Came up on channel 6 and connected fine. The longer range seems to be due to it now being on channel 6 where I always used channel 11 before. I did a constant ping to the internet to watch for dropped packets. It does seem to drop a packet every now and then but overall holding up for the most part. I don't know why Broadcom chipsets always drop packets like this on my ping tests. But this one is not dropping like crazy, just occassionally. Must be that good neighbor policy they implement. The signal strength is amazingly strong though, so don't know why it would drop a packet here and there. I am using the stock firmware that came with it which is version .112. I will know in a few days if it starts acting up or not. But my initial impression is positive thus far. Been running it for a couple of hours now. I am returning the Edimax router to newegg also since I think this router is a keeper.