ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000

[Maverick009]

You make some good points. Except I can't agree with wasting money on an AC router right now unless you are clearly looking for a budget solution. Those older Wifi technologies will be obsoleted over the next five years. Since I like to update my hardware every four to five years by the time I am ready to upgrade to Wifi 6Ew2 or 7 there will be many more Wifi 6 clients available. I will be able to wait longer before choosing the next generation upgrade. This saves me money by giving me time to wait for the cost effective next gen options in the long run.

The thing you have to remember, is Manufactures and OEMS, like ASUS, Netgear, Linksys, etc., are building a stack of devices to meet everyone's budget and price accordingly to that. The other part to that, is if you are looking just for a performance/distance ratio, yes it could be argued that a 4x4 AC router can out class a 2x2 AX router, but that is not always the case. The 2nd part, is your not just buying an AX router for performance/distance, but also for more advanced features, which alot of them come standard even on the cheapest AX routers, as it is part of the AX WiFi6 standard. Some of those features, include enhanced 160mhz channel/signaling, WAP3 security, Better beamforming, OFDMA, which allows WiFi6 Routers to communicate to multiple devices at once, vs. Wifi5 AC routers which can only communicate to one device at a time, AP Spatial streams - AX routers come mainly standard with 8 vs. 4 in AC, allowing them to consistently outperform right out of the box. AX can also use both the 5Ghz and 2.4Ghz allowing more throughput, and AX supports enhanced MU-MIMO, allowing simultaneous downloading and uploading on multiple devices. AC only supports MU-MIMO for downloading, and AX has QAM1024 vs AC with support for only QAM256.

Those are some of the major differences. There are a few other differences too. So distance/performance is not an exact apples to apples comparison, as there are a lot of under the hood improvements. The AXE routers coming soon, just add one additional piece to the aquation, that IMO, should of been part of the first wave, but was not finalized, so they moved on without that feature.

 

[SoCalReviews]

The thing you have to remember, is Manufactures and OEMS, like ASUS, Netgear, Linksys, etc., are building a stack of devices to meet everyone's budget and price accordingly to that. The other part to that, is if you are looking just for a performance/distance ratio, yes it could be argued that a 4x4 AC router can out class a 2x2 AX router, but that is not always the case. The 2nd part, is your not just buying an AX router for performance/distance, but also for more advanced features, which alot of them come standard even on the cheapest AX routers, as it is part of the AX WiFi6 standard. Some of those features, include enhanced 160mhz channel/signaling, WAP3 security, Better beamforming, OFDMA, which allows WiFi6 Routers to communicate to multiple devices at once, vs. Wifi5 AC routers which can only communicate to one device at a time, AP Spatial streams - AX routers come mainly standard with 8 vs. 4 in AC, allowing them to consistently outperform right out of the box. AX can also use both the 5Ghz and 2.4Ghz allowing more throughput, and AX supports enhanced MU-MIMO, allowing simultaneous downloading and uploading on multiple devices. AC only supports MU-MIMO for downloading, and AX has QAM1024 vs AC with support for only QAM256.

Those are some of the major differences. There are a few other differences too. So distance/performance is not an exact apples to apples comparison, as there are a lot of under the hood improvements. The AXE routers coming soon, just add one additional piece to the aquation, that IMO, should of been part of the first wave, but was not finalized, so they moved on without that feature.

Maverick009... All good points but I don't think we disagree. Note that just as the member jsz had posted (seen again below) The part of the 2 x 2 vs. 4 x 4 discussion we seem to agree on is within is in the context of a "budget solution."

I realize what you are saying about a 2 x 2 AX solution still having advantages over a 4 x 4 AC solution. Your point is a welcome addition to the discussion...

The point you are making is part of a more general point I made in an earlier post before my last where in summary I said... Because of the improvements in technology with AX/Wifi 6 I do not recommend spending money on an AC router at this time.... but as I said " Except in the case of a clear budget solution " where AC routers could be considered.

...and I don't want to speak for the other poster directly but from what jsz posted I believe the main points jsz was making was also in regards to raw tested real world performance advantages of 4 x 4 AC vs. 2 x 2 AX as a best bang for your buck solution... (not taking into account the other AX advantages such as WPA3, multiuser performance advantages, etc..) but jsz can post differently if jsz's opinion is otherwise.

I'd generally agree but my argument is that not all AX and AC devices are created equal and can be fairly similar or trade off. Just depends.

Late edit:
If you're coming from a 3x3 Wave 1 AC router, it makes no sense not to upgrade to a 4x4 AX if your budget allows.

A high end wave 2 router can be very competitive though from my personal testing. This is where I would argue price points and antenna configurations. A 2x2 AX router can be a downgrade.

 

[jsz]

The thing you have to remember, is Manufactures and OEMS, like ASUS, Netgear, Linksys, etc., are building a stack of devices to meet everyone's budget and price accordingly to that. The other part to that, is if you are looking just for a performance/distance ratio, yes it could be argued that a 4x4 AC router can out class a 2x2 AX router, but that is not always the case. The 2nd part, is your not just buying an AX router for performance/distance, but also for more advanced features, which alot of them come standard even on the cheapest AX routers, as it is part of the AX WiFi6 standard. Some of those features, include enhanced 160mhz channel/signaling, WAP3 security, Better beamforming, OFDMA, which allows WiFi6 Routers to communicate to multiple devices at once, vs. Wifi5 AC routers which can only communicate to one device at a time, AP Spatial streams - AX routers come mainly standard with 8 vs. 4 in AC, allowing them to consistently outperform right out of the box. AX can also use both the 5Ghz and 2.4Ghz allowing more throughput, and AX supports enhanced MU-MIMO, allowing simultaneous downloading and uploading on multiple devices. AC only supports MU-MIMO for downloading, and AX has QAM1024 vs AC with support for only QAM256.

Those are some of the major differences. There are a few other differences too. So distance/performance is not an exact apples to apples comparison, as there are a lot of under the hood improvements. The AXE routers coming soon, just add one additional piece to the aquation, that IMO, should of been part of the first wave, but was not finalized, so they moved on without that feature.

As I mentioned, 2x2 vs 4x4 really depends on the device itself. In my situation, good 4x4 AC w2 routers ran circles around the 2x4 AX58U that I purchased half a year back. (I've literally messed with multiple broadcom and qualcomm designs at this point)

The AX58U for example did perform "better" within 15-20 feet, but the radio configuration being artificially limited (4x4>2x4) is a big bottleneck for performance at range in my personal environment. That's not saying that the AX58U can't do better, its just the 4x4 AC router I have (GT-AC2900) is a lot more consistent and pretty similar to the new AX86U which I also sent back due to diminishing returns.

There are clear benefits to AX, yes, but I personally do not think they're totally valid until clients are widespread.... which isn't exactly the case ATM. It's not like AX is 100% new either.. its been 2 years since AX88U was released.

Other than higher PHY rates on the AX86U, I did notice a 3~ ping difference between the two generations of routers. Both on 160mhz bonding so theres prob something there, but not significant enough for me personally.

IMO the 160mhz spec is on these dual band routers was purposely pushed to sell a product... Not exactly have any real practical benefits for future AX clients. I strongly think Intel's wireless cards are a special case and not represenative of actual AX products in stuff like future IoT devices. PS5 as I mentioned is capped at 80mhz.

The current 2x2 80mhz router selection and excessive (early adopter) pricing pretty much paints a picture that the goal is to have clients swap to AX and use innate range benefits of both AX client/router. The only problem I see with this is that you degrade AC client performance for legacy devices.. Some first gen 3x3 routers might perform better in the right situation. Also especially valid if you have higher end Macbook with 3x3 internal radios.

PS: Theres like 2-3 OEM'd routers from big companies that are being marketed at a spec higher than the firmware/SW allows.

- ARRIS Surfboard AX7800 is suppose to be a 2x2 160mhz device with a 4x4 backhaul, but the router functions as a 4x4+4x4+4x4 without 160mhz working on client end. The AX11000 has the same firmware as the AX7800 which is kinda funny and BS at the same time since the AX11000 cannot reach spec without 160mhz.

-Linksys MR9600 is sorta the same case. Marketed as AX6000, but doesn't have a functional 160mhz.

Both companies claim this would be fixed, but I would avoid both of them as they're clearly outsourcing development. ASUS has proven to have the most stable and up to date products for me personally.

 

[Synomenon]

Possibly off-topic, but for now and even into the next two years wouldn't two 5GHz radios (AX11000) be more useful for most people than one 5GHz radio and one 6GHz radio (AXE11000)? Unless of course one will be getting two or more AXE11000 units to use the 6GHz as a wireless back-haul b/w the units.

 

[jsz]

Possibly off-topic, but for now and even into the next two years wouldn't two 5GHz radios (AX11000) be more useful for most people than one 5GHz radio and one 6GHz radio (AXE11000)? Unless of course one will be getting two or more AXE11000 units to use the 6GHz as a wireless back-haul b/w the units.

Depends on how much bandwidth your household is using. Most people do not need two 5ghz radios and AX has innate benefits to combat simultaneous devices.. The problem being.. there's a clear lack of AX clients on the market and thus doesn't really make a difference in most real world situations since AC clients operate no differently on AX routers.

If AX clients were released en masse, the argument for tri-band 5G (AX) would be even less valid.. Then again, 6E is around the corner, but also needs specific clients.

From how I view it, were 2+ years off regardless. Most IoT clients will likely adapt to the 5G AX standard with 80mhz as there are clear and stable benefits over AC if built to the same "quality" (Router + Client). As I said earlier, DFS is a no go for compatibility.

Only thing holding that back right now is cost and price points. Off the shelf AC parts are much cheaper. Brand new Google Chromecast with Google TV still uses AC receiver. I believe this is the same case for the newer Ring devices released by amazon as well.

I would honestly grab the AX86U over the AX11000 if that is your question. The AX11000 is valid for households with tons of users/AC clients.

 

[Synomenon]

I've gone through several units this year: Netgear RAX200, Asus 89X, Ubiquiti Dream Machine, my internet provider's router (Cox "Panoramic" router).

Was happiest with the Asus stock firmware, but performance-wise happiest with the Netgear RAX200.

In my house / environment it had the best combo of speed and furthest reach. Got rid of it though because I hated the firmware.

All of the Apple devices in our house (and we have plenty of them) played better with the RAX200 as well.

Seeing as the AX11000 has the same chipset as the RAX200 and has Asus firmware AND I can get it now at a pretty good price locally... well I think I just made my mind up.

I'm getting a PS5 and iPhone 12 Pro Max, but I don't think either has a 6GHz radio.

The AXE11000 does look nicer than the AX11000 though.

 

[jsz]

I've gone through several units this year: Netgear RAX200, Asus 89X, Ubiquiti Dream Machine, my internet provider's router (Cox "Panoramic" router).

Was happiest with the Asus stock firmware, but performance-wise happiest with the Netgear RAX200.

In my house / environment it had the best combo of speed and furthest reach. Got rid of it though because I hated the firmware.

All of the Apple devices in our house (and we have plenty of them) played better with the RAX200 as well.

Seeing as the AX11000 has the same chipset as the RAX200 and has Asus firmware AND I can get it now at a pretty good price locally... well I think I just made my mind up.

I'm getting a PS5 and iPhone 12 Pro Max, but I don't think either has a 6GHz radio.

The AXE11000 does look nicer than the AX11000 though.

That might be attenna setup of router rather than internal hardware itself. You can try the AX11000 to see if its better.

 

[Synomenon]

Could it also have to do with Apple's devices just performing better with certain wifi chipsets over others (ie. Qualcomm vs. Broadcom based routers)?

 

[jsz]

Could it also have to do with Apple's devices just performing better with certain wifi chipsets over others (ie. Qualcomm vs. Broadcom based routers)?

Thats possible in regards to the AX89X, and Dream Machine which are both qualcomm. Macbooks for example use broadcom clients.

Personally speaking, broadcom routers also tend to work better with broadcom modems (subjective experience). When I had an Intel modem, my qualcomm routers seemed to perform better. Not sure why this is or if theres any consistency outside my experience.

 

[erick_e]

And were are the 6e clients ???

They're coming. The Intel AX210 and AX211 2x2 AX R2 (6GHz) cards.

 

[JagoUK]

Possibly off-topic, but for now and even into the next two years wouldn't two 5GHz radios (AX11000) be more useful for most people than one 5GHz radio and one 6GHz radio (AXE11000)? Unless of course one will be getting two or more AXE11000 units to use the 6GHz as a wireless back-haul b/w the units.

Possibly for most yes.
But I live in an area too close to weather Radar. So wifi 6e is something I'm waiting on to build a mesh network. (Backhaul only)
I hope Asus upgrades the ZenWiFi XT8 to 6E early next year.

I wonder if Asus are going to get anything 6E out this year.

 

[Maverick009]

Possibly for most yes.
But I live in an area too close to weather Radar. So wifi 6e is something I'm waiting on to build a mesh network. (Backhaul only)
I hope Asus upgrades the ZenWiFi XT8 to 6E early next year.

I wonder if Asus are going to get anything 6E out this year.

Actually ASUS is suppose to launch the AXE11000 next month. It was announced in September for a December launch, to give time for validation and final firmware.

 

[Clark Griswald]

Just in time for my Christmas Bonus

 

[bluzfanmr1]

Just in time for my Christmas Bonus

 

[Clark Griswald]

Only if those jellies get RMerlin fw
I'm amazed that RMerlin has added so many new routers to his "stable" of supported routers!

 

[wickedny5]

So we are mid December and haven’t heard any news about this router, anyone know any new details?

 

[SoCalReviews]

At this time it sounds like cricketware.

 

[dkyeager]

The delay is concerning. Hopefully adding the 5.9GHz extension to 5GHz Wi-Fi put into immediate effect by the FCC in November (increases 160MHz channels from 2 to 3, etc).

edit: this may be a better explanation: First 6E chip FCC approved Dec 7th https://www.broadcom.com/blog/bcm4389-worlds-first-fcc-certified-wi-fi-6e-chip

 

[SoCalReviews]

The delay is concerning. Hopefully adding the 5.9GHz extension to 5GHz Wi-Fi put into immediate effect by the FCC in November (increases 160MHz channels from 2 to 3, etc).

edit: this may be a better explanation: First 6E chip FCC approved Dec 7th https://www.broadcom.com/blog/bcm4389-worlds-first-fcc-certified-wi-fi-6e-chip

Wow! This is fantastic news for those who have already invested in the latest Wifi 6/AX routers that are utilizing 5Ghz. With a firmware update it could open up their available 5Ghz channel options... until the new 6E routers and 6E devices with 6Ghz mature.

FCC takes spectrum from auto industry in plan to “supersize” Wi-Fi

45MHz freed up in 5GHz band because automakers failed to widely deploy safety tech.

arstechnica.com

The new 45MHz can be combined with the adjacent 5.725-5.850GHz band to create a larger block "that could accommodate a variety of options—including two 80-megahertz Wi-Fi channels, four 40-megahertz Wi-Fi channels, or a single contiguous 160-megahertz Wi-Fi channel," the FCC said.

 

[CrystalLattice]

Just became available for $1500.00 each. We purchased three to review and publish the first reviews on our router site. Good luck getting any cheaper.