What's new

Router Recommendation for heavy traffic and interference

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

mystichead

New Around Here
Hi guys,
I need a lot of help in this; finding a router.

SO...
I am looking for a router can handle heavy duty traffic from 70+ devices simultaneously, with ability to send decent speed through many walls and a decent distance.

I have even gone through this list, http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/802.11ac-wifi-router-testing,4107.html
and through the SNB ranking charts too
but im still a bit confused I guess... its my cost range though, generally.

My current scenario is such that there are 8 individuals in the household, each with an average of 2 mobile devices, 2 desktop/laptops. That by itself makes it 32 devices, but there are 3 separate VOIP services, and 4 streaming devices.
So now there are 39 different dedicated bandwidth requirements.

6 of the desktops are dedicated online gaming machines.
In addition there are 2 high spec psuedo-servers with 15-25(depending) different low-spec data nodes psuedo-servers.

So I think you can get the picture here why I said 70+
The total bandwidth requirements are generally met with 300/300Mbps but I have a 500/500Mbps plan, which i test regularly and i actually get the speed.

The problem is in my current situation:
I can only install the router on the top floor, and my whole work stuff can only be in the basement 40-50 feet away with many many walls and hallways in between. Adding another access point somewhere else isnt allowed.... and P-LAN(power lan) is unusable due to weak wiring mid way (ive tested multiple times with different adapters..it failed).

With such heavy use by so many gadgets, What should I buy that is the most cost effective?

I mean I do often work from home, and run data analysis with Apache Spark, Apache Hadoop, Kafka etc ...
and often need the mini-nodes to talk to each other in a good fashion while also having access to the internet for each of them. Since they and especially my main servers and my main machine also access databases elsewhere with massive amounts of data going back and forth in between and after analysis.

A wireless-bridge isnt an option since it will actually increase the cost of the processing speed at minimum by 2x to 16x, due to adding an extra-layer between the processing, and I cant afford that. Even the positives of Hadoop and Spark where it uses many many commodity hardware to do parallel processing will take a hit with this additional network level layer.

Most of the devices/nodes only support early N and some are even older than that, with only a few supporting AC. 5ghz is generally not supported by most devices, and it also doesnt reach the basement, atleast with my current router Netgear WNDR3700 which i upgraded with DD-WRT.... it worked for 2 yrs.. until more devices and the basement office...

But, DESPITE all this needs to be wireless... And not end up pissing off the others in the house by prioritizing everything to me, and have their games and streams be able to run simultaneusly.

What router should I get in THIS type of scenario that is cost effective while doing the job?

I'll be very very grateful

So to those even considering to help me, Thank you very much in advance
 
Last edited:
So let me get this straight: 70+ devices, most of which are N-wifi, Cat5e/Cat6, powerline and MoCa are all a no-go, and APs placed anywhere other than the router install area on the top floor are strictly forbidden? That's a decent amount of caveats right off the bat...

Even if you manage to get the wifi balance correct (I'll get to that later), I would let APs do AP duty only, and employ a dedicated "core" router for your packet processing. A dual-core ARM consumer box may work, but you must make sure the factory firmware is up to snuff, or Merlin is running in place, or Tomato. Otherwise, I'd suggest a something like a MikroTik RB1100AHx2, EdgeRouter 8 or pFsense box if you have the skill; Peplink Balance One or UTM if you don't. Expensive? You bet, and I do tend to get jeered at for being "overkill" on this piece sometimes, but IMHO you absolutely want a solid core router -- one place not to skimp on. Also, with VoiP and a decent amount of bandwidth contention, solid QoS with adequate buffer control running on the box will be a must, even on a symmetric 300 Mb line.

For wireless, if you are actually forced to broadcast everything down from the point of install (I would check again and make absolutely sure you couldn't hide some APs *somewhere* in the house...) you'll probably want to use repurposed consumer all-in-one or business-class APs with external antennae, and replace the omnis with directional (wide-cone, most likely), for best focusing of each signal down to the lower levels. Make sure to aim the broadcast cones down and then slightly off angle to appropriately blanket the house (think of a pyramid, with your broadcast coming from the top), and proper alternated channels, so as to limit as much cross-talk as you can. With that much traffic, you want to limit your clients per radio to 15-20, at the most. And it may take some experimenting with client/segment radio/frequency assignment to get the best traffic balance. Additionally, there's a good chance 5Ghz may be stopped dead in its tracks after the first floor, so putting more clients on 5Ghz at the top of the house and more on 2.4 at the bottom could be the solution there. Etc. etc. You also may have more luck with APs specifically designed to combat high-density environments, such as Ruckus and the like, but then we're getting into enterprise-class prices, and I doubt you have the budget (understandable).

Beyond that, I would triple-check that you can't place more APs elsewhere in the house, or run some kind of cabling *somewhere*, as you really are trying to accomplish this under some tough constraints.
 
Last edited:
a symmetric 300Mb line requires 600Mb/s of forwarding throughput. Mikrotik has the most options for QoS out of all the options except a linux server and also has the least amount of support that you shouldnt expect any replies on their forums or emails. for wifi you can go with consumer if its good such as netgear or asus as they can handle the load but avoid the ac87U. Business or enterprise class APs give features whereas in terms of performance and range it depends on antenna and radio chips used.

Ofcourse i can personally give support for mikrotik products but im quite mad at them since they wont bother looking at the bugs i posted or even important feature requests that makes a router useful that all other brands now have (the ability to install software for more features).
 
Ain't no such animal. As others have said, you would need a few properly placed APs, Ethernet-connected to the main router and as many clients as possible moved to 5 GHz.

Anyone who wants decent, dependable bandwidth should be running Ethernet.
 
70+ devices used 'heavily' on a single (consumer / prosumer) router and all devices need to be wireless just isn't feasible even in a single, large room, let alone a home spread out over many stories and many obstacles in-between.

If wired CAT5e runs are not an option, then you might consider dual WiFi routers on each floor, located centrally for the area to be covered, with one router setup as a Bridge and the other router setup as an AP.

I did read that you feel that a wireless bridge isn't an option because of the cost of the processing speed, but honestly, I am not sure what you are stating there. The suggestion I am making to use two routers in a Bridge/AP combo on each floor will impact the total network as little as possible if you take care to setup the bands, channels, ssid's and location of the devices properly (both for receiving the main router's signal via the Bridge and for distributing it effectively over the AP on each floor).

Yes, the costs doubled (or more), but the money and time will need to be spent one way or the other to get this working to your satisfaction while honoring the conditions imposed.
 
70+ devices used 'heavily' on a single (consumer / prosumer) router and all devices need to be wireless just isn't feasible even in a single, large room, let alone a home spread out over many stories and many obstacles in-between.

If wired CAT5e runs are not an option, then you might consider dual WiFi routers on each floor, located centrally for the area to be covered, with one router setup as a Bridge and the other router setup as an AP.

I did read that you feel that a wireless bridge isn't an option because of the cost of the processing speed, but honestly, I am not sure what you are stating there. The suggestion I am making to use two routers in a Bridge/AP combo on each floor will impact the total network as little as possible if you take care to setup the bands, channels, ssid's and location of the devices properly (both for receiving the main router's signal via the Bridge and for distributing it effectively over the AP on each floor).

Yes, the costs doubled (or more), but the money and time will need to be spent one way or the other to get this working to your satisfaction while honoring the conditions imposed.

This would also be my suggestion. Using wireless backhaul to each area (or floor) and then wire some clients off of that and an AP off of that. With your constraints (besides money) I think this is your best option. Cost will be fairly high and you will need to manage your channels and SSID's correctly.
 
The AC3200 will handle more than 70 clients if they are all in a room and you spread them across the 3 radios. It would be an interesting test since i can only test how fast the wireless can potentially be but i cant test if it can handle 100 clients since i dont have 100 wireless device. It may be possible to arrange for such a test if there is a public area with 100 potential internet users packed in a small area and a fast internet to test it with or perhaps a lab of computers that all use wireless and you fire up each one using an automated test.
 
Can you show the data to back up this claim? And what do you mean by "handle"?
You could distribute 30 clients to 5Ghz-1, 30 to 5Ghz-2 and 10 to 2.4 Ghz. Im not saying that this is 100% possible but what im saying is that it would be an interesting test. We've seen the r7000 handle more than 100 wifi clients
 

Similar threads

Support SNBForums w/ Amazon

If you'd like to support SNBForums, just use this link and buy anything on Amazon. Thanks!

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

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