Should I upgrade from my RT-AC87U? Go with the RT-AC1900P V3?

[sfx2000]

Pretty much a wash between these two - if the 87U is stable for you, then stick with it - not going to see any improvement with other Router/AP's there...

Don't chase after bigger numbers - chase location and coverage - and there, any router will do... WiFi is like real estate - location matters...

 

[SoCalReviews]

i have tested the rt-ac68u against the rt-ac88u and rt-ac5300 and there is a substantial difference in overall performance of the gui in general as well the wifi coverage and range

i have a wemo switch down the other end of the house that just wont connect even when using the rt-ac68u or pretty much any 1900ac class router or below , however with the 2156M class routers it connects no worries , the wemo's dont have great wifi adapters in them but the extra coverage the 2156M class provides is enough to get to where its needed

I have the 68P which is an upgraded 68U or the 68U with B1 hardware version and the 1900P is noticeably better but it's definitely not night and day better so it's really not a fair comparison to compare the 68U and the 3100 and say that is the same as comparing the 1900P with the 3100. The 1900P has the 1.4Ghz CPU and newer radios (according to the specs and what has been reported here.) I doubt you could tell the difference between the 1900P and the 3100 in real world testing but with a subjective opinion I would give an edge to the 3100 because it's 4 x 4 technology and has updated firmware with more available features.

 

[SoCalReviews]

You can't tell how much a low ram system is being held back by looking how much ram it uses. The os (all os's) is programmed to use the available ram as efficiently as possible. It knows it needs some free, so it leaves as much free as it can.

http://www.snbforums.com/threads/moving-to-upgrade-or-not.34772/#post-281500


The proof of that is the test I made between my RT-AC68U and the RT-AC3100 using an identical configuration (using john9527's NVRAM Save/Restore utility). Percentage wise, the routers used about the same ram. Absolute capacity was almost double though for the RT-AC3100 (in exactly the same use).

I am sure that having more of the os code pieces loaded in ram contributes to an even smoother experience with the RT-AC3100 over the RT-AC86U. Even allowing for the fact that the newer router has a 75% faster processors too.

I checked the RAM usage the other night for my 1900P and if you trust what the firmware said it was using 42MB out of 256MB with 12 devices connected to via Ethernet, 2.4 and 5Ghz. I have yet to see any of my 68P routers or 1900P routers using much more than 54MB of the 256MB available RAM even with over 30 devices connected to it. I don't use many fancy features enabled. I run my routers lean and mean for performance. Maybe it does use more RAM and I just have never seen it when it pushed towards it's limit of 256MB. I am sure more RAM would allow more buffering for whatever is running on the router.

I don't think there is much of a cost difference for Asus going from 256MB to 512MB and definitely not $100 USD of a cost (probably more like $5 to $10 at the most) difference so I am not sure why Asus wouldn't use 512MB for all their routers unless it's also part of a marketing hype to give users a reason to buy the newer routers with an expanded spec sheet and feature set.

I know the 3100 and 88u have more features and users report them using over 100MB of their 512MB RAM. It may need the extra RAM for some of it's expanded firmware features. Over the years I don't recall ever reading about someone complaining that their Asus router with 256MB or 512MB "ran out of RAM"... not ever... not even once in this forum or any other forum... so it obviously has never been a commonly reported problem. I'm not a developer so I am not an authority on RAM needed for these routers. Maybe someone like sfx2000 or Merlin can better answer those router RAM questions.

 

[L&LD]

I checked the RAM usage the other night for my 1900P and if you trust what the firmware said it was using 42MB out of 256MB with 12 devices connected to via Ethernet, 2.4 and 5Ghz. I have yet to see any of my 68P routers or 1900P routers using much more than 54MB of the 256MB available RAM even with over 30 devices connected to it. I don't use many fancy features enabled. I run my routers lean and mean for performance. Maybe it does use more RAM and I just have never seen it when it pushed towards it's limit of 256MB. I am sure more RAM would allow more buffering for whatever is running on the router.

I don't think there is much of a cost difference for Asus going from 256MB to 512MB and definitely not $100 USD of a cost (probably more like $5 to $10 at the most) difference so I am not sure why Asus wouldn't use 512MB for all their routers unless it's also part of a marketing hype to give users a reason to buy the newer routers with an expanded spec sheet and feature set.

I know the 3100 and 88u have more features and users report them using over 100MB of their 512MB RAM. It may need the extra RAM for some of it's expanded firmware features. Over the years I don't recall ever reading about someone complaining that their Asus router with 256MB or 512MB "ran out of RAM"... not ever... not even once in this forum or any other forum... so it obviously has never been a commonly reported problem. I'm not a developer so I am not an authority on RAM needed for these routers. Maybe someone like sfx2000 or Merlin can better answer those router RAM questions.

I'm not asking any ram questions. But you're not reading what I've posted either.

Identical configurations, including options and features used (please, read the link I've posted so I don't have to repeat myself) between two routers one with 256MB ram and the other with 512MB ram. The one with more ram... actually used more ram (in the same network use).

Of course doubling the ram to 512MB doesn't cost $100. But again, as already mentioned, there are other benefits too. Not to mention the money grab from not only Asus, but all WiFi routers available today.

There are many examples of people running out of ram on these forums (the router spontaneously reboots most times, if it doesn't outright 'freeze'). But those examples are few and far between.

 

[SoCalReviews]

I'm not asking any ram questions. But you're not reading what I've posted either.

Identical configurations, including options and features used (please, read the link I've posted so I don't have to repeat myself) between two routers one with 256MB ram and the other with 512MB ram. The one with more ram... actually used more ram (in the same network use).

Of course doubling the ram to 512MB doesn't cost $100. But again, as already mentioned, there are other benefits too. Not to mention the money grab from not only Asus, but all WiFi routers available today.

There are many examples of people running out of ram on these forums (the router spontaneously reboots most times, if it doesn't outright 'freeze'). But those examples are few and far between.

I am not a router expert but we just flat out differ in our fundamental understanding of how computers and computer equipment works and I have been studying and working with computers for more than thirty years. With identical configurations... NO it won't run any "smoother" and NO... More RAM does NOT translate into faster processing unless your amount of RAM is insufficient to handle the operating system and application requirements. It's just a fact of computing... and it's contrary to what you are stating.

Just having more RAM doesn't mean the computing device or router will "automatically" utilize it if it doesn't need it. If you aren't using close to using even half of the 256MB of the RAM to begin with then having 512 RAM doesn't benefit at all. The extra memory sits there not being used by the computer, router, smart phone, etc.. In the same way more hard disk space, drive space, etc. doesn't speed up your computer either if you aren't running out of the need for more storage space.

I don't want to sound repetitive either but you seem to have a complete disconnect with how most computing devices work. Again I'm not a router hardware expert but we have been over this before and while I already said there are benefits to having more memory resources there is a serious question as to whether going from 256MB RAM to 512MB RAM is worth $100 extra cost... and that's one of the real questions of this thread that we have been trying to help answer. Anything less than the truth about this would be doing a serious disservice to the OP who is looking for serious opinions about the value differences between Asus routers before he spends his hard earned money.

 

[pete y testing]

whether going from 256MB RAM to 512MB RAM is worth $100 extra cost

but thats not the only reason its $100 more and your both being too focused on cpu and ram alone

the question is

Should I upgrade from my RT-AC87U? Go with the RT-AC1900P V3?

the answer is there would not be that much difference to be notable so buying the ac1900p v3 would be a huge waste of money in terms of performance gain as its very diminishing returns esp in regards to wifi coverage and throughput

would it be worth the money the answer is no

 

[SoCalReviews]

but thats not the only reason its $100 more and your both being too focused on cpu and ram alone

the question is

Should I upgrade from my RT-AC87U? Go with the RT-AC1900P V3?

the answer is there would not be that much difference to be notable so buying the ac1900p v3 would be a huge waste of money in terms of performance gain as its very diminishing returns esp in regards to wifi coverage and throughput

would it be worth the money the answer is no

I wasn't the one focusing solely on the CPU and RAM as a reason to upgrade so please don't throw me into that corner. I was simply replying to what I believe to be serious faults in the argument that going from 256MB RAM to 512RAM is a good reason to upgrade to the $100 more expensive router.

What I said was that if I myself had decided that I wanted to upgrade I would probably lean towards the 3100 or 88u not necessarily because of any of the subtle performance differences but because of the added feature set and newer design that could lead to additional feature enhancements in the future and if I personally was going to bother to upgrade at all from the 87u I would want the latest design.

These reasons still don't equate to a $100 cost vs. performance difference between the 1900P and the 3100. I believe the 1900P to be a great value and it would be a beneficial upgrade over the 87u for it's improved and more reliable 5Ghz performance alone not to mention the faster processor. If cost was a major factor then the 1900P would also be a good upgrade to consider.

 

[L&LD]

I am not a router expert but we just flat out differ in our fundamental understanding of how computers and computer equipment works and I have been studying and working with computers for more than thirty years. With identical configurations... NO it won't run any "smoother" and NO... More RAM does NOT translate into faster processing unless your amount of RAM is insufficient to handle the operating system and application requirements. It's just a fact of computing... and it's contrary to what you are stating.

Just having more RAM doesn't mean the computing device or router will "automatically" utilize it if it doesn't need it. If you aren't using close to using even half of the 256MB of the RAM to begin with then having 512 RAM doesn't benefit at all. The extra memory sits there not being used by the computer, router, smart phone, etc.. In the same way more hard disk space, drive space, etc. doesn't speed up your computer either if you aren't running out of the need for more storage space.

I don't want to sound repetitive either but you seem to have a complete disconnect with how most computing devices work. Again I'm not a router hardware expert but we have been over this before and while I already said there are benefits to having more memory resources there is a serious question as to whether going from 256MB RAM to 512MB RAM is worth $100 extra cost... and that's one of the real questions of this thread that we have been trying to help answer. Anything less than the truth about this would be doing a serious disservice to the OP who is looking for serious opinions about the value differences between Asus routers before he spends his hard earned money.

For your first and second paragraphs, you're plain wrong as I showed by using my network exactly the same with the exact same options and features and the router with more ram used much more to do the same work.

https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=WKkGVsjINIft8weLl7z4CA#q=does+more+ram+make+computer+faster

As the link above shows, more ram does increase the performance of the platform. Seems like your understanding of computer equipment is not complete yet?

You keep going back to the cost ($100) benefit of doubling the ram. I have never said or implied that ram was the only reason for this 'upgrade'. That is not the only benefit of the RT-AC3100 over anything below it (and others have pointed this out to you too again now). The OP has already been provided the correct information for them to make a solid decision with, but you continue to talk about things that have been settled two days and ten posts back.

 

[WMConey]

I would give an edge to the 3100 because it's 4 x 4 technology and has updated firmware with more available features.

While the 4x4 tech looks good on a spec sheet; in fact there are no 4x4 clients......

 

[L&LD]

While the 4x4 tech looks good on a spec sheet; in fact there are no 4x4 clients......

But, some of the benefits of 4x4 do show up for all clients regardless of their number of streams/antennae support.

 

[RMerlin]

But, some of the benefits of 4x4 do show up for all clients regardless of their number of streams/antennae support.

The increased stream diversity can indeed potentially help even with 2x2 or 3x3 clients, however I don't know if the impact of that improvement have ever been demonstrated or measured. I suspect it might be situational, depending on your specific environment.

 

[pete y testing]

While the 4x4 tech looks good on a spec sheet; in fact there are no 4x4 clients......

funny i got an asus pce-ac88 connected to my comp as i speak and yes its 4 x 4

 

[SoCalReviews]

While the 4x4 tech looks good on a spec sheet; in fact there are no 4x4 clients......

It's called future proofing. You can use compatible 4 x 4 routers. The 4 x 4 client list is limited right now but there will be more 4 x 4 clients in the near future.

 

[SoCalReviews]

For your first and second paragraphs, you're plain wrong as I showed by using my network exactly the same with the exact same options and features and the router with more ram used much more to do the same work.

https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=WKkGVsjINIft8weLl7z4CA#q=does+more+ram+make+computer+faster

As the link above shows, more ram does increase the performance of the platform. Seems like your understanding of computer equipment is not complete yet?

You keep going back to the cost ($100) benefit of doubling the ram. I have never said or implied that ram was the only reason for this 'upgrade'. That is not the only benefit of the RT-AC3100 over anything below it (and others have pointed this out to you too again now). The OP has already been provided the correct information for them to make a solid decision with, but you continue to talk about things that have been settled two days and ten posts back.

You seem completely convinced that more RAM in a router automatically means a performance improvement. You don't have to believe me... and I worked for years in the computer industry in high volume RAM sales for businesses and government contracts and later for a RAM device upgrades manufacturer.... but what do I know since you sound like your the expert.

There are a lot of very knowledgeable people contributing to this forum... testers, developers, etc.. Let's see how many in this forum will agree with you. Let's start start a poll. Does more RAM in a router automatically translate into an increase performance or not?

There are also plenty of router performance tests here on SNB with routers using 256MB vs. ones with 512MB to see any measured performance differences. The test data should be able to confirm fairly easily with the 512MB RAM routers consistently showing increased performance if what you are saying is true about the importance of having more RAM. It's funny that I don't ever recall RAM being mentioned as a known router performance enhancer when data test results are measured for 256MB RAM routers vs. 512MB routers.

 

[sfx2000]

I would just wait a bit - if the current router is ok, then no need to upgrade...

The market is very much in a state of flux at the moment, and some big players might jump in very soon that might influence decisions on which path to take...

Swapping out an RT-AC87U for an RT-anything in the current product lineup (RT-AC3100/RT-AC88U/RT-AC5300) might leave you in the very same spot you're in right now - and that's not future proofing...

MU, in the early days of Wave2, was pretty much in the domain of "Big Honking Routers" as @thiggins has mentioned...

But in my honest opinion - MU does have a place - and that place really is in the Mesh side of the house, and at present -

Asus, at present, has nothing in this space - nor do any of the majors except for Netgear - this week...

Next week - things might change... and October-December 2016, things might change even further if I'm reading the tea leaves right...

 

[SoCalReviews]

I would just wait a bit - if the current router is ok, then no need to upgrade...

The market is very much in a state of flux at the moment, and some big players might jump in very soon that might influence decisions on which path to take...

Swapping out an RT-AC87U for an RT-anything in the current product lineup (RT-AC3100/RT-AC88U/RT-AC5300) might leave you in the very same spot you're in right now - and that's not future proofing...

MU, in the early days of Wave2, was pretty much in the domain of "Big Honking Routers" as @thiggins has mentioned...

But in my honest opinion - MU does have a place - and that place really is in the Mesh side of the house, and at present -

Asus, at present, has nothing in this space - nor do any of the majors except for Netgear - this week...

Next week - things might change... and October-December 2016, things might change even further if I'm reading the tea leaves right...

"and that's not future proofing..."

Owning a newer 3100/88u/5300 Asus router with a faster processor, more RAM to run future added apps, updated BCM 4 x 4 radio technology is not future proofing compared to a several year older 87u with known reported 5Ghz hardware issues and likely limited future update and questionable future new feature support? Ok. Whatever you say...

 

[dlandiss]

"and that's not future proofing..."

Ahh, but it is. By not buying a new router that adds no user advantage now, there is money in the bank for some future purchase when an advantage is apparent.

 

[SoCalReviews]

Ahh, but it is. By not buying a new router that adds no user advantage now, there is money in the bank for some future purchase when an advantage is apparent.

...right... you're sort of parroting what I already mentioned in a previous post in this thread... another option is to wait to upgrade and go with the new Asus business class router based on the QCM chipset reported as set to be released before the end of this year and there will probably be other new models released next year. 802.11 ax is still a ways away from being available as first generation finalized ax hardware. It all depends how long into the future you are willing to wait... 2, 3, 4 or 5 years? An incremental upgrade to 5300/88u/3100 or other newer Asus ac router to last for several years before ax equipment matures is not a bad idea.

 

[L&LD]

You seem completely convinced that more RAM in a router automatically means a performance improvement. You don't have to believe me... and I worked for years in the computer industry in high volume RAM sales for businesses and government contracts and later for a RAM device upgrades manufacturer.... but what do I know since you sound like your the expert.

There are a lot of very knowledgeable people contributing to this forum... testers, developers, etc.. Let's see how many in this forum will agree with you. Let's start start a poll. Does more RAM in a router automatically translate into an increase performance or not?

There are also plenty of router performance tests here on SNB with routers using 256MB vs. ones with 512MB to see any measured performance differences. The test data should be able to confirm fairly easily with the 512MB RAM routers consistently showing increased performance if what you are saying is true about the importance of having more RAM. It's funny that I don't ever recall RAM being mentioned as a known router performance enhancer when data test results are measured for 256MB RAM routers vs. 512MB routers.

I am not convinced because I am simply 'saying so'. I have the tests to prove it (which you have conveniently ignored in every one of your 'answers'). Identical workload, identical network, identical configuration; the router with more ram actually uses more ram. This is not a hard concept to grasp and that is the biggest point I'm making.

Further to that, the google link I provided above also indicates that ram is needed for better performance in a computing platform. It is not a stretch to suggest the same may also be true for our routers (particularly when the simple, straightforward test I did shows more ram being used).

I'm not saying that anything 'automatically' improves performance. But in this case, the increased performance along with the increased ram usage seems to indicate otherwise. So yes, I don't 'believe' you because it flies in the face of the facts presented. Your past experience in ram sales for business and government contracts has little bearing on what I've presented here. It seems you're convinced that ram has no benefits and you're out to prove it.

What I know is that in my network and my customers network, the router with the better hardware easily outclassed lower end hardware including, but (agreed) not limited to, more ram.

For the record, there are threads here which mention specifically that more ram would have been beneficial for specific cases. Most of those also are mentioned with 'real' stand alone routers with not a mere 256MB or 512MB capacity, but in the 4, 8, and 16GB capacity too.

You can try to twist and turn this conversation to your advantage and if that is what the issue is here; I'll give you this 'win'.

But the OP along with everyone else can clearly see the logic of my statements and they'll make up their own minds regardless of the red herrings you constantly bring into this conversation.

 

[WMConey]

funny i got an asus pce-ac88 connected to my comp as i speak and yes its 4 x 4

You're right! I've looked at those myself and I happily acknowledge the exception!