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

[WMConey]

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.

That's the theory, I understand. Of course, the side bet is that by the time these 4x4 clients arrive there will not be a nifty new attractive tech that your now 2 year old router can't support....

 

[sfx2000]

"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...

For most folks - if they presently own an AC1900 class device, there's little reason at the moment to move to something "more" - confirmation bias aside...

There's some cool stuff coming down the pipeline - and I think it's going to be an interesting intersection between MU, Mesh, and Usability - if you look at the startup activity, you can see this, and sooner or later, the big guys are going to jump in...

Watch in a couple of weeks, there's going to be a couple of interesting announcements on platforms - not just SoC's, but at the routing, wireless, and service layers...

 

[SoCalReviews]

For most folks - if they presently own an AC1900 class device, there's little reason at the moment to move to something "more" - confirmation bias aside...

There's some cool stuff coming down the pipeline - and I think it's going to be an interesting intersection between MU, Mesh, and Usability - if you look at the startup activity, you can see this, and sooner or later, the big guys are going to jump in...

Watch in a couple of weeks, there's going to be a couple of interesting announcements on platforms - not just SoC's, but at the routing, wireless, and service layers...

Yes, we have heard about 802.11 ax.

 

[sfx2000]

Yes, we have heard about 802.11 ax.

Not 11ax - it's different solutions around 11ac...

 

[SoCalReviews]

"L&LD: 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.

- NOT TRUE. A system only uses the RAM that it needs. Having more RAM doesn't automatically mean it uses more RAM. It won't use more RAM if it doesn't need it.

"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)."

- NOT TRUE again. The router with more RAM will only use more RAM only if the OS, apps with storage data needs are designed to access more of it. Again, you fundamentally don't understand how computers and computing devices work.

"I'm not saying that anything 'automatically' improves performance."

- That is actually what you were saying throughout this thread. Now you are backtracking.

"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."

- I NEVER said RAM has no benefits. I said the opposite but I said that the benefits exist only if the system needs more RAM and doesn't have enough to use. Now you are not only putting words in my mouth but you are saying the exact opposite of what I posted... which is weird.

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."

- The specific's amount of the RAM (4, 8, 16, 32MB , etc) isn't what is critical. It's whether or not the system needs more RAM and in the days of the WRT-54G having less RAM meant that the router had to run a more stripped down version of third party firmware which often meant it had features removed compared to the full version. This was the complaint when Linksys released later versions of the WRT-54G router with less RAM and different firmware. Users had to load a version of firmware that used less RAM. With the exception of more memory potentially needed for buffering (which I brought up many posts back earlier in this thread) that wasn't a performance specific issue.

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'.

- Now I'm the one trying to twist and turn the conversation. Oh... ok.

"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."

- I don't see anyone backing up your statements up about the actual point of our disagreement in this thread... the issue of 256MB vs. 512MB RAM and whether having more RAM means performance is improved automatically simply because more RAM exists. At this point you're on an island of your own making.

 

[SoCalReviews]

Not 11ax - it's different solutions around 11ac...

So if those solutions are not ax related then we can assume they are proprietary solutions? That sounds similar to an extension of the proprietary BCM ac solution with 4 x 4 with MU-MIMO all over again... back to square one regarding future proofing... or am I missing something?

 

[L&LD]

SoCalReviews, I see that you're the only one that's right here. Well done.

Keep convincing yourself that a platform only needs the (always) limited amount of resources a manufacturer decides (for profit reasons) to give it. In this case; ram.

Nobody has to backup my statements nor do they have to do so to prove the absurdity of the 'issue' you're trying to disprove to show how wrong I am (which I've already told you you're way off base about).

I've had many great conversations with many different people on these forums, but I guess what I've now learned is that you are not one of those people. That's too bad (really).

 

[SoCalReviews]

L&LD, I see that you're the only one that's right here. Well done.

- Good. At least we are getting you on the right track here. Keep trying. Practice makes perfect.

Keep convincing yourself that a platform only needs the (always) limited amount of resources a manufacturer decides (for profit reasons) to give it. In this case; ram.

-Yet you argued for an entire thread that "RAM is not a resource".... when in fact the fact is that RAM is a resource which was my statement you previously disagreed with. As I remember you argued that for over a week until the thread had to be split off for being off topic.

Nobody has to backup my statements nor do they have to do so to prove the absurdity of the 'issue' you're trying to disprove to show how wrong I am (which I've already told you you're way off base about).

-It's not an issue of whether you are right or wrong... or whether I am right or wrong. It's what the objective truth is and what the facts are. I don't make up the truth or the facts.

I've had many great conversations with many different people on these forums, but I guess what I've now learned is that you are not one of those people. That's too bad (really).

- I believe we've had some great conversations too and you have provided a lot of great information in this forum. I can honestly say from what I have seen here and with the exception of our disagreements you've been a knowledgeable and helpful contributor. I just can't stand by and have you post false information that is in direct contradiction to my posts. If I post something that isn't correct I'll be happy to hear the other side and own up to it if I'm wrong. I have yet to see you ever doing this.

 

[sfx2000]

So if those solutions are not ax related then we can assume they are proprietary solutions? That sounds similar to an extension of the proprietary BCM ac solution with 4 x 4 with MU-MIMO all over again... back to square one regarding future proofing... or am I missing something?

Perhaps you might be missing something - it's up to you...

Most of the recent Mesh type of solutions are open standards - it's interesting to see how folks interpret things in the docs... 802.11 is one side, the IETF networking is another story...

 

[SoCalReviews]

Perhaps you might be missing something - it's up to you...

Most of the recent Mesh type of solutions are open standards - it's interesting to see how folks interpret things in the docs... 802.11 is one side, the IETF networking is another story...

There are standards beyond formalized ac, ax, etc.. and there are different organizations releasing those standards. I suppose some of the wave2 standards are a good example of that. I thought about that before I posted which why I asked the question in the first place.

The problem is that your answer or non-answer still doesn't answer the question whether the forthcoming ac enhancements you are talking about will be industry standard or proprietary. I'm patient... If you don't want to reveal any self determined secrets then I'll wait for the announcements you are referring to.

 

[sfx2000]

There are standards beyond formalized ac, ax, etc.. I suppose some of the wave2 standards are a good example of that and I thought about that before I posted which why I asked the question in the first place.

The problem is that your answer or non-answer still doesn't answer the question whether the forthcoming ac enhancements you are talking about will be industry standard or proprietary. I'm patient... If you don't want to reveal any self determined secrets then I'll wait for the announcements you are referring to.

Let's just say... the next couple of quarters, perhaps over the next year - things will be very, very interesting - it's not just the IEEE side, even though the foundation in that shed has been set, but also the rest of the story...

It'll be fun to watch - and people will have to reset...

 

[L&LD]

L&LD, I see that you're the only one that's right here. Well done.

- Good. At least we are getting you on the right track here. Keep trying. Practice makes perfect.

Keep convincing yourself that a platform only needs the (always) limited amount of resources a manufacturer decides (for profit reasons) to give it. In this case; ram.

-Yet you argued for an entire thread that "RAM is not a resource".... when in fact the fact is that RAM is a resource which was my statement you previously disagreed with. As I remember you argued that for over a week until the thread had to be split off for being off topic.

Nobody has to backup my statements nor do they have to do so to prove the absurdity of the 'issue' you're trying to disprove to show how wrong I am (which I've already told you you're way off base about).

-It's not an issue of whether you are right or wrong... or whether I am right or wrong. It's what the objective truth is and what the facts are. I don't make up the truth or the facts.

I've had many great conversations with many different people on these forums, but I guess what I've now learned is that you are not one of those people. That's too bad (really).

- I believe we've had some great conversations too and you have provided a lot of great information in this forum. I can honestly say from what I have seen here and with the exception of our disagreements you've been a knowledgeable and helpful contributor. I just can't stand by and have you post false information that is in direct contradiction to my posts. If I post something that isn't correct I'll be happy to hear the other side and own up to it if I'm wrong. I have yet to see you ever doing this.

Hey, I already said you're right. Stop beating a dead horse.

And yes, I am being sarcastic (again).

Please stop telling me and the rest of the forum what I've said. You read it anyway you want. But do note that twisting the truth and my words isn't helping anyone. Least of all yourself (to sound anywhere near credit worthy).

 

[SoCalReviews]

Will

Hey, I already said you're right. Stop beating a dead horse.

And yes, I am being sarcastic (again).

Please stop telling me and the rest of the forum what I've said. You read it anyway you want. But do note that twisting the truth and my words isn't helping anyone. Least of all yourself (to sound anywhere near credit worthy).

I was afraid I might run out of dead horses to beat.

 

[RMerlin]

There's some cool stuff coming down the pipeline - and I think it's going to be an interesting intersection between MU, Mesh, and Usability - if you look at the startup activity, you can see this, and sooner or later, the big guys are going to jump in...

Google are rumoured to come with a mesh product of their own next month. OnHub owners will be pissed if their device can't be upgraded to act as the central part of these meshes...

 

[sfx2000]

Google are rumoured to come with a mesh product of their own next month. OnHub owners will be pissed if their device can't be upgraded to act as the central part of these meshes...

They probably will get pissed then... but perhaps not, Google could push a firmware update out to the onhubs (both TPLink and Asus) as it is their platform...

I'm just curious what the uptake is for the OnHubs, we certainly don't hear much about them here on the forum...

 

[RMerlin]

I'm just curious what the uptake is for the OnHubs, we certainly don't hear much about them here on the forum...

That's because most visitors on these forums are users who want to control their devices. OnHub is more targeted at people who just want to plug-and-forget, and let Google do everything for them. Different target audiences.

 

[hurjosh]

I was also thinking of upgrading my small business router. It uses a really old draftN router. I forgot the term..but it doesn't work on some clients when it works on other clients. I saw a post on this thread stating that asus is coming out with a business class router in the coming weeks. I don't know if I should just buy the 1900p for now or just buy the 3100?

I also looked at business grade companies such as ubiquiti, engenious, and etc. But the ones I want are much too expensive for my budget. like $400+
I am leaning towards the ac1900p. It seems more reasonable for the price but as an amateur thinker I would want a stronger router. hehe

 

[sfx2000]

That's because most visitors on these forums are users who want to control their devices. OnHub is more targeted at people who just want to plug-and-forget, and let Google do everything for them. Different target audiences.

Yeah - but also consider that many actually do hit the forums with very basic questions related to performance, etc...

And there, in the general forums, we're just not seeing a lot of comments pro/con - one way or another - most of the comments there were at the launch, and there, the more experience/knowledgable folks jumped in with quite a few comments...

FWIW - we don't see a lot of comments either way with the EERO's either, so low volume, or it just works...

 

[anon2015]

Now I know that there's now way I could hit 300Mbps through wireless. That's asking a lot,

Thats not quite true. I have a 3100 as a router and a 68P as a bridge which is hardwired to my pc and connects wirelessly to the 3100 on the 5GHZ channel set to 20/40/80. Ive seen a few OOKLA speedtest readings as high as 370Mbps. I know mismatching the models of the router and bridge is not recommended but its been working flawlessly for over a week. FYI the 3100 is in a closet and there are three walls and about 30 feet between it and the 68P as my place is an old building with the cable line dropped down through the ceiling in the closet. The 68P just wasnt able to compensate for the poor position, but the 3100 seems to be able to handle it.

Should I just...live with this? 160Mbps is very fast, but if I'm missing out on better performance and benefits of a new router, I'd like to know.

In the real world, when downloading large files from a server my company owns it takes between 1-2 min per Gig. So the fastest single connection I can pull is 100-150Mbps and even streaming an HD video to the same client doesnt utilize the whole bandwidth. So the reality is, "Can you get better performance?" Yes, but is it worth the price or is it just something to brag about? Thats up to you and how much money you are willing to pay.

 

[Paul Zakoor]

A couple of weeks ago I had the chance to not only setup an RT-AC3100 for a customer, but also had the chance to use it in my network for a couple of days too.

Hi - new here - is there some step by step instructions to set up the router to get the performance that you did? (I am not very network savvy) We are getting Fibre here in 2 weeks. Currently on Bell Canada phone lines - 1 - 3 MB speed. Cant wait for Fibre and want to invest and set up network to take full advantage. I would be willing to pay for some tech savvy service as well if anyone is close to Windsor, Ontario Canada....