Synology RT1900AC Router

[thiggins]

i would not be holding my breath on review findings though , but lets see what tim's results show

I am getting very poor results on wireless tests. Running more tests this morning to make sure it's not a testbed malfunction.

2.4 in particular was very wonky.

 

[Rascally Jack]

As long as it shows solid throughput I am more interested in the software side vs. what other manufacturers have put on their router/modems. It does not have to be #1 but again I would take a solid software package up front over the ~2 years to get other routers functioning properly after release for customers to be guinea pigs. If the software really disappoints then I am back to square one deciding what package to go with. The fact I see so many comments on top brand sellers having to go 3rd party software for full functionality is a major turnoff. It is like buying a sports car with a four cylinder engine for comparison and having to install the V8 yourself.

*edit* I typed all of this and after posting it Thiggins post appeared from earlier this morning... le sigh...

 

[sfx2000]

I am getting very poor results on wireless tests. Running more tests this morning to make sure it's not a testbed malfunction.

2.4 in particular was very wonky.

Well, hoping things sort out - the Broadcom Wave 1 AC1900 class hardware is fairly sorted these days...

Was always curious though - why not include Routing functionality in DSM directly as an App? Many advanced members here are considering moving towards dedicated AP's, so a NAS could handle the Routing/Firewall part very well...

(I've got a 4-Bay NAS, low power x86 powered, with 4 high quality Intel GiGe powered ports with KVM/QEMU support along with Docker/LXC included... sounds like a no-brain solution for the NAS vendors to do the routing side as an "App" compared to what's offered in the Router/AP market)

 

[stevech]

Is "wonky" a term used in objective assessments?

 

[NightOwl326]

Is "wonky" a term used in objective assessments?

Yep.....unless you don't know what "wonky" means. And it was used in a quick post not in a full blown review. Are you going to buy the equipment needed and put in the required time to provide better reviews than Tim does? If so, you can then be sure not to use this term in regards to YOUR objective assessments. If not you could always build a chocolate factory! Oh wait, that's Wonka....

 

[stevech]

Kidding. Of course it's not a full blown or any other sort of review! But as the chief-reviewer for SNB, one has to be careful not to pre-judge.

Lest we all not take this stuff too seriously.

 

[pete y testing]

one has to be careful not to pre-judge.

i can assure you he isnt pre judging , if he has had the synology for even 10 minutes he will be seeing the same issues i came across many pages ago and in this case wonky is the right term

if this way a draft ac router it could be forgiven its short comings but its not its a very late entry to the 1900ac race and imho chose the wrong chipset to use and is suffering because of its choice

there are still no extra apps for the rt1900ac apart from the ones compiled with the release some 6 plus months ago

it may be seen by some as a good first step for synology into the router world but lets hope newer synology router perform better

but again wait for tim's review and then judge whether you would buy one

 

[thiggins]

Wonky defined.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tool...hawk/1235-asus-rtac68u/2537-synology-rt1900ac

 

[Rascally Jack]

welp in that case of wonky no software can compensate... Hello new best friend Draytek 2860 and AP910C.

 

[RMerlin]

Wonky defined.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tool...hawk/1235-asus-rtac68u/2537-synology-rt1900ac

Wow, that looks... anemic. As if output power was really low.

I see that the 5 GHz is hardly any better either.

welp in that case of wonky no software can compensate... Hello new best friend Draytek 2860 and AP910C.

It could still be a software issue, like an incorrectly configured output power in their driver.

 

[sfx2000]

That is odd - esp considering that HW wise it's pretty similar to the other two devices - like RMerlin mentioned, it could be driver settings perhaps...

Wonky indeed...

 

[sfx2000]

Wow, that looks... anemic. As if output power was really low.

I see that the 5 GHz is hardly any better either.

For uplink perhaps, but downlink has little to do with Tx power - that's why I was thinking calibration perhaps, picking lower MCS rates, but that doesn't explain the short range in the charts - self-jamming maybe or an antenna mismatch?

Maybe it's like what Tim found a long time back with the Airport Extreme N, where the antennas were not connected properly...

 

[L&LD]

Wonky defined.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tools/charts/router/graph/117-2_4-ghz-profile-dn/1234-netgear-r7000-nighthawk/1235-asus-rtac68u/2537-synology-rt1900ac

You are being generous. That is not wonky, that is abysmal.

 

[RMerlin]

For uplink perhaps, but downlink has little to do with Tx power

That's true. Still doesn't rule out a software issue, but it's still really odd. Performance isn't even remotely close to the competition.

 

[pete y testing]

Wonky defined.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/tool...hawk/1235-asus-rtac68u/2537-synology-rt1900ac

certainly what i found as well that even in the same room the rssi on the rt1900ac was 10db lower to start with and thus its coverage and throughput at distance suffers

That is odd - esp considering that HW wise it's pretty similar to the other two devices

apart from a different chipset that is used by a number of early AC access points that also had issues with coverage

the rt1900ac uses the Broadcom BCM43460 for both its 2.4 and 5 gig transmissions and may explain why both are showing the same issue

the others use the__ Broadcom BCM4360

they dont seem like they would be that much different but its proven to be the case that there are some issues with the BCM43460

here is a list of other devices using the same chipset as the rt1900ac , just scroll down and look over to other devices using this chipset

https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Broadcom

some of those devices also reviewed here on snb

see

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wire...ro-ac1750-pro-dual-band-access-point-reviewed

 

[avtella]

The guy in this YouTube review also is getting some weird results, (around 12:00 in video)

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[pete y testing]

for those that want to see my results before tim posts the review see

https://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/2466108

its posted on the whirlpool forum in OZ , didnt want to post it here yet so tim wont be influenced

so as to compare it to other AC devices i have tested and in my test environment see

https://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=2384995#r1

to be honest i am surprised that was released in the states with the performance it has but as i said it was a good first try and lets hope a new class of synology router brings with it perfor,ance and a more focused nas performance set aka port bonding

 

[Rascally Jack]

I see they have released a patch on 2 march 2016 I wonder if this will address any of the wireless issues?

 

[pete y testing]

I see they have released a patch on 2 march 2016 I wonder if this will address any of the wireless issues?

(2016/03/03)

Fixed Issues

1. Added the "TCP/UDP" option to Port Forwarding to set TCP and UDP rules at the same time.
2. Allows setting the DHCP range for guest networks.
3. Re-defined schedule behavior in Parental Control: When Internet access is blocked on a device, you can still use this device to access SRM and other devices in the local network.
4. Re-defined “banned” in Traffic Control: When a device is banned, you cannot use this device to access the Internet or SRM, but you can still access other devices in the local network.
5. UPnP rules will remain after an SRM reboot.
6. Enhanced SRM security (CVE-2015-7547, CVE-2015-3197 CVE-2015-5621, CVE-2016-0777, CVE-2016-0778).
7. Fixed an issue where SRM could not find DNS servers when PPPoE was selected as the connection type after a soft reset of the Synology Router (i.e., pressing the reset button for four seconds).
8. Minor bug fixes.
   
   no word of any wifi fix

and imho its not a fw / software issue its a hardware issue

 

[thiggins]

and imho its not a fw / software issue its a hardware issue

why do you think that?