TP-Link WiFi 6 router advice

[Tech9]

They claim to test routers with a documented methodology/criteria.

I had a few budget TP-Link routers in my hands with better Wi-Fi than much more expensive Asus and Netgear routers.

 

[TexasFlood]

Nowhere to be found in Canada as well. I expect this model to be discontinued, if not already.

TP-Link Archer AX21 Review: The Best Budget Wi-Fi 6 Router

This hassle-free router will upgrade your home network to Wi-Fi 6 -- and it's faster than the competition, too.

www.cnet.com

The TP-Link Archer AX20 was a previous Wirecutter top pick. They didn't like the TP-Link Archer AX21 though.

 

[Tech9]

The TP-Link Archer AX20

I had one for about a week. It's RT-AX56U hardware with better Wi-Fi range, simple functional GUI and under $100 price.

 

[jontalk]

Nowhere to be found in Canada as well. I expect this model to be discontinued, if not already.

TP-Link Archer AX21 Review: The Best Budget Wi-Fi 6 Router

This hassle-free router will upgrade your home network to Wi-Fi 6 -- and it's faster than the competition, too.

www.cnet.com

I appreciate the link though I'd hoped for feedback from members that actually use TP-Link AX routers. Regardless I appreciate the feedback and will definitely steer clear of the RT-AX68 since most of the research shows its one of the weaker models

 

[jontalk]

They claim to test routers with a documented methodology/criteria. I don't use them as my primary source but wouldn't call it random. I recalled that they like TP-Link so thought I'd post it.

The Best Wi-Fi Routers

We’ve tested the latest Wi-Fi routers and found the best options—from budget models to top-of-the-line—to make your wireless network faster and more responsive.

www.nytimes.com

Interesting how the top pick is the AX50..I've had great success with Ebay factory refurb items and I can get the AX1800 for $35 with a 2 year warranty though its obvious the AX50/55 might be better

 

[TexasFlood]

Interesting how the top pick is the AX50..I've had great success with Ebay factory refurb items and I can get the AX1800 for $35 with a 2 year warranty though its obvious the AX50/55 might be better

AX50 yes. But the article also states "The TP-Link Archer AX55 will be our new top pick in an upcoming rewrite of this guide." Just FYI...

 

[jsz]

They claim to test routers with a documented methodology/criteria. I don't use them as my primary source but wouldn't call it random. I recalled that they like TP-Link so thought I'd post it.

The Best Wi-Fi Routers

We’ve tested the latest Wi-Fi routers and found the best options—from budget models to top-of-the-line—to make your wireless network faster and more responsive.

www.nytimes.com

I would take all "reviews" with a grain of salt.

Their "best" WIFI router uses dead Intel platform that was sold off to Maxlinear a few years ago. Chances of the platform being updated with security updates are very slim. Especially with TP link.. A company that only pushes 1-3 updates in a lifecycle.

They recommend AX88U as upgrade pick while GT-AX6000 succeeds the 4 year old AX88U platform with newer Gen 2 AX hardware and 2x 2.5G.. Pricing isn't much different either, at least on sale. (Newegg sold GT-AX6000 for $273 USD for Black Friday).

Any testing they're doing is going to be skewed towards the reviewers home and doesn't really reflect "performance". Some subjective reviews will show the AX86U outperforming the older AX88U @ distance for example.. It doesn't really matter.

The same way ill call out other "reviewers" for only posting Line of sight results. It's complete non sense... Just buy multiple routers and keep the best one that works in your home.

I would avoid 2x2 hardware coming from 3x3, but hey Im biased.

 

[Tech9]

I appreciate the link though I'd hoped for feedback from members that actually use TP-Link AX routers.

No one here uses any router in your apartment. You have to find yourself what works best for you.

Some subjective reviews will show the AX86U outperforming the older AX88U @ distance for example.

My AX86U can't outperform at distance my AC86U. It's just has weaker walls and obstacles penetration. Archer C80 for $50 beats AX86U то АC clients through two walls as well. MediaTek based entry-level router. AX88U is better than AX86U. I had one AX88U in my routers collection.

 

[TexasFlood]

No one here uses any router in your apartment. You have to find yourself what works best for you.



My AX86U can't outperform at distance my AC86U. It's just has weaker walls and obstacles penetration. Archer C80 for $50 beats AX86U то АC clients through two walls as well. MediaTek based entry-level router. AX88U is better than AX86U. I had one AX88U in my routers collection.

All that might be true. I bought an AX86U and it's the first router I've ever had that provides a reliable fast 5GHz signal throughout my entire house. It's the best router I've owned. Maybe not perfect but I'm happy with it

 

[Tech9]

Just another proof of the fact there is no best hardware for everyone or best settings.

 

[jontalk]

I would take all "reviews" with a grain of salt.

Their "best" WIFI router uses dead Intel platform that was sold off to Maxlinear a few years ago. Chances of the platform being updated with security updates are very slim. Especially with TP link.. A company that only pushes 1-3 updates in a lifecycle.

They recommend AX88U as upgrade pick while GT-AX6000 succeeds the 4 year old AX88U platform with newer Gen 2 AX hardware and 2x 2.5G.. Pricing isn't much different either, at least on sale. (Newegg sold GT-AX6000 for $273 USD for Black Friday).

Any testing they're doing is going to be skewed towards the reviewers home and doesn't really reflect "performance". Some subjective reviews will show the AX86U outperforming the older AX88U @ distance for example.. It doesn't really matter.

The same way ill call out other "reviewers" for only posting Line of sight results. It's complete non sense... Just buy multiple routers and keep the best one that works in your home.

I would avoid 2x2 hardware coming from 3x3, but hey Im biased.

When I read CNET reviews and knowing how the channel relies on ad revenue, its hard not to think they're biased towards any brand that 'invests'. I imagine the same holds true with others making it challenging for the consumer. After reading all of these comments, I'm wondering if it even makes sense to upgrade, LOL

 

[jsz]

No one here uses any router in your apartment. You have to find yourself what works best for you.



My AX86U can't outperform at distance my AC86U. It's just has weaker walls and obstacles penetration. Archer C80 for $50 beats AX86U то АC clients through two walls as well. MediaTek based entry-level router. AX88U is better than AX86U. I had one AX88U in my routers collection.

AX86S in my environment can match and exceed my 2.5 yr old GT-AC2900 (Rebranded AC86U platform). The GT-AX6000 I tried has worse PHY rates than both in the same exact locations. I'm willing to repurchase the GT-AX6000 to make sure I didn't get a lemon, but it's likely just the layout/design of the product itself (in conjunction with my home/objects). The GT-AX6000 was way superior for straight LoS.

It really depends on your environment. All these "reviews" are rather pointless. PHY rates WILL impact other metrics like latency.. You really have to test everything out yourself... Especially @ distance. Theres also likely a tolerance factor involved between two units of the same make, but I cant imagine it being +/- 10%.

Higgins does objective reviews, but even his reviews won't reflect your personal environment. My 2c.

When I read CNET reviews and knowing how the channel relies on ad revenue, its hard not to think they're biased towards any brand that 'invests'. I imagine the same holds true with others making it challenging for the consumer. After reading all of these comments, I'm wondering if it even makes sense to upgrade, LOL

It does.

You should really look into a platform with a 3x3 or 4x4 5G radio with 1W power limit on unii-1/unii-3. Your AC68 peaks out with lower power, but had a 3x3 +3x3 config..

Should be superior to entry 2x2 + 2x2 solutions with legacy AC clients. AX clients may trade off as newer products usually have full 1W power limit. 3x3 or 4x4 (or even niche 8x8) will generally penetrate better for all types of clients. This doesn't matter testing right next to router obviously, (in fact newer 2x2 solutions are going to be superior close range) but through walls/distance/objects.

DFS support (250mW limit) will help avoid local congestion assuming all your clients work out of the box... Lower power yes, but an advantage if you're the only one using those channels. Would recommended 4x4 main Radio for DFS.

Radio config:

2x2 = Entry level
3x3 = Old AC standard/Mid range
4x4 = Mid/high end
8x8 = High end/Niche. Only supported by a single QCA platform. BCM was going to make one, but canceled it.

The marketing number on the box is meaningless... Just combined numbers of max 160mhz spec vs radio MIMO on higher end AX routers.

AX89X is AX6000 class, but is stronger for penetrating walls in more environments vs "AX11000 triband.". IE: 8x8 + 4x4 config.. doesn't support 160mhz in 8x8 mode.

 

[Piotrek]

but had a 3x3 +3x3 config

Would recommended 4x4 main Radio for DFS

How many of your clients support 3x3 and how many 4x4?

 

[jsz]

How many of your clients support 3x3 and how many 4x4?

It doesn't matter how many they support.. Thats a dumb take.. The whole point of going into 4x4 or 8x8 is to provide range over distance on weaker 2x2 clients.

It's the whole reason AX89x or RAX120 exist on the market. Outside of MU-MIMO purposes which hasn't really taken off.

 

[Piotrek]

is to provide range over distance on weaker 2x2 clients

Only when we want to provide range over distance.
Do you have any confirmed information about what exactly of provide range over distance can be talked about?
I'm afraid that the difference is so small that it is necessary to confirm the gain by testing and comparing the devices.

 

[jsz]

Only when we want to provide range over distance.
Do you have any confirmed information about what exactly of provide range over distance can be talked about?
I'm afraid that the difference is so small that it is necessary to confirm the gain by testing and comparing the devices.

Yes.. the entire point of a WIFI Router. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Any advantage is going to be subjective to environment.. You can test line of sight on a certain newer BCM platform (Gen 2 AX/GT-AX6000) and it can exceed performance/throughput with weaker 4x4 HW. It's more about the amount of transmissions being broadcasted and what the client can "grab" on to. Walls/objects are always a detriment to this.

Big or small depends on environment. Subjective/objective testing will inevitably skew if moving location to another place.

Why do you think 3x3 hardware became a thing when transitioning to 5 Ghz N/AC? It certainly wasn't because of the 2011 MacBook Pro with its 3x3 card. Granted there are other factors such as FCC power limitation being lower back then... 5 ghz in general needed "oomph" coming from 2.4 ghz.

2x2 AX was launched more as a cheap stop gap. Manufacturers could market faster processors, combined 160mhz spec number (IE: AX3000) and AX>AX SNR advantages, but this doesn't work out in the real world as many later gen AC W2 routers can "out perform" newer products.


Here's a subjective example...

I've tested a few AX3000 class routers (AX58U, RAX35v2, TP LINK BCM variant) with the same AX200/210 clients (same locations). All of them do worse on 5G than my older 4x4 GT-AC2900 in same environment. Even downgrading the AX routers to 80mhz bonding and improving SNR doesn't help as much as having a higher MIMO radio subjectively, but that's just a limitation my home and hardware itself..

Like I said... GT-AX6000, a router that should out perform my GT-AC2900 in PHY, does worse for me... 4x4 vs 4x4, granted throughput IS higher on the newer model and speed does better, but not enough to justify me spending $300. Again, I'm willing to test this again assuming I got a sample with defective amplifiers.

Hell.... I can force my GT-AC2900 into 80+80 mode (2x2 + 2x2 per 80mhz block) due to how its 160mhz capability works and my 80mhz AX/AC limited clients will tank PHY and max speed.. significantly, even though the client itself connects as 2x2.

 

[Tech9]

Should be superior to entry 2x2 + 2x2 solutions with legacy AC clients.

No. What matters most is RF design sensitivity*. The old AC68U is weaker than many newer 2x2 routers. Don't look the TX power and number of streams between few generations routers. There is a huge difference in both range and performance between BCM4360 and BCM4365E, both 3x3.

* - TP-Link provides the numbers in specs, unlike many other manufacturers (AX21 example, 5GHz):

 

[jsz]

No. What matters most is RF design sensitivity*. The old AC68U is weaker than many newer 2x2 routers. Don't look the TX power and number of streams between few generations routers. There is a huge difference in both range and performance between BCM4360 and BCM4365E, both 3x3.

* - TP-Link provides the numbers in specs, unlike many other manufacturers (AX21 example, 5GHz):

View attachment 45878

Doesn't matter, its environmental. A lot of the 4360 routers are lower power (old FCC limitation for US) and prob have weaker throughput innately. Wave 2 AC 4365E 5G can outperform newer 2x2 stuff, at least here in my home. Maybe I should have clarified that.

AC68U/V2 has a very weak unii-1 power output regardless.

Edit: You're right here, but I guess I over generalized AC into later gen wave2. I have a C8 laying around (v2 model with higher power output) that's absolutely horrible. 3x3 or 4x4 newer gen stuff is still better in more situations

 

[Tech9]

BCM4366E (AC86U, AC 4x4) outperforms BCM43684 (AX86U, AX 4x4) in my environment as well. AX86U with it's 4x4 radio has the same range as AX20 with built-in SoC BCM6755 2x2 radio. Go figure. Perhaps there are other design elements in play here, not only the environment. By the way, some TP-Link routers have very high quality printed PCB antennas. High quality in sense well engineered.

 

[jsz]

BCM4366E (AC86U, AC 4x4) outperforms BCM43684 (AX86U, AX 4x4) in my environment as well. AX86U with it's 4x4 radio has the same range as AX20 with built-in SoC BCM6755 2x2 radio. Go figure. Perhaps there are other design elements in play here, not only the environment. By the way, some TP-Link routers have very high quality printed PCB antennas. High quality in sense well engineered.

With AX210 (latest intel driver).. Same location, stationary card:

BCM43684 in my AX86S can hit 8xx PHY, where my GT-AC2900 with BCM4366E peaks out at 650. GT-AX6000 with 6715 was always around 4xx-5xx, but throughput was insanely good..

In terms of actual speed @ (25-30FT) distance: AX86S>GT-AX6000>GT-AC2900 in my home, but this isn't something anyone should take as fact. Its always going to be subjective, especially with variable channels and local interference.

If I retest GT-AX6000, ill try moving the router in the room its in.. I think my kitchen appliances are a big culprit. Overall design of AX86S/GT-AC2900 may be superior for me.