which router supports full ip bandwith control like the TP-LINK Archer C7 AC1750

[Lethasniper007]

looking to purchase a new router and i,m looking for a qos like settings like the TP-LINK Archer C7 AC1750 where i can fully do ip bandwith control. are the tplink the only routers that supports this option

 

[System Error Message]

if tplink supports it every other router does except maybe for dlink. Their implementations may be different.

 

[Lethasniper007]

The Asus only allows upload bandwith control not download

 

[System Error Message]

i might want to add that currently the most effective QoS capable routers are non consumer ones like mikrotik, ubiquiti, pfsense and so on (cisco RV series not included). What they dont tell you is that you can control download via the requests made for it but you also do need to have a downlink que.

 

[azazel1024]

Well, as you mention, several other TP-Link routers provide bandwidth control up/down. As for other manufacturers, a few do. Honestly, your best bet there is to look at different routers from different manufacturers that you might be interested in and look at their feature sets/user manuals to spot check.

That said...is there a reason that the C7 might not be of interest? Very inexpensive and generally good performance.

 

[Lethasniper007]

I'm waiting for the TPlink ac1900 can't find it anywhere I'm located.

 

[Lethasniper007]

i might want to add that currently the most effective QoS capable routers are non consumer ones like mikrotik, ubiquiti, pfsense and so on (cisco RV series not included). What they dont tell you is that you can control download via the requests made for it but you also do need to have a downlink que.

why wouldn't asus support it ? Would there ever be a firmware update for full ip/Mac bandwith control

 

[thiggins]

i might want to add that currently the most effective QoS capable routers are non consumer ones like mikrotik, ubiquiti, pfsense and so on (cisco RV series not included). What they dont tell you is that you can control download via the requests made for it but you also do need to have a downlink que.

Why are those products "most effective"?

 

[azazel1024]

I'm waiting for the TPlink ac1900 can't find it anywhere I'm located.

I wouldn't. Based on SNB's testing, it appears to not really be faster than the AC1750 Archer C8, and in some cases 5GHz performance actually seems not quite as good (not sure what is up with that, as it should be the exact same 5GHz radio and amplifiers).

The Archer C8 works quite well as does the C7. I'd only suggest the C8 over the C7 due to larger flash size, I think it has more RAM (though maybe not?) and it has IMHO better 2.4GHz range and better performance at medium to long range on 2.4GHz, but the C7 has better 5GHz performance and is cheaper, also better routing. C8 also does have somewhat better storage performance.

I'd about to double check now if the C8 allows bandwidth limiting, but I believe it does.

Or check out the C7v3, which supposedly moves to dual band external antennas instead of internal 2.4GHz and external 5GHz antennas. I suspect that is enough to boost the 5GHz performance/range to as good or better than the C8. Since TP-Link seems to have fixed their C7 Apple issues, I am HIGHLY interested in it. Just kind of waiting for budget to allow me to get one, as well as making sure everyone has worked through their V1/2 supply to better guarantee I get a V3 with no hassles.

 

[System Error Message]

Why are those products "most effective"?

because you can configure a different que method. There are multiple queue types ranging from hardware based to different queuing ways with the capability to adjust to que size and even branch them. You can also que using priority based instead of bandwidth control and control both the upload and download in the same que.

I didnt say asus doesnt support it, i said if tplink supports it than every other brand would.

I also noticed that the same CPU the C7 uses is also used by the new inexpensive routerboard APs, namely the RB911 series.

 

[thiggins]

Thanks, SysError. Having lots of options is one thing. Configuring them properly is another. The options you mention are beyond the range of many (most) users.

 

[System Error Message]

i suggest those more complicated options because of too many complaints i hear about QoS setups and requirements. Sometimes it pays to research configurations for your network.

if you look at the mikrotik online demo you will be able to see the different que types if you navigate to queues -- que types. Over there you can also adjust the size of the que. This is one of the fine tunings that you just cant do with consumer brands as it affects results, latency and bandwidth. Faster CPUs and cache means you can have larger ques. It is true that configuring them properly isnt easy. Using the wrong configuration can cause you to lock yourself out from the router network wise but many routerOS users have learnt to dedicate a port for that and even use MAC address to access the router instead. This is the only danger when using the more configurable ones like mikrotik or ubiquiti.