Which router would you choose?

[Loogster]

Long time lurker, first time poster!

Compared to many, my needs are relatively simple.

We have 4 phones, 2 TVs, 2 laptops, a couple of tablets, a thermostat, garage door opener, outdoor LED lights, robot vac and 4 security cameras.
Internet is a solid 400mbps.

There are 4 TVs, a phone, a computer and a printer that are hard wired to the network.
We had a Synology RT2600ac for 5 years, and it was rock solid. It also had impressive range, easily covering our 1750 square foot two floor house. Heck, we could get wifi 50+ feet from the house. SRM was simple.

It went to router heaven, so we had to quickly replace it. Wife was already shopping, so I had her pick up what was available, a TP Link Archer AXE5400.

After a few minor challenges getting it set up, it seemed a little unstable for a few days.
I would get a phone alert that the wifi had no Internet but a few seconds later it resolved.
Family mentioned a few random, short-lived issues. Our Internet is quite stable, but it could have been on their end.
Also, our phones had a Wi-Fi service update, so maybe a coincidence.

Because of the mild instability, I ordered a Synology RT6600.
However, the TP Link settled down and has been solid for the last few weeks.

The Synology is a slightly older unit, but is considered a workhorse by many.
I prefer to set it up and forget it, though I manually reboot monthly.
I think it has pretty good baseline security, with optional free apps (with possible hit to speed).

The TP Link is now stable and has good specs (but the hardware is not divulged, which I find concerning).
Two phones have wifi 6e capability, but we are happy with 5ghz or 2.4,, and the 6e range isn't good, so it isn't needed.
We don't need mesh.
It has some baseline security stuff, but a subscription is needed for the full features.

I just need stability, decent speed and range, and good security. Uncomplicated setup is nice too.
I disable remote management.

Opinions?
Should I return the Synology and stick with the TP Link?
I would also consider an Asus unit, as they seem to have a good reputation, along with good specs and baseline security features.

Many thanks,
Bob

 

[degrub]

Either would serve your use case. The Synology has slightly better radio set up with 4x4 versus 2x2 on the TP. Almost all clients are 2x2 with some IOT devices 1x1. So slightly more throughput possible or more clients. The Synology may have better long term support/security updates. TP Link consumer gear tends to have few updates.

If you are more comfortable with the Synology configuration and are willing to tinker a bit, i would stay with that. There is a subforum here that is active. On either, i would set the 5GHz radios to 80 MHz channel width rather than 160. This will allow a bit more reach with the radio . 5.9/6 GHz is a waste unless there are no walls between the client and the wifi router. i would turn off the 6 GHz radios. Seems the 2.4GHz radios at default settings ( i assume ) are working well for you , so i would not change. If you needed more distance/compatibility with IOTs , you could change the channel width to 40 MHz or even 20 MHz if dedicated to IOTs. It sounds like your devices may be using the 2.4 GHz band heavily, so doing so would have an adverse effect on you regular clients, so i would not do.

 

[Loogster]

Wow, thanks for the response, I really appreciate it!

I recall making only one or maybe 2 mods to the RT2600 settings, but don't recall what I did...might have been the 5ghz mod.
It had surprisingly good range on either channel.

I do lean toward the Synology, and like that they tend to be good with updates.

I know there are some concerns regarding TP Link security, though it is hard to gauge if the concerns are warranted...many opinions.
I have an older TP Link C9 that is pretty solid, but probably not supported.

Bob

 

[Tech9]

Definitely keep the Synology. Better firmware, better support, advanced features.

 

[Loogster]

Follow up:
I finally set up the Synology and fully updated it. I didn't change any settings, and decided to test it against the TP Link. No idea why, just because.
I don't know if this is a valid test, but...

Both routers were updated.
I allowed the Synology to choose the network (5ghz-2) and TP Link was on the 5ghz network.
Was sitting 12 feet away, using my phone and Speedtest. Each test was about 1 minutes apart, and conditions identical (and at 0500, where overall network use is minimal).
The results are...surprising...

Synology:
382, 378, 398, 389, 407, 380.

TP Link:
488, 491, 487, 487, 495, 494.

Pings were the same at 20-23ms.

Now I'm conflicted.
The TP Link seems to be utterly dominating on raw speed.
But...I haven't had a chance to test coverage strength/distance.
And, there are also reliability and security aspects (which I think the Synology has an edge).

I'm wondering if the (alleged) trade off on speed is worth the likely superior reliability/stability/security offered by the Synology?
I'm baffled by the results, as the RT6600 has pretty robust specs...maybe it is employing some security stuff in the background which shaves off some speed?

Bob

 

[degrub]

Is your contracted ISP service 400/400 Mbits/s UP/Down ?

The test may not be stressing the routers too much. Phones aren't famous for their wifi bandwidth with their chipsets/radios. Speed tests, while maybe indicative, are more for bragging rights and marketing than any real world usage. Both sets of results are basically the same. Many/most internet sites limit their client bandwidth anyway, something in the 100 Mbit/s bandwidth range just as a practical matter. i hosted two work at homes and 3 college students, including a gamer, on 38-50 Mbit/s DSL service for years with no significant operating issues. i used SMB gear for the "set and forget" reliability purpose after i got tired of dealing with consumer gear simplicity and flakiness.

It is a "test" of sorts in your specific environment which is fine. i would make sure all the defaults are consistent between the two. RF power for the radios is regulated per country, so those maximums should already be the same. Differences may be caused by using different chipsets in the wifi routers as well as the client device and their interaction.

Honestly, as i mentioned originally, for your use case, either should be fine. Go with what works for you and meets your needs for reliability, support, and configuration. None of your mentioned clients require much bandwidth, certainly <<100 Mbit/s individually. i wouldn't stress too much over the speed test results. Go with what you think is more important.

BTW, if you want to get the longest reach for your wifi bands, use 20 MHz channel width for the 2.4 GHz and 80 MHz for the 5 GHz bands. There is a small tradeoff between channel width and effective power at a location. The bandwidth may be lower, but the communication link stability should be higher as a result.

 

[Loogster]

Haha!
I figured you guys would give a logical response.

I know there are a lot of factors in play, but the RT6600 seemed to fully load websites a tick faster. The TP Link seemed to start loading, pause for a moment, then finish.
Probably my imagination.
What is interesting is that the speed test followed the same pattern: it would jump up to about the same speed as the Rt6600, then steadily climb about 100mbps more.
The RT6600 would jump to a little below max, and climb a bit more.

Another thing I probably imagined: the old Synology AC2600 seemed to get faster after a short period after I set it up. My wife even noticed.

I agree that I don't need as much bandwidth as I have available...but it is nice to have.

I also know the radio power is regulated, yet the old Synology seemed to have a little more reach compared to the TP Link (which still isn't bad at all).
So...because I hate myself, I'm going to do some heat mapping to see how they stack up.
My gut still says...Rt6600ax.

Bob

 

[degrub]

buffering

 

[Tech9]

I allowed the Synology to choose the network (5ghz-2) and TP Link was on the 5ghz network.

You have to test with the same channel and channel bandwidth. Keep the Synology for the features set and support.

 

[tgl]

I also know the radio power is regulated, yet the old Synology seemed to have a little more reach compared to the TP Link (which still isn't bad at all).

Could be a matter of one or the other's antenna gain pattern better fitting where your clients happen to be. Nobody builds routers with perfectly isotropic signal in all directions, and there's often an intentional bias in certain directions.

 

[Tech9]

TP-Link Archer AXE75 (also called AXE5400) is one of often recommended models for folks with VR sets and dedicated 6GHz band to gaming. It may not have the best firmware support, but apparently has good compatibility and price/performance ratio. I personally would keep the Synology, but depending on the use case the TP-Link offers own set of desirable features. It may be used as additional Access Point for 6GHz band with Sinology as Router. Up to @Loogster to decide.