SoHo Gigabit Router?

[sechs]

I'm looking for a reasonably priced gigabit router for a client running a home office. He has two desktops and a server which are all have gigabit ethernet, but also a 100base-T wireless AP to attach. Jumbo frames with the ability to split for the slower clients would be a real plus.

What are people's suggestions right now?

 

[Mercutio]

You're probably talking about a premium-grade wireless-N home router to get a small number of gigabit ports. I doubt you'll see jumbo frames support on anything, but since you'll be looking at models that are nice enough to support 1000Mbit LAN ports, they'll have USB storage or print support, a built in torrent client or possibly some VPN support.

Didn't we kind of decide that enabling jumbo frames isn't a huge help with throughput anyway?

 

[ddrueding]

Didn't we kind of decide that enabling jumbo frames isn't a huge help with throughput anyway?

I believe we did. I've always found troubleshooting compatibility issues with it not worth the hassle.

 

[timwhit]

I'm happy with my Ubiquiti Routerstation Pro. It has 4 gigabit ports and can support 3 mPCI wireless NICs as well.

 

[time]

It makes a lot more sense to just buy a separate gigabit switch and a standard router (is this for DSL, cable, or what?).

Unless you live in Sweden and have gigabit internet access.

 

[Sol]

Gigabit switch and basic router would be my suggestion as well, simple to set up, probably gives you slightly better speed than the switch in a router, more ports and less to replace when you switch from cable to DSL or whatever.
My experience with jumbo frames has been similar to everyone else in the thread, too much hassle, not enough benefit.

 

[Howell]

I've been enjoying my Netgear WNDR3700. It does everything you want except jumbo frames, has dual band wireless and support dd-wrt if you need it. And at $130 is inexpensive.

 

[sechs]

Right now he has a separate router and switch. However, the router is getting a bit unreliable, and we're going to replace it. The theory is to reduce the number of devices, since he doesn't need so many ports.

Jumbo frames would be nice, because he needs to burst data from the server for some of his work, but I knew it would be hard to find feature on this level of hardware.

The Netgear sounds like a good option. I'm curious, however, as to why there seems to be such a dearth of basic gigabit routers without wireless.

 

[Sol]

It looks like this product ticks all of your boxes, including jumbo frames (Assuming that's what Up to 580Mbps throughout with larger packets means), and it's a bit cheaper than the Netgear.

http://routerboard.com/pricelist.php?showProduct=90

 

[MaxBurn]

My suggestion from the other thread.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000H97UC0/ref=nosim/9938135-rg2422-00-20?s=merchant

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps9931/index.html

 

[sechs]

Do you have experience with the Cisco router?

 

[sdbardwick]

Maxburn's post reminded me that I installed this Cisco in a 6 computer office at least a couple of years ago. Hasn't given any problems. I haven't needed to use VPN, so I can't say how it performs in that respect.

Whoops. Cisco declared it End of Life as of 1/31/10.

 

[sdbardwick]

Double whoops. Looks like EOL was only for some non-US models.

 

[sechs]

Thanks sdbardwick. That's looking like a good option.

Looks like I have more research to do....

 

[snowhiker]

Looking to pick up a new wireless router with better range and speed. Is there anything new on the wireless router front? I know about -g and -n but is -a and -b the future? I would like four gigabit ports and USB port(s) for a HDD and/or a printer. Price not that important, speed, range, reliability and overall quality are very important.

Heard some positive words on the Netgear 3700/3800/4000 series and the D-link 655/665.

This Asus model looks interesting: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320091

Any recommendations from this selection: http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCate...=145&Tpk=wireless+routers&Order=PRICED&Page=2

Thanks in advance.

 

[LunarMist]

Looking to pick up a new wireless router with better range and speed. Is there anything new on the wireless router front? I know about -g and -n but is -a and -b the future? I would like four gigabit ports and USB port(s) for a HDD and/or a printer. Price not that important, speed, range, reliability and overall quality are very important.

Heard some positive words on the Netgear 3700/3800/4000 series and the D-link 655/665.

This Asus model looks interesting: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320091

Any recommendations from this selection: http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCate...=145&Tpk=wireless+routers&Order=PRICED&Page=2

Thanks in advance.

Uh, I thought a and b were ancient history.

 

[sechs]

Sure, but it's not that much of a stretch to go from G/N to A/B/G/N.

 

[Mercutio]

802.11ac is coming real soon now. Which could be something like 802.11n, where the standardization process took years and years. But it's the next big thing, with 80MHz channels and support for eight antenna configurations.

 

[Will Rickards]

Supposedly the new airport is good. I saw a review from gizmodo. I have the netgear WNDR4500 and like that. Most here I think recommend a more DIY solution though.

 

[Mercutio]

The things I don't like about the Airport Extreme are that it needs a goofy Apple setup program to be configured and their range really isn't all that great. But, yay, you get Airplay (which is, I don't know, something that means things to icap people) and time capsule support, which is kind of like having USB disk support on a router that costs a sane amount of money.

I'd much rather have a traditional web-based setup where I can set options individually, but the Airport's deal has various operating modes that hide options and take settings away, even in the "advanced view." Airports wind up being about as configurable as the average DLink wireless router, which is to say that they don't have the vast wealth of options I'm used to seeing on a Linksys, Netgear, Buffalo or Trendnet device, let alone something like Tomato or OpenWRT.

Oh, and then there's the thing where every once in a while the combination of Apple devices + Apple wireless router = no stable network connection, but just due to the variability of environmental conditions I can't say that's necessarily anyone's fault. I just think it's amusing when it happens.

 

[MaxBurn]

I had to go down to the oldest firmware available on my time capsule to make it compatible with Windows 7 clients accessing the disk. On the newest firmware's it has a problem where it will crash the Wi-Fi network if the windows 7 client is copying a file. If you look at the supported page for the time capsule it doesn't list Windows 7. Now it's fine though, is fast and reliable and works with everything.

I do not like that it does not have a webpage, that's a bit of a hassle. Much less of a hassle now that they released the iOS app so you can configure from your phone.

 

[Mercutio]

Yes. That totally helps everything for everyone who has to configure an Airport. TOTALLY. All we need is a $600 phone or a $300 mp3 player!

We won't mention the habit of Apple's software updater trying to inflict Quicktime and Safari and itunes onto otherwise decent computers.

 

[MaxBurn]

The airport configurator app is available for PC for $0 also.

But anyway;

I think this was mentioned but I was looking at one of these before I fixed my situation. Seems to have some pretty good reviews.
http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-Dual-...TF8&coliid=I21LH53MZCHQUF&colid=25J2MBDWCL1RE

 

[Mercutio]

The airport configurator app is available for PC for $0 also.

Yup. And after you install it, you get prompted to install all of Apple's other software when the Apple updater gets invoked.
Granted that's only a minor annoyance, but when I configure a Netgear box it doesn't try to install 500MB of crap on my PC, either.

 

[MaxBurn]

Yes we all agree a web page would be nice, but I think they didn't do that because that would require people figuring out an ip address and typing that in a browser, troubleshooting why you can't reach the web page etc. All of that is an un apple like experience.

Once you start getting into repeaters and other situations the airport utility becomes far easier than the alternative though when you start having situations like these and you can see the relationship of your network devices and configure them all in one place.

 

[Mercutio]

Yes we all agree a web page would be nice, but I think they didn't do that because that would require people figuring out an ip address and typing that in a browser, troubleshooting why you can't reach the web page etc. All of that is an un apple like experience.

I think I really don't care why they didn't do it. At the very least it should be an option. What the hell are you supposed to do if you have a non-Apple product and no functional connection to the internet to download their client? To me this is just another clear example of Apple doing things the wrong way.

 

[LunarMist]

I think I really don't care why they didn't do it. At the very least it should be an option. What the hell are you supposed to do if you have a non-Apple product and no functional connection to the internet to download their client? To me this is just another clear example of Apple doing things the wrong way.

What are you expecting from consumer goods marketed mainly to the masses? They want diagrams and pictures.

 

[MaxBurn]

I think I really don't care why they didn't do it. At the very least it should be an option. What the hell are you supposed to do if you have a non-Apple product and no functional connection to the internet to download their client? To me this is just another clear example of Apple doing things the wrong way.

Just plug the router in and connect to the open network, their default configuration allows for this out-of-the-box.

 

[Mercutio]

What are you expecting from consumer goods marketed mainly to the masses? They want diagrams and pictures.

For the most part, people just plug the stupid things in and assume they're working but have none of you ever had to deal with a DSL connection that required a PPP login before it would start? That's not really uncommon.

 

[MaxBurn]

I had one of those PPP things back in 2001 but the one I had up until last year didn't. Think all that sort of thing is inside the DSL modems now, no one really expects people to run a connection client on their computer for DSL these days.

Anyway we understand that there are some options that are off the table for you but I prefer to be a little more broad minded even if I'm not exactly thinking different.

 

[Mercutio]

This is basic functionality we're talking about. Maybe not on the same level as, say, not supporting DHCP, but that crap is standard for everybody else for a really, really good reason.

 

[MaxBurn]

I still think it's a good idea to skip the Linksys and D-Link products.

[H]ardOCP.com (@hardocp)
6/30/12 12:26 PM
Linksys Firmware Upgrade for Wi-Fi Routers Angers Users: Cisco is coming under fire this week for updating route... bit.ly/MIAs3B

http://m.hardocp.com/news/2012/06/30/linksys_firmware_upgrade_for_wifi_routers_angers_users/

 

[MaxBurn]

Well It got a mention on Boing Boing at least.

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...tory-monetized-and-killed-at-their-discretion

When owners of the E2700, E3500, or E4500 attempted to log in to their devices, they were asked to login/register using their “Cisco Connect Cloud” account information.

 

[Mercutio]

I'm only slightly bothered by the mandatory update deal. I think that's functionality that a lot of people would expect to be present. After all, it's more or less what their computers and phones do already. Knowing that they work that way, I wouldn't buy one for myself, but I'm not sure I would hesitate to buy one for someone else, especially if I knew the person would never in a zillion years try to log in and update their device on their own.

The great advantages Linksys has had over time has been better-than-average range even on less expensive products and near-ubiquity in retail. Neither of those qualities has changed.

 

[snowhiker]

My new router tripled my internet download speed.

My new router tripled my internet download speed. Seriously!

Old cable modem: Scientific Atlanta Webstar DPC2100 series purchased early 2006.
Old router: Netgear WGT624v3 purchased in 2007.

New modem: Motorola Surfboard SB6121.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16825122015
New router: ASUS RT-N66U.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833320091

1) Current internet provider Cox Cable in AZ. Premier w/Powerboost plan. 22/5 Mbps up/down $64.99/month**.
2) Using all the various speed test sites listed below my download speed was between 6-12 Mbps. In fact on half of the test sites my upload speed was faster than my download speed.
3) Installed new modem but kept old router and tested again. Same result, no increase in speed.
4) Installed new router with new modem and BAM! my download speeds are way up.

Super happy. I'm sure "powerboost" artificially bumps up the numbers on such short tests but the raw download Mbps numbers are 1.5-3x faster.


What's your bandwidth looking like this July 2012?


**Only one choice of ISP with speeds over 3-5 Mbps so I get to pay through the roof.

Various speed test sites and my speeds below. Tested 2:30am local time:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My internet provider - Cox Cable (must be logged into acct to use their speed test)

32.23 Mbps down
27.04 Mbps up
25 ms ping

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://speedtest.comcast.net/

32.68 Mbps down
12.60 Mbps up
36 ms ping

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/

16.77 Mbps down
14.20 Mbps up

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.speedtest.net/

38.69 Mbps down
17.13 Mbps up
29 ms ping

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.bandwidthplace.com/

32.44 mbps down
22.21 mbps up

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://sunnyvale.speedtest.qwest.net/
31.0 Mbps down
7.17 Mbps up

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.att.com/speedtest/

16.18 Mbps down
8.36 Mbps up

 

[LunarMist]

If mine is not one of those, can I use it safely?

 

[ddrueding]

I suspect that Comcast is throttling my link constantly due to torrent traffic. At the moment I'm at 1.8MB/s down and 0.5MB/s up, but that is sustained for days at a time.

 

[MaxBurn]

I suspect that Comcast is throttling my link constantly due to torrent traffic. At the moment I'm at 1.8MB/s down and 0.5MB/s up, but that is sustained for days at a time.

Comcast stopped the bandwidth penalty recently and is trying a new 300gb cap out, but not enforcing it yet. If you are under that or even the old 250gb cap I'd call to get it fixed.


I'm thinking about upgrading my cable modem, it's an older docsys 2 model and the speed grade I have is right on the end of what that modem is capable of. Whenever I test it I am getting my rated speeds so that's happy enough. Does Comcast still burst some things over your rated speeds? If they did I would replace it.

 

[LunarMist]

Does anyone have experience powering the modem and router on batteries? Does the voltage in need to be well regukted, e.g., ±5%? Wang to be able to withstand 24hours power blackouts and the UPSTATE is inefficient at such low loads.

 

[MaxBurn]

All my it gear is on UPS. They seem quite tolerant of any voltage or frequency slew, if you read the power bricks they come wih they have a very wide input range, most only needing a different plus to switch to euro 220v/50hz. Heck, some of it even runs for a second after unplugging it.