Wireless Router advise

[racinrabbit]

So I'm looking to upgrade my out dated Linksys WRT54G wireless router. I have been looking at some of the new Cisco models (E2000, E3000) and D-Link (DIR-601) but have been noticing a trend with dropped connections and necessary reboots to restore all wifi connections. You guys have any advice as what to get? I'm looking to stick under $150 if possible.

 

[Chris@RT]

I have 2 netgear wnr3500(s) for my wireless access points on either end of my house running factory firmware

And 1 netgear wnr3500L running tomato firmware as my main router between my modem and 24port switch (the wnr3500(s) are run through the switch)

I am not impressed with the range on the wnr3500(s) however they are the most reliable routers I have ever used or dealt with personally. They are no longer made and were a single band wireless N, it was replaced with the wnr3700 which is a dual band and changed over to the smaller wnr3500L (that I used wired only) as the single band.

I have only been using the wnr3500L for a few months but other then me messing up and locking it doing a firmware update it has been just as reliable as the older non L versions, but I have no experience with it and using wireless.

A coworker replaced his wnr3500 (bought his as my second one) with a wnr3700 since he wanted dual band and said the range is fantastic, but I am skeptical based on my experience with the 3500s which use a similar internal antenna.

Edit: I think the wnr3700 is just at or over your budget of 150, the wnr3500L is well under.

 

[nhbubba]

I have an almost all Asus network, and I'm very happy with it.

I have an Asus RT-N13U connected to my cable service. This is my primary home router, DHCP and DNS server, and primary wifi access-point.

One of the 100MbE client ports is connected to an 8-port GbE switch, which powers my wired home network.

Upstairs in my 'man-cave' I have an Asus RT-N16. It serves as a secondary wifi AP and a switch with routing, DHCP and DNS services turned off. It lets me connect my xbox, ps3, and DNLA ready receiver to my wired net, and lets me use wifi toys upstairs.

The N13U's range is not stellar, hence the need for the N16 upstairs. However the N16 features a 4-port GbE switch, so it also lets me connect all my wired toys.

The -N16 would be my pick if I were buying new right now. I got the N13U for wicked cheap after rebate. Selling price was what sold me on that one. The -N16 was cheap too ($90), although not as cheap. I think I got the N13U for like $40 AR.

Both routers run DD-WRT. Compatibility with the open source router software is a requirement in my opinion. I won't buy a router that can't run DD-WRT.

I am not picky about wifi speeds, so I can't comment there. Wifi works acceptably well though.

Additionally I have a WL-520GU I bought as a science project running OpenWRT. I've never really used it as a router, but it was wicked cheap and is highly hackable. I think I paid $30 AR for the thing.

 

[racinrabbit]

Thanks for the info guys. I think i'm going to look into the Netgear wnr3500L. Initial research seems to give pretty good marks and for under $100 bucks its not a bad deal.

 

[supaflip]

note, to fully use the router, hope u have a N wireless adapter and have a gigabit ethernet on whatever device u have.

right now i'm using d-link xtreme. gone 2 wireless routers and finally picked the d-link. basically i bought 3 wireless all at the same and tested each connections.
they were:
linksys - e3000 - couple connection drops within 20 feet
Netgear - n600 - fewer connection drops within 20ft compare to the linkysys
d-link xtreme - i actually have a full bar within 20ft

but really update ur wireless adapters too, pairing them to the same brand helps.

 

[nhbubba]

note, to fully use the router, hope u have a N wireless adapter and have a gigabit ethernet on whatever device u have.

This depends, and is probably worth mentioning: it depends on what you want the router for.

If you're using the router as an access-point for getting to your broad-band connection, it may or may not matter. The average consumer broad-band uplink speeds are still well, well under 100Mbps. So GbE and 802.11n are not necessarily required for this application. A far cheaper 100Mbps/802.11g router is probably perfectly serviceable.

Meanwhile if you are streaming video across your LAN between multiple machines within your home, say from a media server to a set-top box or something, now this becomes an issue.

I wonder how many people in the US are using their 1GbE/802.11n uber-high-speed equipment to get to their 3-5Mbps broadband service.

 

[Chris@RT]

http://www.metageek.net/products/inssider/

awesome for testing signals

My old house was about 1/4 mile straight line to a mcdonalds and that would show their wifi connection at what in theory would have been like a 50% signal strength but still not enough to show in available connections. Drove home from the office with it on.. 2ish mile drive and had a few hundred showing.

There are lots of connections your card is in theory picking up but is not detecting in your OS due to signal strength.

This works great to walk around with your laptop and find out where walls are killing a signal etc.

For example at my old house to keep the lights from annoying me i had a single wnr3500 behind my htpc since hte modem was also there. With the laptop sitting 6ft way roughly moving it up onto the tv stand but still behind the TV changed the strength by about 10db.. which is HUGE.

 

[Cryptic1911]

I just found this last night.. shows comparisons and max throughput for all kinds of wifi routers

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_chart/Itemid,189/

 

[Chris@RT]

I just found this last night.. shows comparisons and max throughput for all kinds of wifi routers

http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/component/option,com_chart/Itemid,189/

I used that when deciding on what main router I was going to use but I think that just makes you stress over stuf you don't need to worry about.

Overall throughput is important especially if you have a higher tier service for able or most fiber but comparing some real world stuff i have seen to their charts made no sense.

I've got a cheap B/G wireless router that according them should barely be able to handle the through put of DSL but tests just as high as my wnr3500l, both maxing out my service.

Not that I spent more money in the end but i really wanted just a wired router for my firewall and handing the IP addresses but everyone tests crap compared to most wireless ones. Partially because people are focusing on wireless routers not wired right now but enough to the point that i think the tests aren't as accurate as they could be. Basically you can get a wireless router for 50 bucks with enough throughput to handle even a top tier fiber connection but you'd have to spend close to a grand to get a wired router that can only do half?

Throughput is important but to get the most of your service but their tests didn't reflect real world for me. Many have gigabit wan ports but would barely touch half a 100bit port would do in these tests. If the through put is truely limited why is the port rated for gigabit on the wan?

 

[melancholygypsy]

I would stay away from Cisco for gaming, I had nothing but trouble with their routers and the NAT settings and UpNp for multiple xbox's and other gaming systems.

I've had a D-Link DGL-4500 and love it. Never have had a problem with it, And I run 3 xbox's in different rooms at the same time. 1 hardwired and 2 wireless. No resets or anything but thats just my 2 cents