Router recommendations

[bobdole369]

OK after using Netgear enterprise switches and a router or two I was comfortable recommending their home products for my sister and mom. Both devices have the same issue. One is a WNR2000, the other WGR614. That is RIDICULOUSLY slow internetz and router web interface via wireless. One client is a new HP notebook, the other a new Dell (studio 17) notebook.

(Dell -> WNR2000)
(HP ->WGR614)

After a couple hours on the phone last night the fine folks in Hyderabad wanted to escalate to a senior tech, we said screw it.

Working on the wire from both PC's the internet and router web interface is lightning fast, the instant we switch to wireless its dog slow. Like with the WNR2000 its throughput is 2-4kb/sec. Most web pages do not load. The WGR614 is also slow, but actually usable throughput on that one is about 40kb/sec.

Pretty crappy for some N devices yes?

SO with the WNR2000 we decided to fix it by returning the device and finding another. Not an option for the WGR614, but it works well enough for now.

Down to my question - What wireless device to recommend for your non-tech mom or grandma? I want something quick to set up that just plain works. No issues, no weirdness, just plug and play and have it keep playing.

 

[xSauronx]

Buffalo WHR-HP-G54

Ive had a couple running at home now for over a year without any problems. Granted, I use 3rd party firmware, but I like to tinker for the hell of it, the stock firmware was reliable.

 

[kevnich2]

Netgear home products and Netgear business products are in a different league. Every company is like this though, they could have one series of products that works great and another set that work like garbage. For SOHO type things, the WHR-HP-G54 is a very good choice and works like it's supposed to.

 

[racolvin]

I've been using D-Link stuff for years now and never had any issues with them.

 

[xgsound]

I've had a Buffalo for several years now and I'm glad to see they're available in the states again.


Jim

 

[JackMDS]

Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 - http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16833162134

Very Good with Stock Firmware or DD-WRT

Asus WL-520GU - http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16833320023

Very Good with DD-WRT, less expnsive but also less powerfull wireless transmission.

If you need more features Flash it with DD-WRT ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DD-WRT ).

http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/ind...tallation#Asus_WL520GU

If needed.

Qos, http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Quality_of_Service

Bridge Configuration, http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wireless_Bridge

-----------------------------

As an indirect side Note.

None of the Entry Level Router stand well very heavy P2P downloads. :shocked: - :brokenheart: -

Taking into consideration the big saving on "Questionable Downloads" One can spend few hundereds $$ on a "real" Router. :thumbsup:

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

linksys wrt 54g

 

[BriGy86]

I'm happy with my Linksys WRT54G. It has numerous options like WPA2 with AES encryption and even home, enterprise and RADIUS options. The signal strength on them is pretty good and the antennas can be swapped out for larger ones.

I've dealt with Netgear and D-Link in the past and find Linksys to be better.

I haven't used other brands like buffalo or Asus though.

 

[JackMDS]

The Wireless Radio of the Buffalo is superior to the Linksys WRT54G.

The Asus can stand load better than the WRT54G.

The WRT54G has nothing to offer better than the other two besides the fact that its' vendor (Linksys) spend more money on Marketing and thus created a more recognized Brand name.

 

[BriGy86]

Originally posted by: JackMDS
The Wireless Radio of the Buffalo is superior to the Linksys WRT54G.

The Asus can stand load better than the WRT54G.

The WRT54G has nothing to offer better than the other two besides the fact that its' vendor (Linksys) spend more money on Marketing and thus created a more recognized Brand name.

I just did a quick search and it seems the Buffalo is the most expensive of the 3 and the Asus is the cheapest at 44.99 on newegg.

all the prices fall within about 20 bucks though

 

[JackMDS]

Price is always a consideration, but I m talking here about Technical capacity of Network components.

Thus out of these three.

Number one is the Buffallo.

Number two is the Asus.

Number three is the Linksys.

 

[Blayze]

I've been very happy using a Linksys WRT54GL with Tomato firmware.

 

[greenbean]

Buffalo WHR-HP-G54 with DD-WRT firmware just keeps on going; nothing better for the money.

I tried the WGR614 for a few days and it was a headache from the get-go; so I know where you're comin from.

 

[bobdole369]

Thanks for all the tips folks. Mom's old fashioned and we went with something we could purchase at the store. I've got a personal vendetta against Linksys or any of its incarnations - so that one was out. D-Link DIR-628 ended up working just fine for her. Fast easy internetz - we'll see in another week what kind of trouble she gets into.

I'm switching out my office for the buffalos and putting on dd-wrt in the near term.

 

[Absolution75]

I can't believe anyone would recommend a router with 100mbit ports. Gigabit has been out for years and is obviously superior.

 

[greenbean]

I can't believe anyone would recommend a router with 100mbit ports. Gigabit has been out for years and is obviously superior.

You're *obviously* of superior intelligence to everyone else here...great reply.

 

[JackMDS]

Originally posted by: greenbean

I can't believe anyone would recommend a router with 100mbit ports. Gigabit has been out for years and is obviously superior.

You're *obviously* of superior intelligence to everyone else here...great reply.

Yeah you are absolutely right. If technology is an affair governed by Historical event and performance does Not matter.

I guess that there are hundreds of marketing people that sit in their offices and are obsessed with how to give the Users first grade Hardware highly performing hardware for little cost.
And if they lose money on it? What the hack it is all to benefit Humanity.

The idea of combos is centered around providing comfortable situation to users without losing money.

The combo Wire Router and Wireless for their price is tolerable, though the Wireless in the Combo Wire Wireless devices is usually inferior to the quality and capacity of Access Points, most End Users can live with it because they do not need the extras that are provided by Access Points.

That is different with the current Routers (and there is very few of them) that have Giga switch inside. The compromise is to provide it as a combo is by using Mediocre and bellow Switch.

Thus Stand alone Giga switch is usually performs better.

 

[kevnich2]

Originally posted by: Absolution75
I can't believe anyone would recommend a router with 100mbit ports. Gigabit has been out for years and is obviously superior.

Um, no not really. Where the heck did you get this from? If you need gigabit, just get another 4, 8 or higher port gigE switch and put your computers on that and then hook the switch to the router. You need a decent, reliable router that doesn't need to be power cycled frequently and the WHR-HP-G54 is definitely one of these.

 

[bobdole369]

I'm switching out my office for the buffalos and putting on dd-wrt in the near term.

Happening this week.

Most folks don't really *NEED* gigabit. 100mb is plenty fast for a pc or 2 on the web. My office of a dozen folks doesn't really *need* gigabit either - we don't normally saturate 100mbits even with file sharing. Most of our stuff is database and web page access.

 

[Absolution75]

I can't imagine people would saturate a gigabit line constantly, but my post was directed towards the fact that when transferring large files across the network, gigabit will be noticeably faster. I can't count how many times I've transferred steam's game files across the network to people who have recently bought said game(s). 4GB of TF2's files will take seconds rather than minutes.

Maybe I just transfer files across the network more than average. . . I do agree having a stable network is the number one priority, but you don't really pay a premium for gigabit enabled routers anymore.

I recommend a D-Link 4300 to basically anyone. I've literally never had connection problems with it, no disconnects in games, port forwarding/triggering actually works. No bizarre ethernet problems with speed negotiation. It even has QOS on upstream.

Connection Up Time : 63 day(s), 10:57:16 - This would probably be higher; I'd have to guess there was a short power outage at my house or my cable company did a modem firmware upgrade.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: bobdole369
Most folks don't really *NEED* gigabit. 100mb is plenty fast for a pc or 2 on the web.

Most folks don't really *NEED* 100 Mb/s. 10 Mb/s is plenty fast for a pc or 2 on the web.

10 Mb/s isn't yet a bottleneck for the vast majority of Internet connections.

100 Mb/s became common because it became cheap and gave some benefit for local transfers, not because it was needed to keep up with typical Internet access speed of the day. Similar reasons apply for adoption of gigabit over 100 Mb/s.

 

[JackMDS]

Fascinating cultural phenomenon, in most cases in the past people did not like combo gad jet.

Yet in Routers that are actually three different devices. Routing circuits Switch, and Access Point they are looking for everything in one plastic box.

Everything in one plastic box is compromising on everything. Thus far, None of the Giga Switches in the Routers that offers it is a ?shiny technological beacon?, and the price does not justify it either.

In other words, need Giga Network get a Giga Switch and leave the poor Router alone.

 

[kevnich2]

Originally posted by: Absolution75
I can't imagine people would saturate a gigabit line constantly, but my post was directed towards the fact that when transferring large files across the network, gigabit will be noticeably faster. I can't count how many times I've transferred steam's game files across the network to people who have recently bought said game(s). 4GB of TF2's files will take seconds rather than minutes.

Maybe I just transfer files across the network more than average. . . I do agree having a stable network is the number one priority, but you don't really pay a premium for gigabit enabled routers anymore.

I recommend a D-Link 4300 to basically anyone. I've literally never had connection problems with it, no disconnects in games, port forwarding/triggering actually works. No bizarre ethernet problems with speed negotiation. It even has QOS on upstream.

Connection Up Time : 63 day(s), 10:57:16 - This would probably be higher; I'd have to guess there was a short power outage at my house or my cable company did a modem firmware upgrade.

Best option then would be a WHR-HP-G54 attached to a large GigE switch that is used for all the computers. This is what I personally use as I do a lot of large file transfers. Even with a router with built in gigabit, the built in switch isn't as good as ones I can find that are separate. Yes you don't have an all in one box but you get ALOT better performance. I'd take performance over having multiple devices any day.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: kevnich2
Even with a router with built in gigabit, the built in switch isn't as good as ones I can find that are separate. Yes you don't have an all in one box but you get ALOT better performance.

File transfer performance is a lot more complicated than the selection of the switch or even the NIC. People tend to jump to the conclusion that the network is at fault when they don't get fast file transfer performance, and then go on to building a mythology of this switch / NIC verses that, sometimes even claiming that you need enterprise gear to get decent performance, etc.

But file transfer performance is a lot more complicated than that, and a common finding is that the choice of switch does not often make a material difference, or at least that dirt cheap ones and ones built into routers are also demonstrably very fast in some cases.

I personally have measured many different configurations and switches, and have looked at many of these folklore assertions about file transfer performance, and have found them wanting. In other words, I don't buy the myth that a switch built into a router is necessarily or materially inferior to a standalone one, and have my own measurements to back that up.

Despite that, I actually agree that a separate switch is often desirable -- for greater layout convenience, easier jumbo frame support, higher number of ports, and also greater choice in the selection of routers.

 

[spidey07]

As far as gigabit switch performance there should be no real difference (well, buffers and queueing could change performance). They are all just on a single chip anyway.