Looking for a router with a novelty – it has to work

[ivan747]

You wouldn't have a Lenovo laptop would you ? i'm battling a similar problem . The wifi conks out every few hours or so. All the Lenovo's in the office are plagued by this ( they are different models ) . The HP and Dells have no problem though ...

Do all those Lenovos have Atheros wifi in them?

Lenovo never, ever, ever ever ever ever update their drivers.. and the ones they ship are broken.

This is on both my main PC and my laptop which is a zoo storm.

*shudder*

Frankly, if you're having problems using PLC, the problem is not wifi. It may be the router, but it's probably typical BT quality at work.

Realtek USB crap.

[ivan747]

If you have to compete with lots of other users on the band then maybe you should look for a higher power router.
Something that outputs 200mW instead of the usual 60mW

The laptop will still transmit at low power, and you're not suggesting improvements in the antennas, so it won't do much good.

I'd start switching to 5GHz, specially if you don't use concrete walls.

[Marco]

As to Lenovo, the wireless performance can best be described as shyte, my one is always either connected via a cable, or I tether the phone to it and use that. Made no difference using the original Win7 drivers, or the ones that Debian uses for the chipset, it just is poor.

I doubt it has much to do with Lenovo's design, the modules and the way they are mounted in a laptop is pretty standardized. You have to try hard to screw that up.

If you have a Centrino N-2230 throw it at an Intel engineer and just get something else (I got this one).

[eas]

If you have to compete with lots of other users on the band then maybe you should look for a higher power router.
Something that outputs 200mW instead of the usual 60mW

We are not allowed such high transmit power levels.

Which is good, because it is one of the most foolish things you can do to try to "solve" interference with other nearby WiFi access points. Doing so pretty much ensures that your neighbors will try to escalate. Some of them may do it with a hack to override firmware limits, which is likely to lead to a louder more distorted signal. Whatever they do, any advantage one gains will be short lived.

If negotiating with neighbors around a better channel allocation is impossible or undesirable, then getting a working 5GHz solution is a much better route. Their are fewer 5GHz devices, more bandwidth/channels available (in the US, at least), and because the range is somewhat lower, less chance of interference from nearby APs.

Beyond that, putting your AP on the same channel as other APs in the area can actually be more reliable, because in that situation, the competing APs should actually listen for one another and avoid transmitting over eachother, whereas picking a different (but overlapping channel) will just lead to bandwidth killing interference.

As for what router. I've been using a now obsolete Netgear WNDR3800 (same basic hardware as the WNDR3700) running OpernWRT for years and it has worked well. One of the nice things about OpenWRT is that it implements proper QoS techniques for the broadband connection. You do have to configure it with the right upstream rate, but once you've done so, it provides consistent, low, ping times even when a big upload is running.

I have a TPLink Archer C7 running OpenWRT yet that I haven't deployed yet. What model TP-Link router do you have? You might try running OpenWRT on it if it is compatible.

If I were going to buy something that I wanted confidence would work without a lot of tinkering, I'd probably get an Apple AirPort Extreme or Express. We are a mostly Apple house though, but compatibility with other devices should be quite good. You can probably find a refurb in your price range.

[eas]

Increasing power at the router is not reciprocal.

Just like there's an increased density of cellphone sites in higher demand urban locations, increasing your own AP density will help to combat interference from other co-channel APs which are raising you local noise floor.

Yup, though if they are on the same channel, rather than just an overlapping channel, they will try to practice collision detection/avoidance. This mitigates the loss of bandwidth due to rising noise floor, at the expense of adding another source of latency. It also has its limited, since the transmitter may not be able to "hear" another transmitter closer to the intended receiver.

[Simon]

Have you looked at the WiFi channels with an analyser to see if they are indeed all occupied? You can get a smartphone app that will do this for you.

Yes I've looked with issider

[dexters_lab]

i have used DD-WRT flashed onto Linksys routers for over 10 years, they never need rebooting. When my internet craps out it's always the virgin media supplied modem (well actually virgin superhub running in modem mode).

currently using a linksys E2000 with DD-WRT on it

note that most of the supported dd-wrt devices are only routers, so if your on DSL you will probably need a modem as well

[tooki]

Another strong vote here for Apple AirPort Extreme. They're not cheap, but they are reliable. They don't have every conceivable advanced setting, but they are reliable. They use an annoying native app (Mac/Win/iOS) for configuration, but they are reliable. They have very good wireless performance, and they are reliable. See a pattern here?

After having nothing but problems with D-Link, Netgear, and Linksys (both stock firmware and DD-WRT), I threw in the towel and switched to Apple wireless gear, and it's been smooth sailing.

Also, if you use Macs, the AirPort devices have a neat feature: Bonjour Sleep Proxy, which let's your Macs' server services stay online even after the machine goes to sleep, and just wakes it on demand when you try to connect. Very clever power saving feature.

If you're not willing to go with bona fide enterprise wifi gear (like the uni-fy mentioned before), then go with Apple.

[macboy]

I use a Linksys/Cisco E2000 as my router and a WiFi access point. It is in 5 GHz mode (it's dual band but not simultaneous). It works well and I basically never need to reboot it. I may have rebooted it six months ago. I can't remember. I use its QOS to give high priority to my devices that use netflix so that streaming is good quality even when some other device is downloading. In two other rooms, I have routers set up as wireless access points connected to ethernet. You can use any wireless router as a basic wireless access point ... all that you need to do is assign them a static LAN side IP, turn off the DHCP, configure wireless, and plug a LAN port into Ethernet. The WAN port is not used (unless it has a bridge mode which is very uncommon). I have them all set to the same SSID/key so that roaming between them is automatic. I have no dead spots and get good performance. I only use my WiFi for handheld devices and a laptop or two. Everything critical is on a GbE wired network. I was fortunate that when my house was built they used Cat-5e for all the phone drops around the house, each coming back to a central point in the basement. All I needed to do is pull the faceplates off and install a RJ-45 jack, crimp some RJ-45s to the cables in the basement, and voila: house-wide GbE network.

Like almost everyone, I suffered from cluttered 2.4 GHz airspace. I could see 30+ networks scattered around all the channels. There was no 'free' spectrum to use and WiFi performance was terrible. I switched to 5 GHz years ago, and promptly discovered that I needed to use the lower-range frequencies of ~5.2 GHz not the ~5.8 Ghz ones as my ten-handset cordless phone system uses a wide swath of 5.8 GHz air  . Everything works great now.

Very recently, I scanned the 2.4 GHz band and discovered to my great surprise that all 30+ networks are on channels 1, 6, or 11. Not a single rogue. This is amazing, it means that the 2.4 Ghz band might actually be usable for once, as there will be no interference from networks on adjacent channels - everything should, in theory, share the airtime relatively well.

[NiHaoMike]

Maybe try putting as many stationary devices on wired/Homeplug/wifi over coax as you can?

[bingo600]

Stay way from the following brands, no exceptions
TP-LINK

I don't agree with all TP-Links being bad.

My 4300 (dualband) ia behaving quite nice on both bands.
The 2.4Ghz is a little weaker than my old WRT54G , but still quite ok.

/Bingo

[lukaq]

have a look at Mikrotik routers, or somewhere to run their RouterOS...or PfSense..
 
as far as most standard routers go, some work, some don't, really hit or miss.. no matter if it is brand name or not, really depends on model and your environment

[kaz911]

I have a bunch of routers...

1. Mikrotik - great routers - if you have a routing protocol degree. I used them a lot in the middle east to set up segmented VPN access to circumvent local blacking rules.  (ip x.x.x.1 - x.x.x.125 -> local) anything else via VPN.

But for " normal " home use - stay away - lots of bugs - lack of release procedures means MikroTik fixes a bug - and then quite likely re-introduce it later on again and again and again. Don't update firmware on release but wait at LEAST 4 weeks and keep an eye on the forum...

2. Ubiquity Unify - UAP Pro - GREAT - anything 802.11ac - absolutely terrible coverage and they often " don't " tell the truth in the spec sheets. My 802.11ac (UAP AC) are limited to 22dB at 5GHz despite spec sheet promise 28 dB - and that is not due to local restrictions but due to overheating issues. Similar issues on the 2.4 GHz band but not as bad (you get 2dB more - but that is a problem as 2.4GHz has longer range than 5 GHz so chances of getting high speed 802.11ac diminish very quickly with distance) - Control software with v4.4 has also become very bloated as they are trying to implement VoIP, Switching, Video surveillance and router control in ONE package.

Best 802.11AC access point I have found - Apple.. Best signal availability  - great 802.11ac support - fast - and not obtrusive - and no need for a degree in routers to set it up.

[coppice]

2. Ubiquity Unify - UAP Pro - GREAT - anything 802.11ac - absolutely terrible coverage and they often " don't " tell the truth in the spec sheets. My 802.11ac (UAP AC) are limited to 22dB at 5GHz despite spec sheet promise 28 dB - and that is not due to local restrictions but due to overheating issues. Similar issues on the 2.4 GHz band but not as bad (you get 2dB more - but that is a problem as 2.4GHz has longer range than 5 GHz so chances of getting high speed 802.11ac diminish very quickly with distance) - Control software with v4.4 has also become very bloated as they are trying to implement VoIP, Switching, Video surveillance and router control in ONE package.

You said anything 802.11ac? Does that include the new and cheaper ones they recently introduced - the UniFi AP AC-Lite, UniFi AP AC LR and UniFi AP AC Pro? I'm really interested in how these might perform in a large new house with a whole lot of steel in its concrete frame.

[tooki]

You said anything 802.11ac? Does that include the new and cheaper ones they recently introduced - the UniFi AP AC-Lite, UniFi AP AC LR and UniFi AP AC Pro? I'm really interested in how these might perform in a large new house with a whole lot of steel in its concrete frame.

I haven't upgraded to AC yet (I'm on dual-band N), but reinforced concrete is a nightmare for Wi-Fi. I have a 60m2 apartment and to get adequate Wi-Fi, I need two routers, so I have gigabit Ethernet running through the walls. (Devices with really good Wi-Fi reception did OK with just one, but poorer receivers simply didn't get a good connection.)

Of course, it also depends on what the Wi-Fi landscape around there is. This is an urban apartment, so there are tons and tons of competing 2.4GHz networks congesting the space. 5GHz is pretty much entirely vacant, but it simply won't penetrate concrete enough.

[Psi]

If you have to compete with lots of other users on the band then maybe you should look for a higher power router.
Something that outputs 200mW instead of the usual 60mW

We are not allowed such high transmit power levels.

Which is good, because it is one of the most foolish things you can do to try to "solve" interference with other nearby WiFi access points. Doing so pretty much ensures that your neighbors will try to escalate. Some of them may do it with a hack to override firmware limits, which is likely to lead to a louder more distorted signal. Whatever they do, any advantage one gains will be short lived.

That's what the china 2W active WiFi antenna amps are for.  M.A.D
 


But seriously, a 200mW AP is not excessively high power.
When access points first appeared for sale they were all in the 100-200mW range. All the cheap multifunction consumer router+AP devices that appeared later set the standard of ~60mW.

[tooki]

But seriously, a 200mW AP is not excessively high power.
When access points first appeared for sale they were all in the 100-200mW range. All the cheap multifunction consumer router+AP devices that appeared later set the standard of ~60mW.

60mW?!? That's nothing! The Apple ones I have (5th gen AirPort Extreme) transmit at 257-392mW, depending on band/mode.

[Marco]

In Europe putting even 100 mW into a >0 dBi antenna is illegal AFAIK (directionality doesn't allow you to increase EIRP, so legally high dBi antennas are useless except for saving some power).

[madires]

In Europe putting even 100 mW into a >0 dBi antenna is illegal AFAIK (directionality doesn't allow you to increase EIRP, so legally high dBi antennas are useless except for saving some power).

There are some special rules for the 5GHz band in the EU:
- channels 35-64, indoor usage: max 200mW
- channels 100-140, DFS & TPC: max 1000mW
- channels 155-171, requires registration: max 4W (might be Germany only)

A directional antenna is NOT useless, since it supresses signals from other directions and has a higher receive gain too. And turning down the output power of your WLAN in combination with a high gain antenna has another positive impact. The RF amp creates less noise while the high gain antenna doesn't increase the noise. So you get a better S/N ratio.

[kaz911]

2. Ubiquity Unify - UAP Pro - GREAT - anything 802.11ac - absolutely terrible coverage and they often " don't " tell the truth in the spec sheets. My 802.11ac (UAP AC) are limited to 22dB at 5GHz despite spec sheet promise 28 dB - and that is not due to local restrictions but due to overheating issues. Similar issues on the 2.4 GHz band but not as bad (you get 2dB more - but that is a problem as 2.4GHz has longer range than 5 GHz so chances of getting high speed 802.11ac diminish very quickly with distance) - Control software with v4.4 has also become very bloated as they are trying to implement VoIP, Switching, Video surveillance and router control in ONE package.

You said anything 802.11ac? Does that include the new and cheaper ones they recently introduced - the UniFi AP AC-Lite, UniFi AP AC LR and UniFi AP AC Pro? I'm really interested in how these might perform in a large new house with a whole lot of steel in its concrete frame.

All the new ones are lower speck - at least on paper vs paper. I would wait. They are too new and possibly far to many firmware bugs. UBNT excels in firmware bugs like Mikrotik.

Actually my Apple AC AP puts out about 28 dBm at 5 GHz and so far have the best range.

[kaz911]

2. Ubiquity Unify - UAP Pro - GREAT - anything 802.11ac - absolutely terrible coverage and they often " don't " tell the truth in the spec sheets. My 802.11ac (UAP AC) are limited to 22dB at 5GHz despite spec sheet promise 28 dB - and that is not due to local restrictions but due to overheating issues. Similar issues on the 2.4 GHz band but not as bad (you get 2dB more - but that is a problem as 2.4GHz has longer range than 5 GHz so chances of getting high speed 802.11ac diminish very quickly with distance) - Control software with v4.4 has also become very bloated as they are trying to implement VoIP, Switching, Video surveillance and router control in ONE package.

You said anything 802.11ac? Does that include the new and cheaper ones they recently introduced - the UniFi AP AC-Lite, UniFi AP AC LR and UniFi AP AC Pro? I'm really interested in how these might perform in a large new house with a whole lot of steel in its concrete frame.

btw for 802.11ac current version - estimate to use about 4 times as many AP's as for 802.11n on 2.4 GHz.

But then you run in to the absolute limited available number of transmission channels to work around interference. If you want the 1300 Mbps - then each " channel " uses total of 4 bundled channels to archive it. That means usually you will only have 1 to 2 channels in total available for 802.11 AC 1300 - if you don't want any overlap. 802.11ac is a jungle with plenty of wrong spec sheets and lots of things " not said or mentioned " like lack of DFS support in UBNT units - which takes out about 1/2 the available channels. DFS is something many does not support. DFS is " weather radar protection " they claim



If you want rock solid - then Unify UAP Pro is great - good range - great output - up to REAL 28 dBm.

[neslekkim]

1. Mikrotik - great routers - if you have a routing protocol degree. I used them a lot in the middle east to set up segmented VPN access to circumvent local blacking rules.  (ip x.x.x.1 - x.x.x.125 -> local) anything else via VPN.

But for " normal " home use - stay away - lots of bugs - lack of release procedures means MikroTik fixes a bug - and then quite likely re-introduce it later on again and again and again. Don't update firmware on release but wait at LEAST 4 weeks and keep an eye on the forum...

So the mikrotiks are still difficult?, I used mikrotik software on an old computer for many years ago, but dropped it because it was kinda difficult to change configurations, reminded me about the old cisco routers.
I wanted to buy an mikrotik now, to replace my linksys (somehow my android doen't like my current wifi router anymore after upgrading to android 5.. ), and use mikrotik rb2011uias-rm or something similar to that, together with an unifi ac pro wifi accesspoint...
Seems like my plans have to change

[kaz911]

1. Mikrotik - great routers - if you have a routing protocol degree. I used them a lot in the middle east to set up segmented VPN access to circumvent local blacking rules.  (ip x.x.x.1 - x.x.x.125 -> local) anything else via VPN.

But for " normal " home use - stay away - lots of bugs - lack of release procedures means MikroTik fixes a bug - and then quite likely re-introduce it later on again and again and again. Don't update firmware on release but wait at LEAST 4 weeks and keep an eye on the forum...

So the mikrotiks are still difficult?, I used mikrotik software on an old computer for many years ago, but dropped it because it was kinda difficult to change configurations, reminded me about the old cisco routers.
I wanted to buy an mikrotik now, to replace my linksys (somehow my android doen't like my current wifi router anymore after upgrading to android 5.. ), and use mikrotik rb2011uias-rm or something similar to that, together with an unifi ac pro wifi accesspoint...
Seems like my plans have to change

only buy Mikrotik if you are trying to solve a problem you would have used Cisco IOS to solve. They can both do a lot - Mikrotik just does it ultra low cost. But with lot's of bugs. I can't tell you home many times they have fck PPTP VPN's, Stats, Sensors, script compatibility - so much I sometimes does think they are Microsoft. And it is not just once. Then they fix it - and by magic same issue comes back 2 releases later - or even 10 releases later. Which is usually a sign of lack of (or bad) comments in the codebase...

[mich41]

You say that things are only slightly better if you use ethernet?

Some TP-Links (possibly others) have buggy hardware NAT acceleration, which affects wired machines as well - try disabling it.

BTW, it would take 10 minutes to connect a laptop directly to the PPPoE modem (or whatever else you have) and find out whether it's the router's or ISP's fault.