Posted: Tue May 23, 2017 11:29 Post subject: R7800 x4S vs. r9000 X10?
Wondering which router would perform better/faster/be more responsive for 1-2 clients using 1024QAM wireless AC only.
I'm using an Asus ac88 4x4 ac2167 wifi pcie adapter and am looking for the fastest response times/lowest latency, not just maximum throughput.
I was thinking the R7800 has a chance because it's simpler in design compared to the r9000. I currently have an Asus GT 5300 ROG rapture, and yeah it's kind of fast but man it's buggy and doesn't support open source firmware which really bothers me. I'm pretty convinced i'm going to return it and get either the R7800 or R9000, just not sure which one is better for just me and maybe 1-2 other people. Thoughts?
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Tue May 23, 2017 11:39 Post subject:
get a r7800 & save ur money..both routers have the same qca9984 radio in them. same performance, both have beyond enough power to get max ac speeds. r9000 is overpriced cause of the 10 gig switch & 802.11ad radio that has the range roughly equal to the length of a spaghetti noodle.
and 1024qam is broadcom only, its not part of the standard. http://mcsindex.com/
u want best latency, plug in. with my semi crap bcm4360 3x3 in my desktop i get 1ms 1ms 2ms 1ms <1ms typically, like mostly any other decent wifi. _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
I actually have an ac68 pci-e asus wifi adapter that's 3x3 ac1300 for the 5ghz. You're telling me i'll get significantly lower latency using that wifi adapter over the "upgraded" 4x4 ac2167 version I just upgraded to?
I actually have an ac68 pci-e asus wifi adapter that's 3x3 ac1300 for the 5ghz. You're telling me i'll get significantly lower latency using that wifi adapter over the "upgraded" 4x4 ac2167 version I just upgraded to?
He is telling you that if you are really picky on latency then use LAN not WLAN. _________________ R6400v2 (boardID:30) - Kong 36480 running since 03/09/18 - (AP - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7800 - BS 31924 running since 05/26/17 - (AP - OpenVPN Client - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7000 - BS 30771 running since 12/16/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - OpenVPN Server - Transmission - DDNS - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R6250 - BS 29193 running since 03/20/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - DNSMasq - AdBlocking)
lul ok will do. but for reals, would the 3x3 asus adapter provide better latency over the 4x4 asus? cuz i can still return the 4x4
No it won't. If you only care about latency then return the 4x4. That only will improve bandwidth, and maayybe range, nothing more. _________________ R6400v2 (boardID:30) - Kong 36480 running since 03/09/18 - (AP - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7800 - BS 31924 running since 05/26/17 - (AP - OpenVPN Client - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7000 - BS 30771 running since 12/16/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - OpenVPN Server - Transmission - DDNS - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R6250 - BS 29193 running since 03/20/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - DNSMasq - AdBlocking)
so the 3x3 is the same in latency as the 4x4? would the increased throughput help me in games like csgo? Or would it only help in download speeds? I just upgraded to the 350 mbit download / 25 mbit upload internet as well. should i return the 4x4 or keep it?
With a 3x3 if you are not far from the router (not more than 10-15m) you will most likely max out the WAN. And yes, I would go for the 7800, it's a beast, really good price and stable ddwrt since a few months now. And no, throughput is different from latency, you need latency in games so as it was already said here, if you REALLY want to make a difference in latency go with LAN. _________________ R6400v2 (boardID:30) - Kong 36480 running since 03/09/18 - (AP - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7800 - BS 31924 running since 05/26/17 - (AP - OpenVPN Client - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R7000 - BS 30771 running since 12/16/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - OpenVPN Server - Transmission - DDNS - DNSMasq - AdBlocking - QoS) R6250 - BS 29193 running since 03/20/16 - (AP - NAS - FTP - SMB - DNSMasq - AdBlocking)
4x4 just gets higher total throughput, latency is unaffected. 4x4 @ 80mhz is 1733mbps link rate. around 800mbps+ should be doable.
either build, both are on the dev team & fixes by kong are also in bs builds.
Quick question. How badly does distance from the router impact the link rate? I have a 3*3 BCM 4360 adapter client connecting at 80 Mhz, which is around 2 rooms away from the router, and I never see the link getting any better than 526 Mpbs.
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 4:48 Post subject:
RandomJerk wrote:
tatsuya46 wrote:
4x4 just gets higher total throughput, latency is unaffected. 4x4 @ 80mhz is 1733mbps link rate. around 800mbps+ should be doable.
either build, both are on the dev team & fixes by kong are also in bs builds.
Quick question. How badly does distance from the router impact the link rate? I have a 3*3 BCM 4360 adapter client connecting at 80 Mhz, which is around 2 rooms away from the router, and I never see the link getting any better than 526 Mpbs.
signal (rssi) below around -53 start dropping link rate for stability & error correction when using ac, thats roughly typical for that distance & walls between it. bcm4360 seems better as a radio in a router than in a desktop nic, at least my archer t8e anyway, it has weak rx (tx on wifi page, router -> nic = nic's rx) but good tx (opposite of just said parenthesis statement).
using "latest" windows 10 broadcom driver i can find, 7.35.338.0 12/10/2015 _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
4x4 just gets higher total throughput, latency is unaffected. 4x4 @ 80mhz is 1733mbps link rate. around 800mbps+ should be doable.
either build, both are on the dev team & fixes by kong are also in bs builds.
Quick question. How badly does distance from the router impact the link rate? I have a 3*3 BCM 4360 adapter client connecting at 80 Mhz, which is around 2 rooms away from the router, and I never see the link getting any better than 526 Mpbs.
signal (rssi) below around -53 start dropping link rate for stability & error correction when using ac, thats roughly typical for that distance & walls between it. bcm4360 seems better as a radio in a router than in a desktop nic, at least my archer t8e anyway, it has weak rx (tx on wifi page, router -> nic = nic's rx) but good tx (opposite of just said parenthesis statement).
using "latest" windows 10 broadcom driver i can find, 7.35.338.0 12/10/2015
Thanks. Is there a way to boost the Rx capability of the 4360 NIC using a driver parameter or some similar settings? BTW, I'm running it on Linux Mint, so I'm not sure if Linux drivers for this chipset are the same or worst compared to their Windows counterparts.
Joined: 03 Jan 2010 Posts: 7568 Location: YWG, Canada
Posted: Wed May 24, 2017 20:28 Post subject:
RandomJerk wrote:
tatsuya46 wrote:
RandomJerk wrote:
tatsuya46 wrote:
4x4 just gets higher total throughput, latency is unaffected. 4x4 @ 80mhz is 1733mbps link rate. around 800mbps+ should be doable.
either build, both are on the dev team & fixes by kong are also in bs builds.
Quick question. How badly does distance from the router impact the link rate? I have a 3*3 BCM 4360 adapter client connecting at 80 Mhz, which is around 2 rooms away from the router, and I never see the link getting any better than 526 Mpbs.
signal (rssi) below around -53 start dropping link rate for stability & error correction when using ac, thats roughly typical for that distance & walls between it. bcm4360 seems better as a radio in a router than in a desktop nic, at least my archer t8e anyway, it has weak rx (tx on wifi page, router -> nic = nic's rx) but good tx (opposite of just said parenthesis statement).
using "latest" windows 10 broadcom driver i can find, 7.35.338.0 12/10/2015
Thanks. Is there a way to boost the Rx capability of the 4360 NIC using a driver parameter or some similar settings? BTW, I'm running it on Linux Mint, so I'm not sure if Linux drivers for this chipset are the same or worst compared to their Windows counterparts.
i have no idea what settings linux offers it, windows has none really, tried all & none do anything _________________ LATEST FIRMWARE(S)
BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers
