Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2011 17:35 Post subject: ASUS WL-520GU wireless speeds slower than wired
I have been happily using DD-WRT for a long time, most recently with an ASUS WL-520GU, running firmware v24-sp2 std, build 14896, 08-07-10.
After recently moving and changing from Century Link DSL 12 Mbps service to Comcast cable 16 Mbps service, I had to make one change to get things working: MAC address clone. Otherwise, all settings are the same on the router as before.
I did a check at speedtest.net when I first connected (straight through the modem) to verify the service level. I was pleased that it came up at 21 Mbps. It has been around 20 fairly consistently.
After setting up my network and adding the mac address clone setting to the ASUS, I again checked speed via wired connection. Still great. Then I checked via wireless connection. 10 Mbps. Hmmm.
Actual results from moments ago:
Wired: 19.30 down, 3.47 up, 27ms ping
Wireless: 8.54 down, 3.47 up, 27ms ping
I didn't forget a 1 there--it is less than half the speed. The best I've managed via wireless is 10 Mbps. I tested on a laptop as well as my Android phone, with similar results.
I checked to see if there was a setting in DD-WRT that could affect this, but learned that the donation version does not include any such capability. So does that mean that my router is the problem? I didn't notice this issue when I was on DSL but perhaps it wasn't apparent since the max wired there hovered around 11 or so.
If my problem isn't DD-WRT, is anyone aware of wireless speed limitations with the WL520-GU? I bought that model specifically based on recommendations here and up to now have been happy. Sure, 10 isn't the worst but I want to be able to use my full bandwidth.
Another question - my new house is not wired the same way that my old house was. Everything will be wireless, including TV, Xbox 360, Androids, iPods, home PC--only one machine will be wired. What would be the benefit of upgrading to an N router? I do plan to use PlayOn between PC and Xbox, both wireless. Would an N router be worth the cost?
Wow, lots of "reads" but no replies. If you have this router, could you do a check at speedtest.net or dslreports.com to compare wired/wireless and share your results. I'm wondering if this is characteristic of this router. Especially if you have similar Internet service (cable) and speed (16 Mbps or higher). Thanks.
Wireless will always be slower than wired. G wireless will be slower than N. A slower processor will have slower throughput than a fast one.
Your router is a stable unit, but not a quick one. _________________ SIG:
I'm trying to teach you to fish, not give you a fish. If you just want a fish, wait for a fisherman who hands them out. I'm more of a fishing instructor.
LOM: "If you show that you have not bothered to read the forum announcements or to follow the advices in them then the level of help available for you will drop substantially, also known as Murrkf's law.."
Thanks for the reply. I thought that 802.11g could support up to 54Mbps, yet I'm getting only 20% of that.
I've always operated with the assumption that my internal network has a bigger pipe than the incoming ISP speed, at least until fiber becomes more widespread. I believe I have connected to G wireless routers faster than 10 Mbps.
Also, as I understand it, going to N will only improve speed if there are no G devices on my network (all must be N to be in full 802.11n mode.) I would need to find out if all of my devices are N capable before going that way.
BUT...I just remembered that I haven't checked nearby channels in my new location--I might have a conflict. I'll also try moving the router around to see if that improves the speed.
Thanks for the reply. I thought that 802.11g could support up to 54Mbps, yet I'm getting only 20% of that.
You will never get anything close to 54mbs with G. What you are getting is about right for that router. All of your devices do not have to be N - There is a G/N option. _________________ SIG:
I'm trying to teach you to fish, not give you a fish. If you just want a fish, wait for a fisherman who hands them out. I'm more of a fishing instructor.
LOM: "If you show that you have not bothered to read the forum announcements or to follow the advices in them then the level of help available for you will drop substantially, also known as Murrkf's law.."
OK, if 10Mbps is what I should expect from this router, I won't sweat it.
As for 802.11n, at one time the only way to enable 5GHz, full N capability, was to be in N-only mode. Otherwise, all traffic was downgraded to G. Perhaps that has changed since the protocol was first introduced.
Either way, I think I'll be fine with my existing configuration for now. Thanks for the help.
OK, if 10Mbps is what I should expect from this router, I won't sweat it.
As for 802.11n, at one time the only way to enable 5GHz, full N capability, was to be in N-only mode. Otherwise, all traffic was downgraded to G. Perhaps that has changed since the protocol was first introduced.
Either way, I think I'll be fine with my existing configuration for now. Thanks for the help.
5ghz and N are not identical. N is 2.4 as well. You need to change your build too if you want better wireless. Please read the forum announcements. _________________ SIG:
I'm trying to teach you to fish, not give you a fish. If you just want a fish, wait for a fisherman who hands them out. I'm more of a fishing instructor.
LOM: "If you show that you have not bothered to read the forum announcements or to follow the advices in them then the level of help available for you will drop substantially, also known as Murrkf's law.."