Amped Wireless R10000G - according to my research, this should rock the 2.4GHz band

Discussion in 'Networking and Wireless' started by miro_gt, Mar 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. miro_gt

    miro_gt Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    433
    Messages:
    1,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    56
    So I've been researching wireless routers lately, and have beet through various reviews on various forums. And I've concluded that instead of focusing on the 5GHz range I can simply dominate the 2.4GHz range with much stronger signal so that other networks around me would have to adjust based on my network rather than the opposite :D

    While researching, I went through reviews of these routers:
    - Linksys e2500, e3000, e3200, e4200;
    - Netgear wndr3700 v1, v2, and v3, wndr3800 which should be about the same as 3700v2, wndr 4000;
    - Asus rt-n56u, rt-n66u
    - D-Link DIR-685 and 825
    - Buffalo N300, N450, and N600

    .. and I've made my choice leaning to the less known Amped Wireless R10000G gigabit router.

    read review here:
    Amped Wireless R10000G Reviewed - SmallNetBuilder

    pros, in short:
    - very high transmit power (2x 600mW amprifiers + 2x good sized external antennas)
    - very high throughput - OMG where it works it works FAST. Check page 4 on the above review
    - fast 620MHz CPU, 64MB RAM

    cons, in short:
    - possible issues at far locations
    - does not have 5GHz band
    - pricy
    - not WiFi certified (?) - heh, if it works as others have said then who cares :D


    What do you all think about it ?
     
  2. downloads

    downloads Super Moderator Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,648
    Messages:
    8,643
    Likes Received:
    2,023
    Trophy Points:
    331
    That's a bad idea. First of all there's no such thing as "dominate the 2.4GHz range with much stronger signal"- other Wi-Fi networks, Bluetooth devices, child monitors and cordless phones are noise for your router and you won't be able to simply stomp them to the ground- your wireless throughput will suffer.

    Secondly- the router doesn't seem to have a strong signal at all. If it did it would have been able to complete a test in smallnetbuilder's location F. The stronger the signal the batter the range (assuming identical or similar antennas and the same frequency).

    Overall it doesn't have a strong signal, it doesn't have a good range, it isn't Wi-Fi certified, it doesn't come from a reputable manufacturer (firmware quality and updates may be questionable), it isn't supported by 3rd party firmware, it isn't dual band yet it is expensive.

    The only thing it does offer is a superb throughput but if that doesn't work for you (and it probably won't since 2.4GHz is overcrowded) what are you left with?


    Keep in mind that smallnetbuilder test routers in a remote location where no Wi-Fi networks are present so their results are of what the router is capable of- not what will you be able to do in real life. You'll end up in a Ferrari sitting in a traffic jam- that's what I'm saying.
     
  3. weinter

    weinter /dev/null

    Reputations:
    596
    Messages:
    2,798
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    I am starting to have my own suspicion from "Review Sites" like Smallnetbuilder.
    My personal experience with Realtek SoC is that it sucks.
    Realtek SoC is based on Lexra Core by a now defunct company producing that once produce MIPS Processor.
    Lexra SoC has not undergo new development and performance is lacklustre.

    I have another Realtek SoC with the exact same IP core and real life routing performance sucks.
    Windows Share transfer low throughout.
    Even though Realtek states its clock as 620MHZ when I serial consoled in it was only 500MHZ so they LIED.
    Clock is independent of performance just as you don't use BogoMIPS to rate Processors.
    Nowadays I don't trust reviews and I reproduce my own real-life benchmarks.
    Why use Artificial networking benchmarks when your network devices is mean to do Real work?

    Who is to know they aren't paid to write advertisement reviews?
    How many a time do you attempt to reproduce "results" from these reviews or do you simply take their word for it?
     
  4. miro_gt

    miro_gt Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    433
    Messages:
    1,751
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    56
    I do agree with most of what you're saying, however I'd like to put it through another prospective as well:

    - noise is relative term that is dependent on the used signal itself. This means that noise that would mess up communications with one particular device could very well not even bother another that is working with much stronger signal (i.e. higher amplitude). What this could mean is that while further away networks with weak signals at your location may interfere with your regular router, may very well not even bother this particular router, thus what would be considered as noise may as well get less.

    - throughput over wireless is highly dependable on the quality/strength of the signal (among other things), meaning the more clear signal (for that particular device) the router operates with, the less error correction mechanisms it has to imply, the higher the throughput is. Looking at their tests, throughput of this router is quite high, thus leading me to believe the signal is also strong.

    - I do agree about the location F though, as it should have been working accordingly there. Getting bad results leads me to believe that either: there's something wrong with the review itself as at all other locations the performance is pretty good and suddenly it drops down to nothing, where as in reality the performance should have dropped gradually over distance; the error correction mechanisms of this device could be buggy.

    - I'm not sold in full to the company name (as being famous or not) having to deal with the qualities of all products they offer, eventhough most of the times it's true. Usually companies sell things that make them more profit, not necessarily things that perform superb, as those would be more expensive thus less people could afford to buy them thus less famous. For example, a Pagani Zonda C12F is not a famous car but surely has superior performance.

    - just looking at the antennas of that thing makes me feel that it would perform quite good (compared to having bunch of internal antennas inside the router's box). Backed up by the company statement as hardware and performance, I'm willing to give it a try.


    I think your decision is heavily based on the tests in location F. What if they find next time the device performs similarly to the others in the test, but at the time of their testing a heavy interference popped up from somewhere else ? Not trying to counter your opinion in any way as I see your points as valid, but just trying to look at what they posted from different aspect, as obviously I dont have it to test out myself. And it bothers me the sudden drop in tested performance between F and the other locations, that's all.

    I do agree 100% , LOL.
     
  5. baii

    baii Sone

    Reputations:
    1,417
    Messages:
    3,951
    Likes Received:
    200
    Trophy Points:
    131
    What download said is pretty much same as the review said themselves
    It comes down to if you trust the company or its return policy.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page