House router for a hundred bucks

[SoNic67]

AC numbers refer to speeds. They have nothing to do with coverage/range. Of 2.4GHz or 5GHz. You can, and typically will, get better 2.4GHz coverage/range from a higher AC number router.

2.4GHz goes only to 40MHz channels, no AC there, just N.
https://meraki.cisco.com/blog/2013/08/4-things-you-need-to-know-about-802-11ac/

 

[Bill_Bright]

Sorry for that, I misinterpreted the end of the thread. I voted for the Netgear one, but haven't pulled the trigger yet, I'm looking for a deal on it. I think it'll be ok with it.

No problem. Thanks for coming back with the update. Just don't wait too long to pull that trigger or you will need to start over with your researching as it is likely Netgear, Linksys, D-Link or another maker will come out with something new that gives you more bang for your money.

AC numbers refer to speeds. They have nothing to do with coverage/range. Of 2.4GHz or 5GHz. You can, and typically will, get better 2.4GHz coverage/range from a higher AC number router.

Of course it has to do with coverage/range.

First, coverage and range, while related, are NOT the same thing. The range is the maximum straight-line "distance" from the WAP (wireless access point - typically integrated in a "wireless router") effective connectivity occurs for the connected wireless device. Coverage is the total "area" between the WAP and that maximum range. Plus, it must be noted the RF propagation pattern of that "coverage" is NOT a perfect circle emanating out from the WAP. And in many cases you many not even want a perfect circle.

Depending on the orientation of the antenna(s), the propagation pattern could be long and narrow, (bi-directional), with a long "range" heading east and west, and a much shorter range heading north and south. Or it could go off in one direction (uni-directional) from the WAP for an extended range in that one direction - often very desirable! Or it may look like a 4-leaf clover or a daisy for (more or less) an omni directional pattern. See this. And with a decent field signal strength meter, a user can plot that pattern and use that information to optimize their antenna orientations and/or wireless device locations to achieve maximum effective "range" for their specific "coverage" objectives to achieve the best speeds - whether using 2.4GHz or 5GHz.

It is true, with everything else being equal, 802.11AC on the 2.4GHz band does not improve the "range" performance over 802.11n. However, with proper antenna orientation and careful division of devices per band, 11AC can provide much improved area "coverage" over 11n.

 

[AltCapwn]

Buy an ubiquiti access point, long range, and just plug it in the current router .

 

[MrGenius]

I bought a better router(with a higher AC number) and got better 2.4GHz "whatever-the-hell-you-want-to-call-it-that-equates-to-better-signal-at-a-given-distance-from-it". So...proof is in the pudding. Don't really care what you have to say about it.

 

[Bill_Bright]

So...proof is in the pudding. Don't really care what you have to say about it.

LOL
Before you’re convinced your sample-size-of-one experience renders moot the whole point, take just a moment and do some homework by running a Google search to bone up on RF theory - at least that for the UHF (2.4GHz) and SHF (5GHz) bands.

Point being, anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

I bought a better router(with a higher AC number) and got better 2.4GHz "whatever-the-hell-you-want-to-call-it-that-equates-to-better-signal-at-a-given-distance-from-it".

Actually, that sample size of one example just illustrated my point, not yours. If you got better "signal strength" at the same distance using 11ac, that indicates you would get a further effective "range".

We must remember radio waves travel at the speed of light. So another 20 yards at 186,000 miles per second is NOT going to result in slower speeds for those waves. The problem is signal strength decreases with distance and a weaker signal can result is missing data. Missing data requires packets be resent and THAT is why wifi speeds can decrease as "range" increases.

 

[SoNic67]

It is true, with everything else being equal, 802.11AC on the 2.4GHz band does not improve the "range" performance over 802.11n. However, with proper antenna orientation and careful division of devices per band, 11AC can provide much improved area "coverage" over 11n.

There is no 802.11AC on 2.4GHz. Only eventually multi stream N. If beam forming is supported there, usually is not, antennas are lacking.

 

[Bill_Bright]

There is no 802.11AC on 2.4GHz. Period.

Gee whiz. Pretty sure most understood we were talking about the hardware since that is what the OP was asking about. 802.11ac is backwards compatible with 11n. That means an 11ac wireless router will be "dual-band". The better are simultaneous dual-band.

Sorry if I was not clear about that.

 

[SoNic67]

I just stated above that, for a house with 4 levels, ONE router will not be able to reach with 5GHz band. So it's useless to buy any fancy AC routers, they won't penetrate at 5GHz.
The only good solution to that is to wire with CAT5E each floor and add a router per floor.
Or wait for the AX routers that push AC like performance over 2.4GHz too... But probably his clients won't be AX for a long time. I have just one - Samsung Galaxy S10.

 

[Bill_Bright]

I just stated above that, for a house with 4 levels, ONE router will not be able to reach with 5GHz band.

??? For one, the OP said it was a small house. For another, as I stated, because it is a small house, it is the number of barriers and the composition of those barriers that matter more than the distance.

One wall (or floor or ceiling) will NOT block a 5GHz signal unless that wall is an 18 inch thick concrete wall, or lined with a copper screen! 5GHz can even easily penetrate 2 standard wallboard walls with wood studs if the walls are not full of metal pipes and wires! So that means, third, your assessment to avoid AC routers makes no sense at all for it assumes none of the connected devices are located near where the WAP will be placed.

What makes total sense is to buy a nice dual band 11ac wireless router. Then split the load by connecting the nearby devices on the faster 5GHz band and the more distant devices on the 2.4GHz band instead of your plan to pile up all the devices on a single, crowded 2.4GHz band (which is also crowded with other cordless phones, TV remotes, baby monitors, garage door openers, even Bluetooth devices).

The only good solution to that is to wire with CAT5E each floor and add a router per floor.

Well, now we agree on something - more or less. I agree the best solution is to go Ethernet. But that typically means you must own the house and be willing to punch holes in floors, walls and ceilings and pull cables through attics and crawlspaces.

But if you are going to pull new cable through the house, it really makes no sense to pull Cat5e. Go with Cat6 for more future proofing. And a router on each floor really makes no sense either unless you are creating and isolating separate networks. Just get a decent Gigabit (1000/100/10) Ethernet switch for the other floors. Networks only need one router.

 

[SoNic67]

In Bulgaria, like the rest of EU, they don't build houses of wood and drywall.
Concrete, reinforced for floors and CMU blocks for walls (or concrete again).

Also CAT6 cable is a pain to terminate for normal people. And 10Gbps routers to take advantage of that... Not so cheap, makes no sense in residential houses.
That's why I recommend CAT5E.

 

[Bill_Bright]

In Bulgaria, like the rest of EU

Like the rest of the EU? LOL Not hardly. I have lived in Portugal, the UK and Germany and yes, lumber and drywall is used often too. And contrary to what you may think, there are still many homes in the US that use brick on the outer walls. But it makes little sense to use bricks and other such materials on the inner walls where you have central HVAC conduits, hot and cold water pipes, drain pipes, electrical and data wires running throughout. It should be noted with lumber or metal stud outer walls, better insulation can be installed too.

As for terminating Cat6 vs Cat5e, the steps are exactly the same so it makes no sense to say one is a pain suggesting the other is not.

https://www.instructables.com/id/Terminating-an-Ethernet-CAT5eCAT6-Cable/

Yes, Cat6 cost more, but not that much more and again, it insures future proofing. And as more and more streaming into the home becomes commonplace, it certainly does make sense in residential homes - especially if you have teenagers living there too. Don't assume because it makes no sense for you that it doesn't for others.

 

[Kursah]

Not sure why you guys insist on derailing this topic for personal reasons, keep it on topic for the OP or move along...

 

[John Naylor]

We have 5 floors, in a 200 year old dairy barn (36 x 60 IIRC). It's split level, 3 floors in back and 2 in front w. my office in the hayloft w/ 20 foot ceiling hence the missing floor. I always used the Netgear ones running about $175 - $200 and had no complaints. This year thought we'd go bigger as my kids come over with their friends every other saturday for big gaming sessions. It came to two $400ish models, the Netgear Nighthawk Pro and the Asus GT-AC5300. Wanted two USB ports for two USB pronters that I wanted to make available to whole network (Stamps and photo) which both had. I wa sleanimg to th entegear but ultimately decided on the Asus because having the 8 LAN ports, it allowed me to eliminate the switch. Not happy with the choice .... and while your not looking in this proce ranmge, it's more about the manufacturer than the feature lists

I'd be concerned as, at least this Asus model, has a bunch of great features, that if ya use them, it's 24/7 spyware monitored by Trend Micro. I don't actually mind sharing data for QC purposes but the wording here was ominous, so w/o giving that up, no access to features like:

Network Protection
Router Security Assessment
Malicious Sites Blocking
Vulnerability Protection
Infected Device Prevention and Blocking
Parental Controls
Time Scheduling
Web & Apps Filters

Problems....

1. The manual's screenshots and instructions do not match what one sees on screen

2. The USB ports are not allowing printer to work as network printers... I can get one printer to work, but only way to get other PCs to access it, need to share it from my box. I can do that w/o a router.

3. We have a 400 pound MFP and a 36" wide paper (150' roll) plotter and the router can not "see" either of them. They do not appear on the Network Map.

Posting in forums has brought no solutions, telephone support says they are calling me back and emails responses keep giving me nstructions on how to get on the internet ... kind a puzzling since I **am** e-mailing them.

Netgear's forums on the other had were pretty responsive. Only did an email once and answer was responsive to question asked.

For recommendations ... We used the Netgear R6300 for Id guess 3-4 yearsw/o complaint. I'd offer it to ya fro free but I just gave it away Monday for someone to try. I will check and see if he ever put it use. This is a newer version of it
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA0AJ1YC5524

In short, before pulling the trigger, I'd check the forums for each make / model and see how many folks are having issues and how well each responds.

Also ... be aware when you buy a router, newegg and amazon often provide 'storefronts' for other distributors and these may not be authorized resellers. I was going to suggest this one but it is sold thru a storefront which is in china and if you make a warranty claim it may not be honored. I just had this happen last week because storefront (asusparts) was not authorized to distribute products in in USA. Not sure how one determines how one determines when / if warranty will be valid.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA4RE8HT5703

Take a peek at this one and see if it fits ya needs ... big price cut at the moment brings it under $100

https://www.amazon.com/NETGEAR-R6700-Nighthawk-Gigabit-Ethernet/dp/B00R2AZLD2/

 

[Good3alz]

??? For one, the OP said it was a small house. For another, as I stated, because it is a small house, it is the number of barriers and the composition of those barriers that matter more than the distance.

One wall (or floor or ceiling) will NOT block a 5GHz signal unless that wall is an 18 inch thick concrete wall, or lined with a copper screen! 5GHz can even easily penetrate 2 standard wallboard walls with wood studs if the walls are not full of metal pipes and wires! So that means, third, your assessment to avoid AC routers makes no sense at all for it assumes none of the connected devices are located near where the WAP will be placed.

What makes total sense is to buy a nice dual band 11ac wireless router. Then split the load by connecting the nearby devices on the faster 5GHz band and the more distant devices on the 2.4GHz band instead of your plan to pile up all the devices on a single, crowded 2.4GHz band (which is also crowded with other cordless phones, TV remotes, baby monitors, garage door openers, even Bluetooth devices).
Well, now we agree on something - more or less. I agree the best solution is to go Ethernet. But that typically means you must own the house and be willing to punch holes in floors, walls and ceilings and pull cables through attics and crawlspaces.

But if you are going to pull new cable through the house, it really makes no sense to pull Cat5e. Go with Cat6 for more future proofing. And a router on each floor really makes no sense either unless you are creating and isolating separate networks. Just get a decent Gigabit (1000/100/10) Ethernet switch for the other floors. Networks only need one router.

: )
4 floors, 5GHz. = fail. NO not one router. PERIOD. No matter what size the house is. IF it was room on top of room 4 times.. and the router was in the middle I STILL doubt that would work.
I have a RT-AC68U and I can not get 5GHz from one bedroom to the balcony (from one end to the other) 2bd apt. 1 floor. California, wood frame, no stucco nothing like that. Just electrical and heat vent and water in the walls.

It is not going to happen.

(Respectively speaking )

I just stated above that, for a house with 4 levels, ONE router will not be able to reach with 5GHz band. So it's useless to buy any fancy AC routers, they won't penetrate at 5GHz.
The only good solution to that is to wire with CAT5E each floor and add a router per floor.
Or wait for the AX routers that push AC like performance over 2.4GHz too... But probably his clients won't be AX for a long time. I have just one - Samsung Galaxy S10.

IS Correct.


---
OP, what ever router you buy, make sure it has antennas sticking out of it. Internal won't give you the range you NEED.

 

[newtekie1]

I'm not sure why everyone is caught up on getting 5GHz coverage to the whole house. This is for OP's parents, so what are the chances they are going to care about, or even notice the difference if they are using 2.4GHz? Chances are they aren't using the network to transfer large files, or even transfering files at all, they're probably using it for an internet connection and that's it. The current router they are using is only 2.4GHz anyway, and the OP is really only looking to upgrade to something with a strong signal.

Any good router, with decent external antennas, will likely give a better 2.4GHz signal than the current router in use, and if they can connect to 5GHz in the areas it reaches, that's just a bonus.

 

[Good3alz]

I'm not sure why everyone is caught up on getting 5GHz coverage to the whole house. This is for OP's parents, so what are the chances they are going to care about, or even notice the difference if they are using 2.4GHz? Chances are they aren't using the network to transfer large files, or even transfering files at all, they're probably using it for an internet connection and that's it. The current router they are using is only 2.4GHz anyway, and the OP is really only looking to upgrade to something with a strong signal.

Any good router, with decent external antennas, will likely give a better 2.4GHz signal than the current router in use, and if they can connect to 5GHz in the areas it reaches, that's just a bonus.

What is the point in upgrading the current router then?

 

[newtekie1]

What is the point in upgrading the current router then?

Because the current router is a cheap PoS that barely reaches where they need it to reach. Seriously, am I the only one that actually read the OP's posts?

 

[Bill_Bright]

4 floors, 5GHz. = fail.

NO ONE, including me, said anything about using 5GHz for the entire house. Please read what's been said again about using both bands.

I'm not sure why everyone is caught up on getting 5GHz coverage to the whole house.

Me either. No one is suggested that.

I have a RT-AC68U and I can not get 5GHz from one bedroom to the balcony (from one end to the other) 2bd apt. 1 floor. California, wood frame, no stucco nothing like that. Just electrical and heat vent and water in the walls.

If you note what I said that you even quoted, I was pretty clear and said "5GHz can even easily penetrate 2 standard wallboard walls with wood studs if the walls are not full of metal pipes and wires!"

@lZKoce - 5GHz wifi, under ideal conditions has an effective range up to ~45 feet. That means, the you can use 5GHz for the wireless devices in the same room as your router. And depending on the construction and contents of the barriers (walls, floors, and ceilings), you may be able to use 5GHz for devices in adjacent rooms, including the rooms directly above and below the room where the router sits. Using 5GHz where possible is good because it is subject to less interference as the 2.4GHz band tends to be more crowded. Plus, 5GHz can offer better performance. However, as others have noted, it has shorter effective range and is less able to penetrate some and/or multiple barriers.

So for those distant areas in your home, you can then use 2.4GHz. Using both bands distributes the load on the router and on one particular band.

Possible under $100 suggestions include:
Netgear R6700 AC1750 Dual Band $87
D-Link Dual Band with MU-Mimo for $90. Note that MU-Mimo is a desirable feature - but the distant end device must support it too.

If you can bump up the budget to $150, you can find a router that offers better performance and have more features and might be able to find a "simultaneous" dual band AC router. Simultaneous dual bands allow communications with both 2.4 and 5GHz devices at the same time instead of constantly flipping back and forth. This is really beneficial when you have multiple users/devices connecting at once.

See best under $150 wireless router for ideas. I personally have used D-Link, Netgear and Linksys over the years and never had any fail on me. I currently use a Linksys MAX-STREAM AC1900 MU-MIMO Dual-Band in this 2-story house. The router is centrally located on the top floor. I have no problems accessing the Samsung Blu-ray player located in the basement via 5GHz, or my cell and table via 5GHz wifi out on the back deck. I have recommended this PC Mag Editor's Choice to a couple friends and colleagues and they too have been happy with the results.

 

[Gasaraki]

That's a lot of coverage that you're asking from a single router.

And a $100 router at that.

 

[John Naylor]

I called my bud that I gave the router to ... he hasn't gotten around to trying it out. If I get it back, was gonna offer it to you but then realized you were in Bulgaria .. well if ya happen to be in the neighborhood