Router Charts

Click for Router Charts

Router Ranker

Click for Router Ranker

NAS Charts

Click for NAS Charts

NAS Ranker

Click for NAS Ranker

More Tools

Click for More Tools

Wireless Features

AC1900 Bridge Tests

I frequently say that if you're going to buy an AC1900 routers, you should buy two of them, since that's the surest way to get a 600 Mbps link rate in 2.4 GHz. So, in the interest of having data to back up my advice, I ran 2.4 GHz profiles with a pair of NETGEAR R7000 Nighthawks and a pair of ASUS RT-AC68Us. No offense intended to Linksys, but I ran out of time alloted to this work, so didn't run a pair of EA6900's.

In each case, I set the main router to Channel 6. I selected the "Up to 600 Mbps" wireless mode for the NETGEAR and 20/40 mode with the default of Turbo QAM enabled for the ASUS. I configured the second router in non-WDS wireless bridge mode in both cases to ensure that I had a WPA2-AES encrypted link fully capable of maximum link rate.

I checked the status display in both R7000's, and both reported a 600 Mbps link. The ASUS reported only a 486 Mbps link rate, which is the lowest of three 256-QAM link rates with a 40 MHz channel (the three rates are 486, 540 and 600 Mbps).

The R7000's downlink plot finally shows a notable throughput boost for strong to medium signals. But as signal levels move into the weak range, the throughput advantage disappears as the 20 and 40 MHz bandwidth plots track for a little while. As signal levels drop further, we see lower throughput for the 40 MHz B/W plot, indicating lower usable range. This confirms what I used to see when running 40 MHz mode tests, i.e. lower range with 40 MHz bandwidth in use.

NETGEAR R7000 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - downlink

NETGEAR R7000 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - downlink

The uplink plot shows the same pattern as downlink, at slightly reduced maximum throughput.

NETGEAR R7000 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - uplink

NETGEAR R7000 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - uplink

I calculated the difference in average throughput between 20 and 40 MHz in both directions and got a 29% difference in downlink and 27% in uplink. But again, most of the gain comes at strong to medium level signals and at the sacrifice of reduced range.

Despite its lower reported link rate, the ASUS started out with 331 Mbps vs. 117 Mbps for the R7000. But throughput fell sharply with only 21 dB of attenuation and kept going down from there. Once again, we see 40 MHz bandwidth throughput fall below 20 MHz mode at around 51 dB of attenuation.

ASUS RT-AC68U 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - downlink

ASUS RT-AC68U 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - downlink

The shape of the AC68U's uplink profile looks more like the R7000's, but starting again with higher throughput (~190 Mbps vs. 160 Mbps).

ASUS RT-AC68U 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - uplink

ASUS RT-AC68U 2.4 GHz bridge 20 / 40 MHz compare - uplink

Difference in average throughput for the ASUS between 20 and 40 MHz modes came in at a 64% difference in downlink and 26% in uplink. But again, most of the gain comes at strong to medium level signals (particularly for downlink!) and at the sacrifice of reduced range.

Closing Thoughts

I can't say I'm totally surprised by the poor results from the PCE-AC68 adapter. It's a unique beast and has had a long birthing process. Perhaps another driver revision will improve its performance or perhaps not. It's not that it matters that much, since the audience for the adapter is rather limited. I won't be changing to it as my reference adapter anytime soon, if ever.

The bigger story is how AC1900 bridges performed. More people are likely to try to take advantage of AC1900's potentially higher 2.4 GHz link rates this way, even though it ain't cheap. But with AC2300 on the June/July horizon, AC1900 prices should start to drop and make an AC1900 bridged pair more affordable.

If you decide to give it a shot, remember that you can achieve > 450 Mbps link rates only using 40 MHz bandwidth. AC1900 routers are supposed to obey 20/40 MHz coexistence rules and fall back to 20 MHz bandwidth if there are interfering networks. So you might find yourself on the lower curves in the plots above, which is about where you'd be with a pair of top-performing (and less expensive) AC1750 or N900 routers like those shown below.

AC1900 router alternatives

AC1900 router alternatives

So are AC1900 routers worth their higher price tags? Maybe. Since the three on the market all use the same Broadcom BCM4360 chipset used in AC1750 routers, their improved 5 GHz performance is more due to better drivers than advanced silicon. And the ASUS and NETGEAR AC1900s can also deliver improved 2.4 GHz range vs. their AC1750 counterparts.

But if you're looking for AC1900 to deliver higher 2.4 GHz throughput, your best chance—as I've said from the start—is to buy a pair and have clear enough spectrum to use the 40 MHz bandwidth mode you'll need to get it.

P.S. All three products have also been retested with our normal 2.4 and 5 GHz benchmark tests.

More Wireless

Featured Sponsors

Top Ranked Routers




Support Us!

If you like what we do and want to thank us, just buy something on Amazon. We'll get a small commission on anything you buy. Thanks!

Over In The Forums

Hi,my current setup: TP-Link ER5120 as my router for load balancing a DSL connection and a LTE connection, Apple Airport Extreme (older version with 8...
Hey all! For a while now I've been getting fairly large ping spikes in games when someone else opens up YouTube videos or something like that. For exa...
I've only had an Asus router for ~2 years but from day one, I've ran Merlin's version of f/w. I did use dd-wrt for close to a decade on various Linksy...
Hi,I am currently using AC68, my bedroom is getting erratic wifi connections using 2.4GHz. Would like to seek opinions as to whether upgrading to AC88...
Hi SmallNetBuilders!!!Thanks for taking the time to read my question and give me a hand.I live in Australia and am getting connected to our new "fast"...

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3