Routing throughput running the latest 18.104.22.168 firmware measured in the low 400 Mbps range in both directions and mid 400 Mbps range for both WAN to LAN and LAN to WAN tests running simultaneously.
|WAN > LAN||429||409|
|LAN > WAN||420||422|
|Maximum Simultaneous Connections||4096||4096|
Table 1: Routing throughput summary and comparison
Table 1 compares routing throughput for the v2 and v1, which are, for all intents and purposes equal.
The IxChariot plot in Figure 10 shows throughput isn't rock steady. But it's doubtful you'd notice the variations with most Internet services.
Figure 10: WNDR3700v2 routing throughput
The question in most buyers' minds is whether the v2 has improved wireless performance. But, just as important, is whether performance has gotten worse. Unfortunately, it looks like the change in 5 GHz antennas yields has changed performance for the v2 vs. the v1.
I tested the v2 using our standard six-location open-air test. As usual, I set the 2.4 GHz radio to Channel 1 and the 5 GHz radio to Channel 36. I've recently changed to running performance tests using WPA2 / AES encryption instead of no encryption, because that's how Wi-Fi gear should be secured today, so that's how the v2 was configured. I left all other router defaults in place.
The test client was an Intel Wi-Fi Link 5300 AGN mini-PCIe card. For the v1, the card was in a Dell Mini 12 running WinXP Home SP3 and using Intel's Win XP 22.214.171.124 driver. For the v2, I used an Acer Aspire 1810T notebook running Win 7 Home Premium and Intel's Win 7 126.96.36.199 driver for the Intel card, because I recently switched to that platform, again to more accurately reflect current usage patterns.
I ran a Wireless Performance Table comparison for the v1 and v2 and split it into 2.4 and 5 GHz band results, shown in Figures 11 and 12. For each test location (A through F), the higher throughput is highlighted in yellow. If both readings are within 1 Mbps of each other, both are highlighted. Then the product with the most location highlights is itself highlighted. If both products have the same number of highlights, then both products are highlighted.
For the 2.4 GHz band, v1 and v2 are tied for three of the four benchmarks run, with the fourth benchmark (40 MHz mode, uplink) going to the v1.
Figure 11: WNDR3700v1 and v2 wireless performance comparison - 2.4 GHz
For the 5 GHz band, the v1 wins for all four benchmarks, consistently yielding higher throughput particularly in the medium signal locations C and D. Note that neither router managed to even be detected by the client in our dead-zone locations E and F.
Figure 12: WNDR3700v1 and v2 wireless performance comparison - 5 GHz
Here are links to the IxChariot wireless test plots if you'd like to explore further:
- 5 GHz / 20 MHz downlink
- 5 GHz / 20 MHz uplink
- 5 GHz / 20 MHz up and downlink
- 5 GHz / 40 MHz downlink
- 5 GHz / 40 MHz uplink
- 5 GHz / 40 MHz up and downlink
User reviewsView all user reviews
Average user rating from: 14 user(s)
NOTE! Please post product reviews from actual experience only.
Questions, review comments and opinions about products not based on actual use will not be published.
|User Rating [Back to Top]||Overall:||2.6||Features :||3.2||Performance :||2.8||Reliability :||1.9|
One of the lucky ones
February 18, 2012
Report this review
After one year, easily the best consumer router i have ever used. I have 1.5 problems, 1st the USB storage is crap. Even getting the latest firmware, best possible USB key (20mb/s) + correct partition format = never got passed 2Mbit/s. My 1/2 complaint is that the range is worse than my old router. Previous one was a Billion 7300N, which had 3 huge external anttenas, the range was stupendous @ 150 METERS accross the road. Now I am reduced to with in my land which is the 1/2 complaint. Performance wise WiFi N 5Ghz is stupid fast averaging 18Mbyte/s , Gigabit averaging 45M/Bytes is ok. Reliabilty is all based on heat, as long you keep the black box out of sunlight a cool area and upright it should stay cool. When cool the thing is rock sold, I have a habbit of switching modems and router off every 2 to 4 days to rest. But I always forget with the WNDR3700 because it never even slows down, amazing. Warning when hot, it’s slow and drops out a lot. A fast reliable router at a good price, 9/10.
Performance doesnt correspond to price
November 27, 2011
Report this review
Selling it. NAS performance poor. Wifi range poor, dropping frequently on longer ranges. Dual band not needed anymore - sold the only device with such feature. So why this overpriced product? Why not Tplink 1043? Why not any other product that delivers the similar performance? Why not the cheapiest router in the world with EXTERNAL antennas?
Great device, lots of features
June 12, 2011
Report this review
Great device, got the V2 version of it with the latest firmware, as i'm mainly using it as wired router, i don't really care about the wireless performance, although it is way better then my previous WRT320n (now i can actually use the iPad -with its weak wireless chipset- in the garden).
With a 100/100 Fiber to the home line you need a serious device, especially if you like to download and upload around 3TB per month. The 4096 simultaneous connections seems to be enough to handle the bittorrent traffic, usually i have around 3000 connections + 50 connections to a usenet server, for all other downloading needs.
This is the first router i have that actually reaches the 98mbit/s up and down, most other devices i got stopped at 80mbit/s down and 70 up.
It never crashed, even with some serious traffic volumes.
It has 1 little issue, i can't set a From: and To: port when i want to forward something (for example, SSH from 443 on the WAN side to 22 on the LAN side, so i can set up SSH-tunnels at school via the HTTPS port and still use 22 on my LAN).
It outperforms the WNDR4000 with its wired performance.
May 28, 2011
Report this review
I brought home my new WNDR3700 after two failed Cisco products. My WinPro 64 bit was able to read the CD unlike the others so I thought this one would work. But after reading the CD my system was having unusual problems and I had to hit the reset button. So I give the features rating a complete failure. After forcing the CD read issue and getting one step away from the complete checkmark, all I had left to do was get the laptop to communicate... it would not.
Tech support said change to weaker WEP encryption and try again. Well It didn't work and they don't speak fluent english so the performance rating is a complete failure. The reliability of the product is finally a complete failure as well due to the fact that it is featureless and does not perform at all unless you count on reliability to take it back for a refund.
This router will piss you off and drive you to drinking. Without being crude, I told Netgear what I thought. If I recover from my bad attitude and decide to try wireless networking again I will call a veteran networking specialist and let that person decide on what router will work with my office pc and configure it to actually work. For now I'm looking at buying about a 1000 feet of ethernet cable and just punching a bunch of holes in the wall. Hope your purchase goes better than mine.
Good performance, bad reliability
April 29, 2011
Report this review
The router is great, when it works. I bought 2 of the 3700v2, the 2nd one is the replacement. I returned both eventually. The first router is blazing fast on both bands, for a week, before kept dropping 2.4G band connections. When the connection is dropped, I had to reboot the router. The 2nd router is a lot worse. After 3 days, the wireless part is completely broken, on both bands. No wireless signal at all.
The router offers a lot for a reasonable price but the reliability is a huge issue.
Related Items:NETGEAR WNDR3700v2 5 GHz Band Retest
NETGEAR WNDAP350 ProSafe 802.11n Dual Band Wireless Access Point Retes
New To The Wireless Charts: D-Link DIR-665 Xtreme N 450 Gigabit Router
D-Link DIR-825 B1 Quick Review
ASUS RT-N56U Black Diamond Dual-Band Gigabit Wireless-N Router Reviewe