Like every other website on the planet, SmallNetBuilder uses cookies. Our cookies track login status, but we only allow admins to log in anyway, so those don't apply to you. Any other cookies you pick up during your visit come from advertisers, which we don't control.
If you continue to use the site, you agree to tolerate our use of cookies. Thank you!

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 Reviews

Does Afterburner beat Super-G?

So how does Broadcom's Afterburner stack up against Atheros' Super-G? Or in product terms, does Linksys' WRT54GS / WPC54GS pair beat NETGEAR's WGT624 / WG511T duo? Take a look at Figure 13 and decide for yourself.

Afterburner vs. Super-G

Figure 13: Afterburner vs. Super-G
(click on the image for a full-sized view)

The NETGEAR pair was tested under the same conditions as mentioned before, i.e. close range and no other equipment operating. I did, however, use unreleased firmware and drivers obtained from NETGEAR that are completing QA testing and should be available shortly. I also set the WGT624 router to Auto 108 mode (the card automatically adjusts).

At an average throughput of around 50 Mbps, the NETGEAR products using Super-G clearly beat Linksys' Afterburner-based offerings, but only when Super-G is running in its controversial channel-bonding mode. As the plot shows, Super-G drops out of channel bonding on a periodic basis to ensure that non Super-G products get a chance to communicate, which lowers its average best-case throughput to about 45Mbps.

But Super-G is supposed to drop immediately out of channel bonding as soon as a non Super-G client comes in range - though it has been Broadcom's contention that this doesn't happen. If you assume that Super-G does adjust, however, the speed advantage goes to Afterburner, since its 36 Mbps clearly beats Super-G's non-bonded 26 (or so) Mbps. On the other hand, as Figure 7 shows, Afterburner's speed drops pretty quickly with distance and / or obstacles - enough so to question whether Afterburner provides any significant benefit under real-world conditions.

By the way, even though these results (using faster WinXP test computers) are better than I obtained in my previous Super-G testing, I still can't verify Atheros' claim that Super-G "will consistently deliver over 60 Mbps of end-user TCP/IP throughput using typical data files".

NOTE!NOTE: The unreleased drivers and firmware I obtained from NETGEAR are supposed to contain the kinder, gentler version of Super-G that Atheros announced a few weeks ago (mid-March 2004), but I didn't test those claims for this review.

More Wireless

Wi-Fi System Tools
Check out our Wi-Fi System Charts, Ranker and Finder!

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

By popular request.Everyone who wants to complain about my decision to no longer support Tapatalk on SNBForums is welcome to post here.It will not cha...
Hi There.After several years with NetGear and DD-WRT, I am so glad to come back to the Asus Routers and Merlin.I recently got the AX88U connected to a...
I have been using AiMesh on over many AiMesh models for the past year and I would like to share some thoughts on AiMesh. Opinions are my own. Discussi...
Hi There,Update 2020/08/06386 rc2-3 firmware is in this link

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3