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

NETGEAR WNDR4000

Like Cisco's Linksys E4200, NETGEAR's WNDR4000 uses a Broadcom-based design. In fact, the two products are very similar. Aside from 8 MB of flash vs. 16 MB in the E4200, different antennas and firmware, the WNDR4000 and E4200 are very similar, both using a Broadcom BCM4331 Single-Chip 802.11n Dual-Band 3x3 for the 5 GHz radio.

5 GHz band tests using a dual-stream client showed better overall performance in 40 MHz bandwidth mode (or Up to 450 Mbps mode in NETGEAR-speak) than in 20. Best case 5 GHz performance was 83 Mbps running downlink in 40 MHz bandwidth mode at Location A and I measured 111 Mbps total throughput in 40 MHz mode running simultaneous up and downlink tests at Location A.

I duplicated Figure 1 below so that you don't have to click back to the previous page. You can see generally higher throughput in the stronger signal locations A and C from the WNDR4000. But highest throughput measured was 87 Mbps running uplink in Location A in 40 MHz bandwidth mode, only slightly higher than measured with the dual-stream client.

Three stream performance - 5 GHz band

Figure 1 (duplicate): Three stream performance - 5 GHz band

The IxChariot plot in Figure 3 shows relatively steady throughput, which in turn yielded higher average throughput for the one minute test runs. Unlike the Belkin, the NETGEAR's link rates didn't move around much, which also helped produce higher average throughput. Even in Location A, however, I did not get a steady 450 Mbps link rate.

NETGEAR WNDR4000 IxChariot plot summary - 5 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink

Figure 3: NETGEAR WNDR4000 IxChariot plot summary - 5 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink, three stream client

Running simultaneous up and downlink tests in location A in Auto 20/40 mode once again produced the highest total throughput of 135 Mbps.

Here are links to the other 5 GHz plots for your perusal:

Updated 7/29/2011

NETGEAR had asked me to retest the router with its recently issued 1.0.0.66 firmware, which is supposed to improve routing throughput. The results in Table 2 show that both WAN to LAN and LAN to WAN routing throughput has indeed been improved.

Test V1.0.0.66 V1.0.0.60_8.0.49
WAN to LAN 676 Mbps 351 Mbps
LAN to WAN 624 Mbps 366 Mbps
Total Simultaneous 701 Mbps 423 Mbps
Max Simultaneous Connections 4096 4096
Table 2: WNDR4000 routing throughput

TRENDnet TEW-691GR

The last three-stream router I had in the SmallNetBuilder closet was TRENDnet's TEW-691GR. TRENDnet has been pretty aggressively pursuing the three stream N market, shipping the TEW-691GR and beating the bigger names to market with the first three-stream N router.

Like the Belkin N750 DB, the TEW-691GR uses a Ralink RT3883F 3X3 N radio, but set for the 2.4 GHz, not 5 GHz band. So the performance chart in Figure 4 doesn't have any other products to compare to because all other current three-stream routers support it for 5 GHz only. The exception is TRENDnet's TEW-692GR, which patiently awaits my test of its simultaneous three-stream dual-band capabilities.

Three stream performance - 2.4 GHz band

Figure 4: Three stream performance - 2.4 GHz band

Given the impressive results I saw when I tested the 691GR with TRENDnet's TEW-687GA 450Mbps Wireless N Gaming Adapter, I expected similar behavior with the Intel 6300 client. Silly me.

Figure 5 from the TEW-687GA review summarizes 20MHz downlink tests. The top throughput of 108 Mbps was pretty impressive. Even more impressive was the 134 Mbps obtained switching to 40 MHz bandwidth mode!

TRENDnet TEW-691GR IxChariot plot summary - 2.4 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink, three stream client

Figure 5: TRENDnet TEW-691GR IxChariot plot summary - 2.4 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink, three stream client

In contrast, the IxChariot plot in Figure 6 presents a pretty sorry sight. Best case throughput of 52 Mbps is only half that obtained using the TEW-687GA, with high throughput variation helping to keep average throughput down.

TRENDnet TEW-691GR IxChariot plot summary - 2.4 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink

Figure 6: TRENDnet TEW-691GR IxChariot plot summary - 2.4 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink

Uplink was even worse, producing the lowest results seen in this roundup. Take a look at Figure 7. Even repeating the dismally low throughput runs didn't help.

TRENDnet TEW-691GR IxChariot plot summary - 2.4 GHz, 20 MHz mode, uplink

Figure 7: TRENDnet TEW-691GR IxChariot plot summary - 2.4 GHz, 20 MHz mode, uplink

At least running simultaneous up and downlink tests in location A in Auto 20/40 mode managed to rustle up 107 Mbps of total throughput.

Here are links to the other TRENDnet plots:

Closing Thoughts

I said right in the article tease that these tests produced pretty disappointing results, especially in light of the optimistic view the combination of TRENDnet TEW-691GR and TEW-687GA previously produced. I think, however, there's a clue to the reason why in those very results: the TEW-691GR and TEW-687GA both use the same chipset.

In the early "draft" days of 802.11n, the technology was developing so quickly that for best results, you had to match clients and AP / routers using the same manufacturer's chipsets for best performance. As 11n matured with successive chipset generations and driver tunings, this recommendation became less important. It also became less practical given the number of chipset manufacturers and the fact that some (I'm looking at you, Intel) produced only client products.

It seems like we're back in that mode with three-stream N. The technology behind dual-stream 802.11n is hellaciously complex. And I'm told that moving from two to three streams isn't just a matter of adding another antenna and transmit / receive chain. The math behind optimally handling that third stream is exponentially more difficult. So it appears that the cake once again ain't fully baked. And you, dear consumer, may get a bellyache if you choose to partake.

I'm surprised, however, that the results are so bad with Intel's client. Intel was one of the first to support client-side three stream N in its 5300 chipset, even before there were three-stream N AP's on the market! So it's not like Broadcom and Ralink (and Qualcomm/Atheros, who isn't represented in this roundup) haven't had time to test their products with Intel clients.

The good news is that now we have the test capability in place, SmallNetBuilder can help you make an informed choice. So stay tuned folks. Looks like it's going to be a bumpy ride in three-stream N land for awhile.

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

Just changed broadband provider in the UK to Vodafone and didn't want to use their routerSo, managed to get my DSL username and password from their su...
Hi,I was trying to downgrade the CFE for overclocking, because CFE 1.1.1.2 does not allow overclocking. The original firmware were:CFE 1.1.1.2Firmware...
Bought a AC1900 ASUS router and I live in the boonies with good lte but wayyyy over priced cable. Looking for a forum/guide to setup my cell as the so...
I am trying to figure out a slow wireless issue I am experiencing. If its "normal" behavior due to the nature of wireless. When uploading files via LA...
Hi guys,Recently I purchased an RT-AX88U version which was replaced with the RT-AC66U as I had very good experience with it and all the features worke...

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3