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!

Wi-Fi Router Charts

Click for Wi-Fi Router Charts

Mesh System Charts

Click for Wi-Fi Mesh System Charts

Wireless Performance - 5 GHz, Two Stream

Moving up to 5 GHz, here is the Performance Table for Two-Stream 5 GHz and 20 MHz mode. You'll find it's pretty hard to call an overall winner in this group. So I'll instead compare the original E4200 and V2. With only a few exceptions, they perform about the same.

The IxChariot plot summary for 5 GHz, 20 MHz mode downlink in two-stream mode is below and shows surprisingly low throughput variation. The plots of other runs aren't this flat, but show lower variation than we found with the 2.4 GHz three-stream plots.

Cisco E4200V2 IxChariot plot summary - 5 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink, 2 stream
Cisco E4200V2 IxChariot plot summary - 5 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink, 2 stream

Here are links to the other plots for your reference.

Wireless Performance - 5 GHz, Three Stream

Finally, we come to the Performance Table for Three-Stream 5 GHz and 20 MHz mode. Once again, the products are more alike than similar. Good luck calling an overall winner for this group of tests. I can't.

Here are the IxChariot plots for 20 MHz mode downlink in three-stream mode. Throughput is again, generally well-behaved, but with higher variation. Clicking through the other plots will show consistently higher throughput variation when running uplink.

Cisco E4200V2 IxChariot plot summary - 5 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink, 3 stream
Cisco E4200V2 IxChariot plot summary - 5 GHz, 20 MHz mode, downlink, 3 stream

Here are links to the other plots for your reference.

Closing Thoughts

There are those who will take one look at the E4200V2's lower wired routing throughput results and conclude that Cisco screwed up with the V2. They would be wrong. High routing speed doesn't do you any good unless you have Internet throughput to match, which few of us do. Given the increased processing power of the V2, I don't know why Cisco chose to crank down routing throughput. But that doesn't make the V2 a bad router.

On the other hand, the V2 won't provide a quantum leap (or even a little hop) in wireless performance, despite now supporting up to 450 Mbps link rates on both bands (with three stream clients and with 40 MHz bandwidth mode used).

The only real performance improvement the V2 provides is about twice the speed of the V1 for sharing a USB drive. 20 MB/s is actually pretty good, especially when you consider that's using an NTFS-formatted drive. If that, plus three-stream N on the 2.4 GHz band, is worth $20 to you, then by all means go for the E4200V2.

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!

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2