Wireless Performance - more

The 5 GHz results don't look very good for the WZR-1750DHP with nearly 50% lower throughput right out of the gate and staying below the other two routers throughout the tested range.

5 GHz Downlink Throughput vs. Attenuation

The 5 GHz uplink throughput profile is very similar to downlink.

5 GHz Uplink Throughput vs. Attenuation

Closing Thoughts

The Router Ranker shows the Buffalo WZR-1750DHP in 5th place (out of ten) among AC1750 class routers. Sadly, it gets hit hardest in the areas which will matter most for many consumers, 5 GHz wireless performance. It ranks #10 in 5 GHz downlink throughput and #7 for 5 GHz downlink range. And while its 2.4 GHz results are somewhat better than 5 GHz, comparatively, they are not.

Buffalo WZR-1750DHP Ranking Performance Summary

It should also be noted that I set the router up for daily use during my review period. I ended up having to reboot the router two times in the span of a week and a half for internet slowdowns. I did a small amount of troubleshooting, including ensuring QoS was not enabled, but was never able to find the cause. I ended up switching back to my NETGEAR router to finish the review. I interacted a bit with Buffalo support, but didn't get to the bottom of the problem by the time it came to post this.

The Buffalo is priced competitively with other AC1750 routers, has fast storage throughput, a USB 3.0 port and decent 2.4 GHz performance. But for the main reason you would buy an AC1750 class routers, its 5 GHz AC performance, the WZR-1750DHP doesn't measure up.