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

Routing Performance

All performance tests were done with firmware and Android app using select tests from the Version 10 Router process.

The simple iperf3 WAN to LAN and LAN to WAN throughput tests came in at a surprisingly low 523 and 529 Mbps, respectively. I suspected AiProtection and Adaptive QoS could be causing lower throughput, so I disabled both and reran the tests. This raised WAN to LAN throughput up to 638 Mbps and LAN to WAN to 614 Mbps. So if you have a gigabit internet connection, you'll need to give Lyra a pass, at least until ASUS implements AP mode and you can use another router.

Routing throughput - iperf3 method

Routing throughput - iperf3 method

The HTTP test method is better at showing performance differences under load, downloading four different size image files with 2K concurrent connections. The plot below compares Lyra with eero Gen 2, Orbi "mini" and Google Wi-Fi. Lyra doesn't do well in any of the test cases. Shutting off AiProtection and Adaptive QoS improved things considerably, yielding scores of 12%, 24%, 65% and 88% for 2KB, 10KB, 108KB and 759KB file sizes, respectively.

Routing throughput - HTTP Score comparison - WAN to LAN

Routing throughput - HTTP Score comparison - WAN to LAN
Plot key file size: [A] 2 KB, [B] 10 KB, [C] 108 KB and [D] 759 KB file

Results are very similar for uplink. Disabling AiProtection and Adaptive QoS raised scores to 13%, 30%, 69% and 91%.

Routing throughput - HTTP Score comparison - LAN to WAN

Routing throughput - HTTP Score comparison - LAN to WAN

Wi-Fi Performance

Lyra was run through our new Wi-Fi System test process, letting Lyra use whichever channels and bandwidth it chose. Here's what Lyra looked like in the octoBox 18" test chamber. Because Lyra's three-radio design is most similar to eero Gen 2 and its pricing is closest, I'm going to focus comparisons to these two products.

ASUS Lyra in test chamber

ASUS Lyra in test chamber

Throughput vs. Attenuation (RvR)

The Rate vs. Range or RvR benchmarks look at how throughput varies with decreasing signal. This test is done on the root node, so is a best-case view and does not include any effects from backhaul links.

The 2.4 GHz downlink plot shows eero and Lyra tracking pretty closely. Both ran with 40 MHz bandwidth and reached full 400 Mbps maximum link rate at the beginning of the plot.

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 2.4 GHz downlink

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 2.4 GHz downlink

2.4 GHz uplink, again shows similar performance for both products, except for a dip in eero's throughput at the stronger signal levels at the start of the plot.

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 2.4 GHz uplink

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 2.4 GHz uplink

The two products diverge on the 5 GHz downlink benchmark, with Lyra showing a much faster throughput decline than eero.

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 5 GHz downlink

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 5 GHz downlink

5 GHz uplink shows a similar result. These results would seem to indicate eero would have better 5 GHz range than Lyra. Of course, since both operate in a multi-node mesh, the difference might not be immediately obvious. In fact, just as in multi-AP systems, long range in mesh systems isn't necessarily an advantage. If nodes overlap too much, devices will have a difficult time figuring out when to roam and where to roam to.

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 5 GHz uplink

Throughput vs. Attenuation - 5 GHz uplink

On the other hand, since mesh systems lean heavily on 5 GHz for backhaul, you'd want as much 5 GHz range as you can get. It's not an easy tradeoff for system designers.

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

I have attached a 2TB WD elements and partitioned it for 1.8TB for network share and 200GB for use with jffs partition on a RTAC88U with Merlin 384.18...
Suricata is a free and open source, mature, fast and robust network threat detection engine.The Suricata engine is capable of real time intrusion dete...
Hello guys.Right now I'm using that line to make a backup of my entire jffs in shell:Bash: tar -cf some_folder/jffs_"$FWVER".tar /jffs >/dev/null 2>&...
This is FlexQoS, a fork of the original, groundbreaking FreshJR_QOS script written by @FreshJR.FlexQoS provides a fully customizable Adaptive QoS expe...
Supermicro SuperServer E302-9D Review: A Fanless 10G pfSense Powerhouse With this piece of kit, I could see myself wadin...

Don't Miss These

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3