Linksys Wireless AX3200 Dual-Band Wi-Fi 6 Router (E8450-CA) - $79.99

zywan0124 wrote: ↑ Sold and shipped by Bestbuy, wondering if it's worth returning the E7350 I got from Amazon for $45 and get this one instead.

$45 would better this one, you could buy 2 $45 then mesh to got much better experience

Last time a Linksys router was posted, RFD'ers much more knowledgeable than I said they were terrible routers. Not sure what gives, but might want to do some research into them.

Used to be a good name...back in the day.

shoryuken1 wrote: ↑ Last time a Linksys router was posted, RFD'ers much more knowledgeable than I said they were terrible routers. Not sure what gives, but might want to do some research into them.

Used to be a good name...back in the day.

Terrible if you run the stock firmware, great if you flash OpenWRT.

Old Gen wrt54g

mouf wrote: ↑ Terrible if you run the stock firmware, great if you flash OpenWRT.

This. Pair with some access points you are good.

Unfortunately not DDWRT compatible

mouf wrote: ↑ Terrible if you run the stock firmware, great if you flash OpenWRT.

I flashed with OpenWRT, LAN speed got a lot slower and there's no real firmware, just avoid this one.

akito925 wrote: ↑ Old Gen wrt54g

The video is 6 years old. The WRT54g is 20 years old. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_WRT54G_series

WRT54gl is not a good choice. It has a LOT less RAM (16MB) and flash (4MB) than current routers. It doesn't support recent WiFi standards. OpenWRT stopped supporting it in 2022 https://openwrt.org/toh/linksys/wrt54g

Historically, WRT54g was the starting point for open source firmware. Then Linksys released a cost-reduced model with the same name but with half the RAM and half the flash, not enough RAM or flash to run common third-party firmware. After the peasants came with pitchforks, they magnanimously released the WRT54gl with the original resources (at a higher price).

The Linksys E8450 has 512MiB of RAM and 128MiB flash, each 32 times what the WRT54gl has. https://openwrt.org/toh/linksys/e8450

Mike2021 wrote: ↑ Unfortunately not DDWRT compatible

My prejudice: OpenWRT is the only really open firmware. Unfortunately that means it can only run on some routers because much hardware is closed (the only driver for certain components is a proprietary binary kernel module). This router is supported by OpenWRT.

Last I looked:

• DD-WRT was really a project of BrainSlayer and not open. And he had signed NDAs -- hard to call that open. He also seemed to be jealous god.
• Merlin hacks non-open Asus firmware.
• Tomato has a lack of continuity. I don't recollect that it is all open.

Hugh wrote: ↑ My prejudice: OpenWRT is the only really open firmware. Unfortunately that means it can only run on some routers because much hardware is closed (the only driver for certain components is a proprietary binary kernel module). This router is supported by OpenWRT.

Last I looked:

• DD-WRT was really a project of BrainSlayer and not open. And he had signed NDAs -- hard to call that open. He also seemed to be jealous god.
• Merlin hacks non-open Asus firmware.
• Tomato has a lack of continuity. I don't recollect that it is all open.

Yes you right but DDWRT is better than stock firmware

Hugh wrote: ↑ My prejudice: OpenWRT is the only really open firmware. Unfortunately that means it can only run on some routers because much hardware is closed (the only driver for certain components is a proprietary binary kernel module). This router is supported by OpenWRT.

Last I looked:

• DD-WRT was really a project of BrainSlayer and not open. And he had signed NDAs -- hard to call that open. He also seemed to be jealous god.
• Merlin hacks non-open Asus firmware.
• Tomato has a lack of continuity. I don't recollect that it is all open.

Personally I feel the configuration interface for DD-WRT is much better though, OpenWRT's Luci interface is pretty barebones and has a nonsensical layout in many respects.

Trying to do any advanced QOS on OpenWRT basically requires command line level configuration.

The one of the easiest ax router to flash to openwrt.

Had it over year with open wrt. Stable works great

FormerSlacker wrote: ↑ Personally I feel the configuration interface for DD-WRT is much better though, OpenWRT's Luci interface is pretty barebones and has a nonsensical layout in many respects.

Trying to do any advanced QOS on OpenWRT basically requires command line level configuration.

Depends on your desiring. It’s straight forward for Sqm cake.True adaptive sqm qos not to be confused with Asus labeling. But cellular/sat adaptive sqm qos requires adding another package thru git as that is is still wip and not mainline for any firmware. Ddwrt or gargoyle for openwrt don’t support sqm cake qos only fcodel for their builds which is why I abandoned using them.

Seems to be dead, shows $169.99 for me.

lead wrote: ↑ Depends on your desiring. It’s straight forward for Sqm cake.True adaptive sqm qos not to be confused with Asus labeling. But cellular/sat adaptive sqm qos requires adding another package thru git as that is is still wip and not mainline for any firmware. Ddwrt or gargoyle for openwrt don’t support sqm cake qos only fcodel for their builds which is why I abandoned using them.

Fair enough, I actually prefer fcodel - cake's CPU usage in recent builds is alot higher for some reason.

But take for example advanced QOS, on DD-WRT you can control clients on a per mac level with limits/priorities/quotas and that kind of granularity simply doesn't exist on OpenWRT via Luci so yeah neither is perfect.

Even something as simple as showing how long a client has maintained a wireless link isn't shown via Luci, all you get is lease time... it's a lot of little things like this I find lacking.

With that being said I am using OpenWRT currently.

FormerSlacker wrote: ↑ Fair enough, I actually prefer fcodel - cake's CPU usage in recent builds is alot higher for some reason.

But take for example advanced QOS, on DD-WRT you can control clients on a per mac level with limits/priorities/quotas and that kind of granularity simply doesn't exist on OpenWRT via Luci so yeah neither is perfect.

Even something as simple as showing how long a client has maintained a wireless link isn't shown via Luci, all you get is lease time... it's a lot of little things like this I find lacking.

With that being said I am using OpenWRT currently.

Takes a lot of cpu power to do cake. With simple fcodel qos this router could do gigabit without much sweat. But cakes maxes at around +500mbps. Which is what all a53 Socs can do with sqm cake. You want faster go x86 or a72 cpu or better. For brand routers the best are either high clocked a53 arm filogic or Qualcomm 2.2 ghz and even those are still just a53 socs. Even the udm is only an a57 soc and can’t hit gigabit with cake. Which for almost 500 bucks is sad.