Remember that capacitors are essentially batteries, and most electronics have dozens of capacitors on their boards. Each capacitor has a set number of discharges before it starts to die. Depending on the architecture of the board, that could be 3 years or 10 years.
My theory is that they are ok for the workload they were purchased for, but the crappy software quality and poor testing means that when you start to push them beyond what they were designed for, they soon fall over. It could be the ever-increasing internet speed, the sheer number of WiFi devices in your home and their growing traffic, the increasing interference from neighbours, the accumulating security patches ... who knows? It could also be that your router is on and staying warm 24/7, so the cheap capacitors just start to deteriorate after 3 years.DarkReaper wrote: ↑ That's what I figured but every router I've owned from the Linksys WRT54G, Asus RT-N56U, to the Netgear R7000P, have all started to degrade around the 3 year mark. Wi-fi would cut out randomly and would require reboots. Up until 3 years, they all were fantastic. Custom firmware tend to be a temporary fix for a few months at most.
Ya... that's odd, unless your usage has changed during that time. More devices on the network, more network traffic, etc.DarkReaper wrote: ↑ That's what I figured but every router I've owned from the Linksys WRT54G, Asus RT-N56U, to the Netgear R7000P, have all started to degrade around the 3 year mark. Wi-fi would cut out randomly and would require reboots. Up until 3 years, they all were fantastic. Custom firmware tend to be a temporary fix for a few months at most.
Ya... so that comes down to the quality of the components.danfromwaterloo wrote: ↑ Remember that capacitors are essentially batteries, and most electronics have dozens of capacitors on their boards. Each capacitor has a set number of discharges before it starts to die. Depending on the architecture of the board, that could be 3 years or 10 years.
Costco is selling the AX4300 https://www.costco.ca/netgear-nighthawk ... 59981.html
Yes, I mean total price. That’s what I care about. I’m trying to compare if there’s a better router for less than or nearly the same price in Canada.EmpressLisaSu wrote: ↑ Wait how does that even work. Are you talking after taxes and shipping? I'm just talking about what I see on the product page, before all the taxes and fees and shipping, if any.
I got charged 112.98 USD for 2 for some reason, even though paypal checkout stated 99.98 USD. What the heck. So that's $56.49 USD for 1, or $70.69 CAD. Not sure what's gonna happen to duties, or if that extra bit would be the duties.
Can look at powerline adapters for unreachable corners to go with a good standalone router.henrik112 wrote: ↑ It’s not a huge house (single floor), but there are 4 bedrooms and one of the rooms always experiences slow and unstable connection. Shaw said it’s because of the router. If there’s something cheaper than this but is great for Wifi gaming and streaming, then that would be awesome.
Bad idea even though it is what most people do. Not updating the firmware guarantees you will have security vulnerabilities. All software has bugs.
What's the point of showing a screenshot of other routers?
The RAX 40 is on the list. I have no idea which model was reviewed actually but I wouldn't expect it to be drastically better or worse than where the RAX 40 is on the list.
The model being sold by B&H is the RAX38 which uses a Broadcom chipset. The RAX40 uses an Intel chipset. Two completely different routers.Nimious wrote: ↑ The RAX 40 is on the list. I have no idea which model was reviewed actually but I wouldn't expect it to be drastically better or worse than where the RAX 40 is on the list.
Whereas you can see the latency of many other WiFi 6 routers which could help someone who's in a similar case as me here, looking for a router just for VR reasons.
If you have better info concerning latency, I'd love to hear it since there are very few professional reviews on this router.
Okay... kind of strange for you to lecture me on this when you literally posted the internals of the RAX40 and assumed the RAX38 will look similar... to now claiming they're "completely different routers".
I said I assumed. Could be a completely different board for all I know or it could look similar. I couldn't find pictures of the RAX38's internals. The Intel chips aren't great based on the user feedback I was reading, while the Broadcom ones are more favourable. The Broadcom chip used in the RAX38 is also used in the TP-Link Archer AX73 router, but I wouldn't compare their performances. The most common comment I read about the Intel based routers is that they're slow (could be software or network performance, not sure). People don't seem to have the same issue with the RAX35 and RAX38, and both use the same Broadcom chip.Nimious wrote: ↑ Okay... kind of strange for you to lecture me on this when you literally posted the internals of the RAX40 and assumed the RAX38 will look similar... to now claiming they're "completely different routers".
As I've said, the latency chart would put things in perspective because there are higher-end models there like the RAX70. I don't think it's hard to see how that can help someone out when making a router purchase.
fudge_u wrote: ↑ I said I assumed. Could be a completely different board for all I know or it could look similar. I couldn't find pictures of the RAX38's internals. The Intel chips aren't great based on the user feedback I was reading, while the Broadcom ones are more favourable. The Broadcom chip used in the RAX38 is also used in the TP-Link Archer AX73 router, but I wouldn't compare their performances. The most common comment I read about the Intel based routers is that they're slow (could be software or network performance, not sure). People don't seem to have the same issue with the RAX35 and RAX38, and both use the same Broadcom chip.
If that's what you believe you should go back to your comment on the first page and edit it again. You said earlier in the day that the RAX38 and RAX40 are similar so I really don't understand why you're now trying to say the exact opposite.fudge_u wrote: ↑ Problem is, the model in the OP's link is an RAX38.
*EDIT*
I just figured out what the difference between the RAX38 and RAX40 is. The RAX38 has a Broadcom BCM6750 @ 1.5 GHz chip (also used by the RAX35), while the RAX40 has an Intel Lantiq GRX350A3 @ 800 MHz chip. Other than that, the routers are similar.
If you're going to check out a similar router, then check the RAX35. It's likely more similar to the RAX38 than the RAX40, because it uses the exact same Broadcom chip.Nimious wrote: ↑ If that's what you believe you should go back to your comment on the first page and edit it again. You said earlier in the day that the RAX38 and RAX40 are similar so I really don't understand why you're now trying to say the exact opposite.
As I said, there aren't a lot of professional reviews on the RAX38, especially concerning latency. I would think the most reasonable thing to do is to check out a similar router in this case and see the relative performance to other routers.
There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)
