eibgrad said:
I doubt anyone here is going to be able to address the finer points that differentiate these two routers. As repeaters, they’re fundamentally based on the same principles; establish a wireless client to the primary router, then establish a secondary AP. To that extent, it doesn't matter.
That said, assuming they have *generally* similar specs, I'm going to recommend dd-wrt if only because it offers so much more flexibility. You can create both bridged and unbridged repeaters. You can adjust the power output up to 250mW.
Now in terms of performance, you always take a hit w/ these types of repeaters since they have to split their time between the two modes (client and AP). And that can mean as much as HALF your throughput is lost, at least for local transfers (for internet access where the available bandwidth is typically so much less, it’s much less of a concern). But even under the best of conditions, some apps don’t work well over a repeater, specifically those which demand very fast response time. All that jumping between client and AP mode can make some almost unusable (e.g., VOIP)!
That’s why in some cases you might want to consider creating your own repeater. All you need is a wireless ethernet bridge connected to a wireless AP. And now each AP can use different freqs/channels and avoid all these problems!
Yup thats very true. I was mostly looking for opinions from users who may have had experience with the performance of one or both of these devices.
Your suggestion about the wireless ethernet bridge, would a setup as such look like this:
side A = primary network with internet that needs to be extended
Side B = side with dead spots/ poor coverage
AP 1 acting as the bridge receiving/sending data by wireless to side A; and AP 2 connected by wire to AP1, sending and receiving data by wireless to clients on side B
Am i close to the idea you meant?