Wireless Networking: Nine 802.11n Routers Rounded Up

ZyXEL X550N

In reviewing ZyXEL products over the years, we consistently come away with the impression that the company should be more popular than it is. This is another one of those D-Link-ish “we do some of everything” vendors—soup to nuts, print servers to powerline adapters. The margins must be so slim in networking gear that the industry’s players have to span the entire product range just to make a buck. When you try to do everything at once, the tendency is to do nothing particularly well unless you have fairly deep pockets.

ZyXEL, while never dazzling us with unique innovation, has never disappointed us, either. The X550N ($99.93) fits the pattern: boring on the outside, interesting on the inside, with high enough performance and build quality at a low enough price to make the whole package attractive.

As an indication of how serious ZyXEL is about its gear, this router’s manual is over 300 pages and features over 300 tables and illustrations. Having QoS is now ordinary, and a bandwidth monitor is almost expected now, but how about a bandwidth monitor for different traffic types? Interesting, right? The setup wizard comes in six languages. There’s a router/AP mode selector in the maintenance menus (although we still prefer a physical exterior switch). ZyXEL goes beyond the usual basic QoS functionality by not only providing general Wi-Fi Multimedia (WMM) QoS—prioritizing by voice, video, “best effort,” and background—but several common application profiles and a custom configuration area where you can create user-defined QoS profiles. This sort of management depth reflects ZyXEL’s larger presence in the business products world. If you dislike 24x7 wireless broadcasting, use the integrated scheduling matrix to disable it during off hours. All told, there’s just so much great functionality buried in this router that it’s easy just to geek out and get lost in it, forgetting along the way that ZyXEL omits a USB port for NAS and FTP functionality, has no media serving capabilities, or any of the other modern consumer amenities. The overall impression is that this is a router for business and productivity, not entertainment.

From the outside, the X500N is totally ordinary: bland white non-styling, three detachable 2 dBi antennas, a WPS button, and five total gigabit Ethernet LAN and WAN ports. It would have been really interesting to try out the X550NH, which replaces the X550N’s 2 dBi antennas with 6 dBi high-gain alternatives, but we weren’t able to land this variant for our review. You can buy the ANT1106 antenna upgrade for $45.10, which is odd when the entire X550NH package runs only $117.27.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
82 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • Anonymous
    The testing is flawed in that there could be great variability in adapter performance, as admitted by the author. A true "router" comparison would use a common non-partial built-in Intel wifi link miniPCIe card to isolate router performance. Otherwise, too many variables are introduced. Besides, most ppl buy routers for routers, not in matching pairs since most ppl already own wifi laptops or adapters. Smallnetbuilders tested the Netgear WNDR3700 as one of the best performing routers on the market. Obviously this review unit is hampered by the Netgear adapter.
    10
  • Other Comments
  • Anonymous
    Which version of the Linksys WRT610N did you use? V1 or V2?
    1
  • deividast
    I want one of those Linksys :) I use now WRT54G and it's doing it's job, but it's a bit slow some times then transfering files from notebook to PC :)
    1
  • vant
    I'm surprised the 610N won. Without testing, the general consensus is that Linksys sucks except for their WRT54s.
    -9
  • Anonymous
    The testing is flawed in that there could be great variability in adapter performance, as admitted by the author. A true "router" comparison would use a common non-partial built-in Intel wifi link miniPCIe card to isolate router performance. Otherwise, too many variables are introduced. Besides, most ppl buy routers for routers, not in matching pairs since most ppl already own wifi laptops or adapters. Smallnetbuilders tested the Netgear WNDR3700 as one of the best performing routers on the market. Obviously this review unit is hampered by the Netgear adapter.
    10
  • vant
    kevinqThe testing is flawed in that there could be great variability in adapter performance, as admitted by the author. A true "router" comparison would use a common non-partial built-in Intel wifi link miniPCIe card to isolate router performance. Otherwise, too many variables are introduced. Besides, most ppl buy routers for routers, not in matching pairs since most ppl already own wifi laptops or adapters. Smallnetbuilders tested the Netgear WNDR3700 as one of the best performing routers on the market. Obviously this review unit is hampered by the Netgear adapter.

    Good point.
    6
  • The Greater Good
    I will never buy a Linksys again. No 64 bit driver support! What gives?
    1
  • cag404
    I just replaced my Linksys WRT600N with the Netgear WNDR3700. I have not used the WRT610 that is reviewed here, but I can say that the difference in routers is noticeable. The reason I replaced the router was that the WRT600N was dropping my port settings used to provide remote access to my home server, and I got tired of it. Wanted to try a different router so I went with the Netgear based on a favorable Maximum PC review. Glad I did. It has a snappier feel and I get a stronger signal throughout my two-floor house. The Netgear has not dropped my port settings for my home server yet. Also, I didn't like that fact that Linksys abandoned the WRT600N with no further firmware updates after about the first or second one.
    4
  • pato
    Was the Linksys the V1 or V2 variant?
    Which firmware was installed on it?
    I have one (V1), but am very unhappy about the signal range! I have it replaced with a WNDR3700 and have now a twice as strong signal as before!
    0
  • Anonymous
    No D-Link DIR-855, DGL-4500, no Apple AirPort Extreme Base Station?
    2
  • Anonymous
    Would have been nice to see the WAN-LAN throughput/connections as well for wired connections, but I guess all people but me use wireless for everything nowadays...
    3
  • opmopadop
    I use a Linksys WAG160N, it wasnt reviewed here but I wanted to share that it has the same crappy problem of dropping internet connection. The competition can learn alot by making sure their routers dont suck as much as Linksys's do!
    1
  • Anonymous
    Linksys must make an official annoucement/support page about WAG160N, i have two and wired connections can not see wireless ones and vice versa, they even didnt make a firmware for that.
    1
  • Stillglade
    Would be an interesting follow up article to flash the WRT610N with DD-WRT firmware to compare against stock. Basically, answer the question of is it the hardware or the software that makes it so good?
    1
  • Zenthar
    I think Linksys Linksys E series should have been evaluated as well. Assuming a new version would perform at least on-par with the previous one is really bad analysis. There is so many things they could have screwed or even improved (one has to be positive as well).
    2
  • Anonymous
    tried 3 different routers and the linksys was the only one that would not freeze up with NETFLIX streaming from my Samsung Blueray player. Netgear, dlink, and Belkin all froze up after a about 75% of the buffering...requiring a power cycle of the router and the samsung player.
    Bit the bullet with the $$ and opted for the Linksys and am very pleased.
    1
  • Anonymous
    Try TP-Link TL-WR1043ND , it is ~80&
    -1
  • cag404
    CoriassiNo D-Link DIR-855, DGL-4500, no Apple AirPort Extreme Base Station?


    pato, my WRT600N was the v1 variant. I forget the release version of the firmware, but it was the latest version, as Linksys has not released any updates for it in roughly a year (I've had the router since a few months after it was first released). I liked it due to the dual radios, however, but it would drop wireless clients randomly (which was aggravating and required me to reset the router about once every other month) and it would not retain my port forwarding settings for my home server. And I agree with you, signal range was marginal with that router.
    -2
  • zelannii
    No Apple Airport Extreme considered????? Its the stick we measure the rest by in many cases, or at least most other sites do. How did you guys miss this one? Please amend to include the Airport in relation to the rest.
    0
  • zelannii
    1) should have tested both with the "matching" adapter, and also with the generic Intel Wireless N chipset which is what 90% of people likely use (and the AMD equivalent). VERY VERY few people buy the matching adapters, especially if one is built in. It's a STANDARD now, so interoperability with "supported" adapters should not be an issue for the vendor (and if it is, that's actually IMPORTANT)!

    2) Should have tested N + G concurrency on 2.4GHz as well as N only on 2.4 + 5GHz concurrency (for devices that had dual radio). This data is important for most people who will run a Wireless N device or two, but likely also have a few smart phones or a game console that only supports 2.4GHz... I know the Airport Extreme currently has a bug making this dog slow, do some of the others?

    3) onyl 2 concurrent devices? how about 5 or 6? I regularly have 7 or 8. I notice performance drops off consistently just based on the number of connected devices, even if only one is "in use" actively downloading, and want to know if some routers hold out better with that.

    4) no feature comparison chart?
    3
  • pluripotent
    I bought that linksys and the connection was so unstable that it was totally unusable. After spending way too much time on it, I got the D-link dual band router, the DIR-855. I stream live talks over the router, and using 2.4 GHz, I would have consistent brief signal disconnections every few minutes. 5 GHz solves that problem, but you need a compatible adapter.

    How much did you guys test the shareport function? (Not much from what it looks like). The shareport function hooked up to an external hard drive only works if you are transferring a file or two using windows. It totally fails when you try to us it with a 3rd party backup program (such as acrea). I personally haven't tried connecting a printer to shareport. I also couldn't get it to work using eraser (a disk erasing utility. I concluded that it just doesn't work with third party apps. So far, none of the driver, firmware or shareport software updates have fixed this problem.

    D-link does have a nice forum on their site where people can post their problems. For fixable problems, other users will helpfully solve your problems. For unsolvable problems (shareport being one of them) the user complaints just keep piling up. Rarely do d-link's own tech support grace the forums. Apparently, D-link is currently collecting all of the shareport grips and cataloging them. Ostensibly, this will result in a fix at some point in the future. Still waiting.
    -1