Benchmark Results: IxChariot Throughput
All right, enough of real world file copying. Let’s see what the esteemed IxChariot has to say.
Linksys and ZyXEL again stomp the 2.4 GHz yard, but this time around TRENDnet’s 671BR jumps out with a great location 1 result, even edging out the Asus N16 overall. Netgear’s WNDR3700 starts to push a little higher in the ranks here. Belkin’s N150 nudges aside the N1 Vision and tells the fancy pants router to go home and check itself in the mirror.
Over on the 5 GHz side, Netgear whips out a surprise win, making it the only router to break 100 Mb/s in IxChariot and even beating Linksys and Ruckus when averaged across all three locations. Still, check out that tight Ruckus grouping in the 58 to 68 Mb/s range. There’s a lot to be said for a router that will deliver good results everywhere rather than great results only when the conditions are exactly right.
Related Stories :
- Wireless Networking: Nine 802.11n Routers Rounded Up
- ZyXEL Intros Portable Router, Access Point
- New Belkin 802.11n Router Features Torrent App
- Xbox 360 802.11n Wireless Adapter Hits UK
- PQI Announces the Air Bank Portable NAS and Access Point
- This Access Point Offers Up to 7,500 SQ FT of Wi-Fi Coverage
- ZyXEL's New Business Access Point Resembles Smoke Detector
- D-Link Ships Wireless AC1200 Dual Band Gigabit Cloud Router
- Cisco Access Point Does Dual Band, HD Streaming
- WD Intros New 802.11ac Wireless Router, Bridge
Which version of the Linksys WRT610N did you use? V1 or V2?
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 
I'm surprised the 610N won. Without testing, the general consensus is that Linksys sucks except for their WRT54s.
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.
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.
Good point.
I will never buy a Linksys again. No 64 bit driver support! What gives?
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.
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!
No D-Link DIR-855, DGL-4500, no Apple AirPort Extreme Base Station?
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...
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!
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.
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?
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).
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.
Try TP-Link TL-WR1043ND , it is ~80&
No 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.
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.
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?