Baseline 2.4GHz Tests
Even though Amped stumbled in our last benchmark, it nails this 2GB transfer, keeping even with the field on the client-to-server half and knocking it out of the park when copying from server to client. Asus comes in a somewhat distant second. Our Netgear R6300 exhibits oddly poky client-to-server performance, but we’ll soon see if this is a problem or only an anomaly.
In this close PerformanceTest race, victory again goes to the Amped RTA15. This was not one of those times where UDP traffic suffered on the device. While it did come in third place out of four on UDP, it still beat the 3x3 R6300 and turned in the highest TCP performance. The RTA15 walked away with the highest combined score in this test. In our minds, this lays to rest any speculation of a possible superiority in 2.4GHz performance in AC1900 over AC1750 in the absence of a 256-QAM-enabled client. The surprising part is that a 2x2 router snubbed three 3x3 routers on this score, and that’s with the Nighthawk boasting about its beam-forming capabilities. Apparently, sometimes power does matter more.
Once again, Amped hits it out of the park. Its 2.4GHz TCP performance in IxChariot reveals a decent throughput floor, but sustained transfer rates run so close to the peak that the average score is nearly 50% greater than its peers. Meanwhile, the R6300 limps along at less than half of the average rate of Asus and the Nighthawk, with a bottom speed that’s downright atrocious in same-room conditions.
Amped surrenders its clear lead when we switch to UDP traffic, but it still squeaks past the Nighthawk, largely on the strength of its markedly faster lowest throughput rate. The R6300 again turns in a pitiful showing on its bottom data rate, although its top rate is largely in line and enough to make its average tolerable (although still last). The message we take away from this chart is that average 2.4GHz UDP performance is fairly even across all four routers, a condition we see echoed in the PerformanceTest results.