NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Orbi Pro WiFi 6 AX6000 terrible AC range and performance
I've been fighting with the new SXK80 system "NETGEAR Orbi Pro WiFi 6 Tri-Band Mesh System (SXK80)" for the last few days. tl;dr - I'm returning it today. I still have an RBK53 system that bl...
Wizec wrote:I'm done with Netgear as a brand.
With a backpack of a life-long infrastructure experience including DEC, HP, HPE, Cisco, IBM ... there would not be many major networking brands left if I had abandoned each brand on the first impression or bug...
schumaku wrote:
Wizec wrote:I'm done with Netgear as a brand.
With a backpack of a life-long infrastructure experience including DEC, HP, HPE, Cisco, IBM ... there would not be many major networking brands left if I had abandoned each brand on the first impression or bug...
LOL
It's not the first bug. I and many members of the community fought Netgear for over 2yr just to get the AC generation of Orbis to work reliably.
I bought the "Professional" RBX82 setup wanting to upgrade to the benefits of AX now that I am upgrading my clients to AX.
The experience wasn't just "a bug". It's a host of bugs, including an egregious design flaw, admitted to by Netgear themselves that the antennas aren't as good as their 4yr old Orbis.
You can't fix bad antennas with firmware updates. It's logic. I'm not going to "upgrade" to a vastly inferior experience. I have a 4000 sq ft home and the RBK53 (finally) provides an excellent experience. I will research other vendors and find an AX solution worthy of my hard-earned $$.
Netgear knew they were offering an inferior experience when they decided to make the antennas worse. Now that the cat's out of the bag, and given my past horrible experiences with RBK53 for years, lesson learned. Netgear doesn't take the time to do things right - I'm out.
RaghuHR wrote:The antenna is not same between SXK80 and RBK53.
This is what RaghuHR stated. What you make out of it is just B.S. fake news:
Wizec wrote:The experience wasn't just "a bug". It's a host of bugs, including an egregious design flaw, admitted to by Netgear themselves that the antennas aren't as good as their 4yr old Orbis.
...
You can't fix bad antennas with firmware updates.
...
It's logic.
I can't and won't deny Netgear has a flat learning curve ... however, "antenna is not the same" does not imply anything of what you made out of it. It's not logic. It's simply a lie.
- No, you cherry picked one line from what he stated.
He stated repeatedly that I would have to move satellites around / play with router and satellite placement. Direct quote below:
“You need to move around Satellites for the better performance.
The antenna is not same between SXK80 and RBK53.
So you need play with router and satellite placement.”
So, let’s do a logic exercise. If I place the new router and satellite in the exact same place as my previous generation - and get worse signal, link speed and backhaul performance - what does that tell you?
Clearly that the antenna design is inferior, or I wouldn’t have to relocate for better performance. Period. End of story.
Once more for emphasis:
“You need to move around Satellites for the better performance.
The antenna is not same between SXK80 and RBK53.“
NO. I don’t need to do anything of the sort. In fact, I can move my existing Orbi satellite another 10ft away from the router and still get a better signal than the “Professional Orbi”.
Here’s what needs to happen. Netgear needs to get a clue about antenna design and improve it from one generation - and higher tier - to the next. A major drop off in antenna performance with precisely the same locations is an insta-return.
Wizec wrote:
“You need to move around Satellites for the better performance.
The antenna is not same between SXK80 and RBK53.“
NO. I don’t need to do anything of the sort. In fact, I can move my existing Orbi satellite another 10ft away from the router and still get a better signal than the “Professional Orbi”.More than unlucky communication. There are (many) other factors but just the "antenna". The Orbi Pro WiFi 6 should perform RF wise about the same as the classic Orbi. Similar, the sensitivity should be similar for both the wireless backhaul as well as the client facing fronthaul.
Needless to say, the max emitted power is certainly driven to the top for what each regulatory area allows for the sub-bands, ie. the FCC U-NII bands (channel sets).
The Pro part in the product designation does not come from the wireless capability - considering that all vendors and products WiFi routers and access points are made from very similar platforms (predominant Qualcomm, and then also Broadcom, and some Lantiq/Inhell and few exotic ones) from the additional networking features..
Wizec wrote:
Here’s what needs to happen. Netgear needs to get a clue about antenna design and improve it from one generation - and higher tier - to the next. A major drop off in antenna performance with precisely the same locations is an insta-return.Netgear has wonderful RF labs in San Jose and Taipei - and they use it heavily on site as from the remote development sites.
Making even better antennas is no rocket science. Performing within the allowed power and bandwidth is.
Based on recent local testing here with the independent lab with various recent 802.11ax and .11ac technology, we think that WiFi 6 seems to be a more impacted on channel co-usage (being the primary channel, or the dynamically added channels) - read even at good signal levels in the 90..95% area - the reliability as well as the net throughput has became affected more than the older standards.
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
