NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
RBK753S - Much slower wifi speeds after AUTO firmware upgrade to 3.2.18.1! 3.2.17.x was MUCH faster
I had intentionally downgraded my RBK753S from 3.2.18.1 to 3.2.17.x and with 3.2.17.x, everything was great! But this morning I noticed that my firmware updated automatically to 3.2.18.1, which seem...
Quick update - Since I am / was experiencing the low speeds noted above (330 - 350 Mbps), I just disconnected and reconnected my Netgear A7000 wifi adapater from the network in Win 10 (did NOT unplug it).
After reconnecting to the network, speeds improved to 430 Mbps on first run after reconnecting, then 471 Mbps, 476 Mbps, 468 Mbps, one slower one of 451.7 Mbps but much better than before the disconnect/reconnect, and then 470 Mbps.
Will monitor stabilty after a few hours and also after a full day or two / after restarts / hibernates/ shutdowns etc.
Ran a few tests myself on my 8 series with v1 loaded: Armor/TM disabled. DST Enabled. CTS set to 64(default)
Mac Book wireless connected to RBR: 866Mbs Connection Rate
Mac Book Pro Connected near the RBR: 1300Mpbs Connection rate which is max rate for Mac Book Pro 2018
Mac Book Pro wire connected to a NG R7800 router in wireless bridge mode connected at 1733Mbps to RBR:
Furry - Nice results (above)!
I ran my FIRST Speedtest of the day and immediately got 473.42 Mbps out of ~480 Mbps provisioned, so it looks like I may stick with 3.2.18.1 since it appears to be working well! :)
Will wait till Satruday evening or Sunday morning to consider this solved to be safe (i.e. I want to ensure stability over several days).
I need to check and monitor my TiVO MoCA connection though.
I may go back and re-test with CTS set to 2347 and see how that does.
FURRYe38 wrote:I may go back and re-test with CTS set to 2347 and see how that does.
No noticeable adverse effects here with CTS set to 2347, but I have not extensively tested concurrent intensive connections (e.g. downloads, concurrent streaming etc.), but I would have likely noticed by now anyway given typical activity.
Sounds good. Ya, not sure why NG went with 64 instead of 2347 which is on there older systems. Seems to be a mixed bag of it works form some and not others. At least we can change that value.
njweb wrote:
FURRYe38 wrote:I may go back and re-test with CTS set to 2347 and see how that does.
No noticeable adverse effects here with CTS set to 2347, but I have not extensively tested concurrent connections but would have likely noticed by now..