NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
RAX200 - Performance difference between the channel ranges for the 5GHz radios?
I'm curious about something with regard to my RAX200, though the issue probably applies to other tri-band routers. The two 5GHz radios on my RAX200 have mutually exclusive channel numbers to select f...
Since I don't see a setting that explicitly defines the max channel width for the 5GHz radios, I assume you mean set the mode from "up to 4800 Mbps" to "up to 2400 Mbps"? I recall trying that yesterday, and the first thing I noticed was the PC I was working on connected at a MUCH lower speed(it's using an adapter with Intel's AX200 2x2 chip). Low enough to make 802.11ax not worth the trouble. But I'm guessing it should be fine for my devices that use 802.11ac, none of them have serious bandwidth needs. I'll try switching my AX band to the lower channels and my AC up to the higher ones and see if that helps. Thanks for the feedback!
Yes, sorry the 4800 Mbps setting is HT160 and the 2400 Mbps setting is HT80.
The AX200 in my testing in my Dell Inspiron 7577 on HT160 will connect at a link rate of 2.4 Gbps (theoretical), actual realworld sustained transfer speeds will be around 130-150 MB/s (1040 Mbps -1200 MBps) on HT80 it will be around 70-85 MB/s (560-680 Mbps). Testing was done with transfers to/from a Samsung T5 USB SSD connected to the router.
AX regardless of HT80 or HT160 will net you around 10-15% higher speeds over AC on 5Ghz, don't expect more than 20% gain at best.
Remeber even some of the better AC routers like the R7800 have support for HT160 so its not somethng special to AX routers. So don't confound AX with HT160. If you really need a stable gigabit transfer rate use the lower channel radio at HT160. In my experience on various routers the 100-120 area was generally worse range wise. For the upper channel radio the 149-165 section has better range and a more stable connection even if its only at HT80. You could relegate the upper radio for older or slower devices. Overall though unless you have a gigabit internet connection or a NAS on your network that you do large transfers to I highly doubt it makes much of difference between HT80/HT160.
In fact I do have Gigabit Ethernet, or near enough, but I'm not so worried about that. I also have a NAS that's connected to the router via 2.5Gig Ethernet(I got sick of bonding two 1GigE ports and bought the multi-Gig ethernet adapter for my NAS). My computers are regularly moving files to and from the NAS for various jobs, so while stable is key, fast is also quite important. :)
Nice, then yeah just use the lower channel for the HT160 AC and AX cabale devcies. The multigig port is nice unfortunately most NASs don't support N-BaseT and only do 1/10 Gbps. You may want to get a Multigig (Nbase-T) capable switch to bridge the connection to your NAS. I had to do that to connect the 5Gbps port on my RAX120 to my ReadyNAS524X, using a Netgear SX10 multigig capable switch.
Thankfully Synology has a card that works in my NAS that supports 100Meg/1G/2.5G/5G/10G so I could just plut it right into the router. On good days I can transfer files from the NAS over 802.11ax through a wall at 130MB/s, I can live with that :)