RAXE500 Beta FW v1.0.9.72 is available for Testing

---

Altsai wrote:

---

TWilson wrote:

Item 1
I still experience the same frequent client disconnects using the beta firmware that I experienced in prior firmware in the 5GHz band even with its Mode set to "Up to 2400 Mbps" and channel set to 44 (non-DFS channel).

 

This only occurred with my prior RAX200 when its Mode was set to "up to 4800 Mbps" due to Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). When I changed the RAX200 Mode to "Up to 2400 Mbps" and selected a non DFS channel, the disconnects stopped occurring (I live near an airport so I assume DFS was sensing a radar and was switching channels resulting in client disconnections).

 

With the RAXE500, changing the 5HGZ band mode to "Up to 2400 Mbps" and selecting a non DFS channel hasn't resolved the client disconnects (like it did with my prior RAX200).

 

Not happy about this and am considering returning the RAXE500 and rolling back to the RAX200 because of this and item 2 below.

 

>>>> did you ever try other channels in other bands? e.g., 5G band 4 (non-DFS channnels)?

 

>>>> Yes.  Also tried 153 with the same results.   Lowering mode and using non-DFS channel significantly reduced the frequency of client disconnects but has not resolved it like it did with my RAX200.  The latest RAX200 firmware is much more stable/reliable as compared to the RAXE500 firmware (which to me, is more like alpha code with incomplete feature set - e.g. a work in progress).

 

Item 2
The 6GHz band is working with my Windows 11 devices having the Intel AX210NGW adapter using WPA3 on 6GHz.

 

Range is horrible though. I get 3 bars when 15-20 feet away in line of sight.  Connection speeds are also frequently the same as or lower than what I get when connected to the 5Ghz band.

 

The 6GHz radio power output seems to be much lower than the 5GHz radio (I know there is greater attenuation across materials when using 6 GHz vs 5 GHz and 2.4 GHz - however I'm observing this with line of slight with only air between the router and device).

 

I had much higher hopes for 6Ghz band than this (The marketing for has been extremely over hyped).  I currently have the entire 6GHz band to myself in my neighborhood and its typical performance isn't any better than what I get on the congested 5GHz band (was expecting to see improved data transfer ratperformance between 6GHz AX clients and file/applications servers attached to local network).    

>>>>> FCC only opens LPI (low power mode) for 6GHz band so yes, the RF output power is actually lower than 5GH band. And 6GHZ RF power drop is faster than 5GHZ band which is the physical limitation. 

 

>>>> I understood this but did not fully appreciate the impact of this limitation until after deployment (marketing hype led me to believe it would perform better than it actually does in the real world - had expected reduced range but not near as bad is it actually is). Good article explaining 6E power levels here: https://www.extremenetworks.com/extreme-networks-blog/wi-fi-6e-its-not-just-about-6ghz/

IMHO, Netgear (and others) are greatly overhyping/exaggerating the benefits of 6E in their product marketing. As of today, 6E is not able to deliver on its promised benefits outside of a lab or very narrow window of environments having ideal conditions (e.g. client is extremely close to and in line of sight of the router). In a typical home or business, you’re better off sticking to 5GHz today. Maybe this will improve if the FCC allow the power to be increased in the future (not crossing my fingers that it will ever be increase though) ....

 

Item 3
The beta firmware included support for QOS. When I select the QOS setting page, I see options to enable WMM for 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, and 5GHz-2.   By default, WMM is checked for 2.4GHz and 5GHz (5GHz-2 is not checked).  

 

Obviously, there shouldn't be any settings for 5GHz-2 and instead should be settings for the 6GHz band.  

 

>>>> I agree. seems like GUI issue which needs to be fixed.

 

I haven't tested if QOS works on 2.4 or 5 GHz bands. 

 

 

---

 

---