RAX70 vs RAX80

[KevW]

Hi,

Im trying to pick between these 2 routers, any advice would be great!

I have a 2,500 size home with 3 gamers and we stream all our TV viewing.

The main difference I can see is the RAX70 has Tri-Band WiFi and a slower 1.5GHz processor vs the RAX80 Dual Band WiFi and 1.8GHz quad-core processor.

So am I better with the faster processor or wifi channel?

Thanks,

Kevin.

[plemans]

That's a tough one. You're home is boarderline to where a mesh system might be a better option but its not "needed". Plus the 2 routers are fairly closely rated in speeds. yes one is triband but the other supports wider channel support (tends to have faster peak speed as you can get a wider link back to the router per singular device)

but you also don't have a ton of devices. 

So its a toss up of which would be better. 

what I'd do? 

Find somewhere with a generous return policy and try the cheaper one and see if it hits all your needs/expectations. If it doesn't, return it and try the more expensive option

[KevW]

I have about 50 devices approx.
The price difference between the two is only £20.
I also notice the netgear gaming x1000 router has the same processor as the RAX70.

[plemans]

I've never used either one so I can't attest to either's prowress. 

I've used the CAX80 that would be similar to the RAX80 and it worked great. 

But unsure of if the triband would have any benefit over the dual  band.

I've also got a RAX200 but thats a triband with quite a bit more grunt than the RAX70 so its not much of a comparison. 

I'd probably try the triband and see how it works. But thats just because I've liked my triband setups. 

[Vorter]

What did you end up getting? I'm picking between the Costco versions of these two (RAX75 vs RAX78) and it's hard to choose. The RAX78/RAX70  only has 2x2 256-QAM on the 2.4GHz and 5GHz-1. The RAX75/80 has an additional ethernet port and USB port but is a bit older.

[Razor512]

In terms of coverage, aftter something like the RAX 50, range improvements will be marginal since the main limit of a single AP is the FCC.

For non-DFS channels, the transmit power limit is 1 watt and Netgear already gets very close to that limit (where everyone is slightly under ot due to band edge regulations and not wanting any variance violating the limit).

For DFS channels, the transmit power is limited to 250mw.  By default when the AX routers are using 160MHz channel width on the 5GHz band, the transmit power will be limited to 250mw due to the FCC limits and 160MHz width will always put at least part of your transmission in the DFS range.

If you want extra range, you can set your wireless router to 80MHz channel width. On Netgear routers, it is done by changing the wireless mode for the 5GHz band from "Up to 4800Mbps" to "Up to 2400 Mbps".

On the 2.4GHz band, 20MHz transmit pwoer will be higher.

With all of that in mind, at 2500 square feet, it will be hard for any AP to cover. While an RAX80 will cover it, when you get a good distance away, those speeds will be pretty poor, where internet streaming will likely be find but comfortable access to a NAS will be painfully slow.

Ideally, for a large coverage area, you would use either a mesh system, for the best possible performance, a set of wired APs.

For example, if you need the current best wireless mesh performance, then you will be stuck with a pricey such as the https://www.netgear.com/home/wifi/mesh/rbk852/

If you can run Ethernet to different rooms, then running a cable to a separate room and then using an AX AP will the best overall performance.