Reply

AC1900 or AC2350?

Barry4405
Aspirant

AC1900 or AC2350?

I am looking for a new router, I have been doing research on both and I understand that the AC 1900 is more reliable and troublefree than the AC2350. Here's the kicker, I can get the AC1900 for $199.00 and the AC2350 for $149.00 (This is for the V2). 

 

Knowing that the AC2350 is discounted for a reason, is it worth an extra $50.00 to go with the AC1900??

Message 1 of 7
TheEther
Guru

Re: AC1900 or AC2350?

Take my advice with a grain of salt, but I would go for the AC1900 (aka the R7000) over the AC2350 (R7500), though not necessarily for $199.  You can get it much cheaper if you shop around.

 

I can give three reasons for favoring the AC1900:

  1. There are literally no clients that can connect to the AC2350 at its maximum link speed of 1733 Mbps at 5 GHz.  To do so requires support for 4x4 spatial streams.  Most clients use 1x1, 2x2 or 3x3 streams.  The R7000 supports 3x3 streams at a maxium link speed of 1300 Mbps.   The AC2350 was a halo product with no practical application.  In practice, it is no faster than the AC1900.
  2. The AC1900 is more stable than the AC2350.  The latest R7000 firmware, however, is buggy and should probably be avoided but we should expect to see new firmware soon.
  3. There is rich support for the AC1900 by the 3rd party firmware development community.  DD-WRT, Asuswrt-Merlin and Tomato all support the R7000.

The AC2350 does have a faster CPU (1.4 GHz vs 1.0 GHz) and an eSATA port.  It also has a different QoS engine.  But, frankly, I don't really trust Netgear firmware to use their routers for anything but as a router.  I don't use the USB ports for either file or printer sharing.

 

My $0.02.

Message 2 of 7
Barry4405
Aspirant

Re: AC1900 or AC2350?

Thanks for the reply. I am upgrading from an AC1450 and looking for something that is more capable of handling everything we are running through it. We have 100mbs service, so I'm thinking the AC1450 is the bottleneck.

I am a pretty basic user, I would not be adding 3rd party ware. And I don't use the ports either. It seems to me that the R7500 is basically the R7000 with some extra features that really aren't practical or useable. And maybe a little bit buggier. If that's the case, and I can't find the R7000 for much less than $199, is it still worth the extra $50 to get basically the same router?
Message 3 of 7
Retired_Member
Not applicable

Re: AC1900 or AC2350?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/221971086981?item=221971086981&lgeo=1&vectorid=229466&rmvSB=true

 

 

Last week the r7000 was on sale $150 @tigerdirect.com   I would wait a few days and keep watching the sales. It appears they're dumping them.

Message 4 of 7
TheEther
Guru

Re: AC1900 or AC2350?

What are you running through your AC1450?  It should be capable of easily handling 100 Mbps Internet service.  Its 5 GHz band has a max link speed of 975 Mbps, with probably a real world throughput of 400 to 500 Mbps, more than enough to handle 100 Mbps.  As I mentioned before, an AC1900 can support 3x3 clients capable of connecting at 1300 Mbps, but unless you do a lot of file sharing inside the house, it's not going to make much of a difference with Internet access.  And if you have no plans to use the USB ports, a faster CPU may not provide much benefit, either.

 

Where the AC1900 and AC2350 might outperform the AC1450 is range due to their superior, external antennas.  If your house is big, then an upgrade may help.  On the other hand, a range extender can be a much cheaper way to expand Wi-Fi coverage.  If your house is wired with Ethernet or Powerline, a range extender can be installed as a wired Access Point without the usual speed penalty that comes with expanding Wi-Fi wirelessly.

Message 5 of 7
Barry4405
Aspirant

That's really good to know. I was wrong then in my assump...

That's really good to know. I was wrong then in my assumption about the 1450. I don't have a problem with coverage, sometimes with the 5g, but I also have an extender. I am also adding a NAS for videos and music, would that make a difference?
Message 6 of 7
TheEther
Guru

Re: That's really good to know. I was wrong then in my assump...

Unless you are streaming high-quality 4K renders, a video stream will probably consume anywhere from 2 to, maybe, 15 Mbps.  If you have dozens of simultaneous streams, or if Wi-Fi signal strength is bad, then you could have a problem.  Otherwise, you should be ok.  Music streaming should inconsequential, unless you are streaming uncompressed audio.

 

The bigger issue could be with file transfers (e.g. downloading videos from the Internet to your NAS).  Hopefully, your NAS is attached via Ethernet and not Wi-Fi.

Message 7 of 7
Top Contributors
Discussion stats
  • 6 replies
  • 16851 views
  • 1 kudo
  • 3 in conversation
Announcements