Update: This post has been viewed approx. 100,000 times on Slickdeals.
Target price of $129 less the 10% coupon is $116. Coupon Expires 10/31
#1 Rated by the New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutte...fi-router/
You can get the AX3000 (Archer AX 50) for $116 at TARGET (see below)
https://www.target.com/p/tp-link-...A-79847621
HOW TO GET IT FOR $116 AT TARGET (2 WAYS)
New price is $129 and then apply the 10% off one electronic item (Target circle coupon). Total came to $116 and change. If you are a target Redcard member get additional 5% Redcard discount[/QUOTE]
10% coupon can be found here (Expires October 31)：
https://slickdeals.net/?sdtid=14448551&sdop=1&sdpid=141342461&sdfid=30&lno=1&trd=https%20www%20target%20com%20offers%20targ&pv=&au=&sdtrk=SiteSearchV2Algo1&u2=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.target.com%2Foffers%2Ftarget-circle[/QUOTE]
At Walmart, you can get the $99 AX1800 (Archer AX 20) model. Note that "PeteyTheStriker" who is very knowledgeable on routers has commented extensively on this thread has recommended the upgrade from the AX20 to AX50 if you can afford it. Through Target (see above, you can get the AX 3000 for $116)
WALMART
$99 AX1800 (Archer AX 20)
https://www.walmart.com/ip/TP-Lin.../210201077
FOR ONLY $17 More (Target), you can upgrade from the Archer AX20 (AX1800) to the TP-LINK Archer AX50, i.e., AX 3000,
https://www.target.com/p/tp-link-...A-79847621
COMPARISON OF AX20 ($99) VS AX50 ($129) [ Thanks - zpeedster_m ]; Note that "PeteyTheStriker" who is very knowledgeable on routers has commented extensively on this thread has recommended the upgrade from the AX20 to AX50 if you can afford it.
https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutte...fi-router/
TP-Link Archer AX50
The best Wi-Fi router
In our tests the TP-Link Archer AX50 created a speedy, responsive network even from across a medium house. You have to spend a lot more on a router—or a mesh kit if you have a very large home—to get anything even a little better. It's our first WI-Fi 6 (802.11ax) router pick.
The TP-Link Archer AX50 is reasonably priced, yet it can handle a growing selection of laptops and smart devices while surpassing the performance of routers that cost twice as much. It's generally speedy and able to reach long range, it has little lag even when the network is busy, and it's a great choice if you have a high-performance internet service plan. It's compatible with Wi-Fi 6, the latest wireless standard, and it comes with built-in security in the form of a lifetime subscription to updates.
TP-Link Archer AX20
If our main pick is unavailable
The Archer AX20 offers fewer features than our pick for a slightly lower price, but in most cases it can keep up in throughput, responsiveness, and ease of setup.
If our pick is out of stock or its price is more than $30 higher, you should consider the TP-Link Archer AX20 instead. The AX20 looks like the AX50 and offers a strong, responsive network that's nearly as good, especially if your house isn't larger than our 2,300-square-foot-test home. But it's not quite as fast at longer ranges, and TP-Link sacrifices a few advanced features and settings in its administration interface to meet the lower price
REVIEWS (Thanks "PeteyTheStriker")
https://play3r.net/reviews/networ...er-review/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXVGRKgaxYo
https://www.blacktubi.com/review/...cher-ax50/
https://techprojournal.com/tp-lin...ink_AX3000
Overall if you want a entry level to medium end router, you cant go wrong.[/QUOTE]
OTHER THINGS TO NOTE:
1. Donknows has a review on the AX3000 (Archer AX 50) this has thoroughly been discredited on this thread.
|
As was mentioned by me and a few others, that DONGKNOWS review is poorly done. It is not an apples to apples comparison, he used a router with a brand new firmware comparing to an identical router with firmware over 6 months old which had major problems just like any other router around that time. It takes time to work out the bugs and TP-Link, Netgear, Asus to name a few all put out routers with bugged performance with their first set of Wifi 6 routers. So yeah..... Important to make apples to apples instead of reading something without understanding the testing. If he did it the correct way he would have had both side by side on the same firmware.The routers are identical outside USB 3.0 port and Homecare included on one, so you will get identical performance results with the same firmware.
|
2. CAT7, a CAT 6 or CAT5e cable is needed for gigabit Ethernet. Most cables made for the last 10 years are already 5e, so just saying that cables are usually never a bottleneck.
:
Leave a Comment
520 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Yesterday I was watching a review of the Pixel 5 5G millimeter wave speeds on VZW. Seriously, who needs 1.3Gbps speeds on a phone? I'd be happy with a steady 100mbps, heck even 50mbps in 4G.
Its funny cause if you look back at statements I made on here in other deal threads on networking gear 6 months to 1 year ago, you are making my exact same claims against upgrading to wifi 6 that I was making. Unfortunately its time to change with the times, since almost all new computing and devices are coming with AX cards, and for those that have older gear the to upgrade their said equipment is a pretty cheap prospect for a nice gain. If money was not a issue sure buy the best 4x4 item you can and replace it every year, but most people dont live like that, so my suggestions look toward longevity of a product in my recommendation.
As for wifi 6E its great and I cant wait, but most people are completely impractical in 6E expectations, such as using it for wireless backhaul. The 6E band is extremely short so I doubt unless they find some way to blast that frequency like a precision laser to another station you could not have it serve the purpose as wireless backhaul unless the devices are a room apart. Most people with current mesh put their nodes more than a room apart. some initial test and most speculation agrees that 6E will be a same room close proximity solution only type of product, so new routers will still rely on Wifi 5/6 for the majority of the workload.
Also 6E will almost always fall back on standard Wifi 6 frequencies for most devices that are not in the same room as the node, cause again extremely short range.
So while wifi 6E is a great step forward, and I do recommend waiting if you are not in a rush, to see the new wave of 6E routers next year, if you have to buy something now just go with Wifi 6.
Yes I had a different tone if you look at my history, but I actually went on to experiment with different devices and want to show a perspective that it isn't sunshine and rainbows...I'm just making the argument that 4x4 wave 2 AC devices can offer better value right now for real world performance at range. 2x2 AX to AX has the speed advantage at closer range, but also falls off at relative distance where 4x4 AC will tend to hold speeds better. Of course environmental area and settings of device do matter.
6E isn't much different than high gains from AC in conjunction with the 149-161 block of channels which has operated at 5.8ghz since 2009 (160mhz and 320 mhz will innately provide worse performance regardless of frequency). Its completely valid for back haul use, especially early on when you don't have to deal with local congestion of devices in an area. You're completely wrong here. It's more limited, but amplification and antenna design nullifies any drawbacks. Of course, that means higher cost to compensate.
6E uses a higher frequency range in default.. there's no fallback to 5G channels. That doesn't even make sense.
I thought this was clarified but I'm not against AX at all. I'm against buying a lower end design that can get out performed by a higher end 4x4 chip at a similar price bracket. AC W2 and AX are pretty close regardless of what people tend to think.
3x3 AX designs should be on the market shortly anyway. Price points will end up shifting lower regardless as AC designs get discontinued.
Yes I had a different tone if you look at my history, but I actually went on to experiment with different devices and want to show a perspective that it isn't sunshine and rainbows...I'm just making the argument that 4x4 wave 2 AC devices can offer better value right now for real world performance at range. 2x2 AX to AX has the speed advantage at closer range, but also falls off at relative distance where 4x4 AC will tend to hold speeds better. Of course environmental area and settings of device do matter.
6E isn't much different than high gains from AC in conjunction with the 149-161 block of channels which has operated at 5.8ghz since 2009 (160mhz and 320 mhz will innately provide worse performance regardless of frequency). Its completely valid for back haul use, especially early on when you don't have to deal with local congestion of devices in an area. You're completely wrong here. It's more limited, but amplification and antenna design nullifies any drawbacks. Of course, that means higher cost to compensate.
6E uses a higher frequency range in default.. there's no fallback. That doesn't even make sense.
I thought this was clarified but I'm not against AX at all. I'm against buying a lower end design that can get out performed by a higher end 4x4 chip at a similar price bracket. AC W2 and AX are pretty close regardless of what people tend to think.
We will find out how it all will really play out really soon, with the Asus coming out at the end of the year.
Its not like wireless AD (60ghz) where the signal is limited to 1-2 rooms. amplification and antenna design can overcompensate any real drawbacks.. especially from a lower end device such as this AX1800 TPLINK.
I talked to a engineer about this recently. Biggest drawback is 160mhz channel width.. which is shared on current AC and AX devices that have it enabled.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Its not like wireless AD (60ghz) where the signal is limited to 1-2 rooms. amplification and antenna design can overcompensate any real drawbacks.. especially from a lower end device such as this AX1800 TPLINK.
I talked to a engineer about this recently. Biggest drawback is 160mhz channel width.. which is shared on current AC and AX devices that have it enabled.
looking to add that or the AX89X to AiMesh with my existing GT-AC5300
80mhz 6E on a 6E client should out perform most current (majority AC client) 5G hardware due to innate improvements with AX standard. The only trade off will be 80mhz AX 5G at a lower frequency and comparable antenna/amplification/radio, but then you have to worry bout typical channel congestion which in a non DFS world is 2 main 80mhz blocks of 42 and 155..
6E completely nullifies this with 14 80mhz or 7 160mhz channels available for free use at a given time (better signal integrity in general, especially in apartments with auto switching), Early adopters gain most benefit.
The only real problem to 6E is cost and lack of clients in the first couple years unless the WIFI industry actually takes it seriously and pushes it as hard as AC was. AC W2 > AX isn't as big as the jump to 6E and whats offered.
I don't want to really sell 6E either because if adaption rate is slow, whats the point of hyping it up..
Again.. My argument for buying a router now is buy a device with a good radio config and test and compare devices. Im biased to 4x4 radios.
1) 2x2 AX to AX has the speed advantage at closer range, but also falls off at relative distance where 4x4 AC will tend to hold speeds better. Of course environmental area and settings of device do matter.
2) AC W2 and AX are pretty close regardless of what people tend to think.
3) 3x3 AX designs should be on the market shortly anyway.
#2: Examples of of AC W2 models close to AX at this price range.
#3: What's the of 3X3 when the Archer AX50, I believe already has 4 streams (4X4?) is is priced at $129.99 at Walmart?
What is your take on the AX50 at $129.99? What can you suggest as a better alternative at this price point?
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Leave a Comment