ASUS RT-AX3000 AX3000 Wi-Fi 6 Wireless Dual-Band Gigabit Router $150

How is this compared to?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07YMFZ...k_detail_1 [amazon.com]

No asus merlin support? No thanks 😟

No asus merlin support? No thanks 😟

Skip the AX3000 class imo. Its "AX1800" in reality for most future devices not using intel AX200/201 adapters.

Theres a plethora of 3x3 designs incoming which should offer better range than the entry 2x2 stuff in the same price segments.

This 2x2 design is worse than older high end 4x4 AC routers in regards to range vs speed, but it will def do better with AX laptops with poor antenna as theres better signal integrity with AX>AX. Trade offs exist.


Anyway. Not really a deal. Its been on and off for $160 for the past year. Will prob drop lower.

do you own Asus AX3000 to make your 'expert' opinion on slickdeals? you're wrong on so many levels. AX3000 is the best network router in this price range and for mid-entry consumer segment. i'm a network engineer, so i understand a little bit on a subject. i own this router for more than a year. we live in a two-story, 3400 sq ft house. coverage is great on 5GHz and not the best on 2.4GHz. we have lots of wireless devices. kids use multiple for the college & hs school. no issues whatsoever. i wish that the Ring's outside cameras we own had 5GHz. i might buy ASUS's RT-AX86u or RT-AX88u in the future to have air mesh for Ring's outside cameras to get better RSSI (not going w/ASUS extenders including the RP-AX56 (essentially it's 1800 by specs)), if the price drops, but right now ax3000 is plenty.

Yes.. I've owned the AX58U/AX3000 for over a month prior to returning for testing purposes. The ASUS AX3000 is honestly nothing more than an entry BCM6750 SoC (Same SoC family in lower end AX1800 routers) paired with a higher end 4x4 Chip for 5G channel, but this specific chip is limited in firmware(locked) to only broadcast 2x4 mode. You cannot get the hardware to work in 4x4 as this is reserved for the AX82U.. which uses a variant of the same PCB design.

I don't exactly care if you're a network engineer if you haven't messed with alternative consumer routers, especially older but relevant 4x4 AC wave 2 hardware....Routers such as the AC86U (2017) and Netgear R7800 (2016) and their "gaming variants" push speeds further than what the AX3000/AX58U can pull off due to its limited radio config (Regardless of client limitations of 1x1 or 2x2). I've talked to people that actually test these as a job to confirm this situation so its not just a case of me having faulty hardware. Both were tested in same static channel configuration and locations.

Both set to 160mhz (GT-AC2900 aka upgraded AC86U) and 80mhz for separate testing... AX3000 performs similarly to GT-AC2900 in 160mhz mode, but this is due to the wave AC 2 radio disabling itself as per spec 2x2 (QCA radios do the same). Range is significantly lower, especially because of the higher block width. If we compare the two in 80mhz mode, the GT-AC2900 (4x4 ACW2) significantly out performs the AX3000 in range.. Especially with legacy AC hardware (majority of clients as of march 2021) AX>AX fairs better but still limited compared to a real 4x4 design even with dated 2x2 AC clients.

Industry is positioning 4x4 hardware for mainstream. 3x3 will take over entry 2x2 stuff (AX3000) and or older legacy 3x3 AC designs (majority).

If you're not using an intel AX variant PC card, the AX3000 "spec" doesn't exist. Its AX1800. The 6750/6755 doesn't do 160mhz bandwidth, hence why and how they can market this. (2400 2x2 160mhz + 600) Besides... 160mhz is completely stupid unless you're within 15ft... too much signal degradation over distance. The only benefit of AX is 80mhz >80mhz AX SNR improvements (8-9DB) over AC routers. There is no SNR improvement using AX router + AC client.

We can argue AC2900 doesn't exist either than that is actually quite true, especially when most clients peak out, but real world range performance is significantly better due having double the stream capability over weaker 2 stream designs such as AX3000.



WIFI6E solves the bandwidth limitations and makes 160mhz more valid as an option anyway due to channels.. (320mhz possible for specific configs, but need to be super closer). Also higher frequency which degrades performance over range, though the early block should be fine and comparable to current hardware with better antenna designs.


But hey, I'm completely wrong.



Edit: also the tri core CPU in the AX3000 isn't really a triple core. The SoC is a dual core + one A7 core functions to control the internal radio. If we pair the higher end chip, its more or less a "quad core" or in a traditional sense, dual core + 2 radio cores like most wave 2 routers before it.

The only real upgraded routers are stuff like the AX86U or AX88U which have a real quad + 2 SoC cores for radio functionality.

I had AX86U for a little bit too. Its much better than AX3000, but actually a slight downgrade in overall range vs my GT-AC2900 unfortunately (most AC clients). 160mhz 4x4 is a lot better relatively to both the GTAC2900 and AX3000, so trade off.


I'll be picking up 6E hardware once next gen stuff is on market en masse.

thank you for the extensive write-up on this. i appreciate it; however, like i said earlier, for the average consumer, like myself, who is not necessarily a gamer and uses Spectrum's (TX) 200mbps internet plan, who has uninterrupted great coverage throughout the 3,400 sq ft 2-story house w/5 bedrooms, including outside back and front yards... AX58U/AXC300 alone does the job just fine. That's why I argued your suggestion to 'skip' this router. imho it's great. i paid $150 about a year ago for it, and I firmly believe that an average consumer doesn't need to spend more than that.