Ath10k-ct R7800 grumblings

ath10k-ct driver really does not as expected, bad performance! I have to change it to ath10k.

Even ath10k on qca9984/99x0, the 2.4G speed is much lower than cheap cheap router using MTK chipset(tested on Xiaomi 4A Gigabit).

Your question is non-actionable, unless you provide the gory details (exact iperf3 benchmarks for both (in both directions!) and stating the client device(s) in use for gathering them).

1 Like

no need actions, just remark the same findings. OpenWrt official build for ipq806x, should consider back to ath10k driver.

Slh at this point I think we just have to ignore him....

1 Like

ath10k-ct, bad performance still there.

BTW, I found another R7800 cons: Power Consumption 7~10W. Too high.
As a reference, EA8500 4~5W.

Ok this is getting ridiculous and sorry if i look rude....
You are actually posting power consumption stats AND NOT network stats ?

Did you consider that it could be just an incompatibility with your device?

Also how a 3 w difference is problematic considering it does consume less than a led bulb....
We even started scaling the voltage with latest build so?????

1 Like

Hi, I have both R7800/EA8500 on hands. When I connected them with a 12V lab power supply to check the power consumption, my R7800 is significantly on high current than EA8500. My testing results is rough data on only 1 sample each. Maybe not correct. Both sets run almost same hnyman builds and same other conditions. The LEDs should not use much current. (3mA for 1 LED, 10 LEDs 30mA only).

Consider the router is working 24h/day, I use EA8500 as my ISP router, and R7800 for testing new openwrt build

ea8500 = ipq8064
r7800 = ipq8065

it's just normal and expected that a more powerful and more clocked soc consume more power....
but again 24h/day... unless you have some abnormal price for electricity, you would pay 1-3€ in a year

And again x2 the complain was about ath10k-ct.... why you are posting that much data and stuff about power consumption....

1 Like

Because I'm an engineer, always try to do my best for everything. It's releted performance/cost.

I also have other openwrt routers, Xiaomi 4A gigabit and Xiaomi 4C, the power consumption is lower than ipq806x, the internet speed (Xiaomi 4A gigabit) even fast then those ipq806x router for normal user.

Xiaomi 4A ~ 900M/bps on speedtest, but my R7800/EA8500 only 700M/bps, same conditions. (I'll try NSS build to see if it can be improved).

if you didn't notice the difference with the soc and did find the cause for the extra W by the fact that both cache and core are clocked at higher freq... then don't know what to say honestly...

1 Like

If I'm not a gammer, not using VPN, and not using other hi-loading encrypt/decrypt, just access internet Youtube.... It means I donot need such hi-end SOC router?
I wonder why ipq806x router cannot do hi-speed near ISP (1Gbps) for normal user (all run OpenWrt official builds, donot consider variants).

the real question is... why a ""shit"" soc like a xiaomi 4a can do 1gbps? it's simple it does support offload... but try to do any type of sqm or qos and watch the real speed of that...

Thanks. much things to learn for me, I was thinking hi-core freqs can do everything include "shit", and the real world is not.

ipq806x can but it's not supported on openwrt due to how it's implemented.

Sigh. Saw the title, thought "ah, maybe some light for the ath9k/10k long term issues on same or similar chipset as the TP-Link C7"... but... maybe not.

Will try to post my newer, now ath10k again as well as ath9k problems, with the C7 and 21.02.1. Where's the best place for some kwarn logs?

Btw., expect twice that power consumption for modern 802.11ax routers (probably more with 6 GHz support).

someone said, corrent 5GHz cellphone network base-stations, power down at mid-night for saving power, in China.

Recall my openwrt story, what makes me going to here:

  1. I use EA8500 as ISP router many years, original Linksys factory firmware. ISP 1Gbps.

  2. two month ago, I found the ea8500 router "intenet speed" lower, only 100Mbps on LAN port, using speedtest on my PC to test the internet speed. Then I start to check what happened.

  3. first, re-flash ea8500 linksys newest fw, the internet speed back to 900M up, my isp not lying and peace-world.

  4. only several days later, the "lower speed" came again! Then I try re-flash the router again, Same.

  5. then I start to use openwrt official on ea8500, get the 600-700M internet speed and stable, not very happy.

  6. check on forum, many many good comments on R7800, then I buy a used r7800 at reasonable price.

  7. compare the same level router, r7800 vs ea8500, speed same for my use cases, not much gains.

  8. Do more Trouble more:

    • ath10k-ct driver, bad 2.4g wifi internet speed, but even shit Xiaomi can do it better.
    • the LAN internet speed still up to 700M, can not reach 900M up, but Linksys/Xiaomi yes.
    • r7800 power consumption higher than ea8500.
  9. I will use ea8500 as internet connection, not spend much time to study/align firmwares.

  10. official openwrt default settings, need to improve, many things to do.

OEM firmware has all the proprietary advantages…at the sacrifice of having a terrible interface / limited software add-ons.

If you are on a gig line you really need a NSS offloaded build if you want to get everything you are paying for. Feel free to try my build on your EA8500 or R7800.

For wireless speeds ath10k and ath10k-ct are pretty comparable. All my clients like -ct at my house. With the same 2x2 iphone client I got these numbers with iperf3:

ath10k-ct with NSS
[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.61 GBytes   462 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[SUM]   0.00-30.03  sec  1.85 GBytes   530 Mbits/sec  126             sender

ath10k with encap offloading and NSS:
[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.65 GBytes   473 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.81 GBytes   517 Mbits/sec  784             sender

ath10k with encap offloading:
[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.63 GBytes   468 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.50 GBytes   428 Mbits/sec  1717             sender

[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.60 GBytes   459 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.14 GBytes   326 Mbits/sec  699             sender

[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.53 GBytes   437 Mbits/sec                  receiver
[SUM]   0.00-30.01  sec  1.21 GBytes   347 Mbits/sec  763             sender

Thanks. yesterday I downloaded your 21.02 branch, I will try on it and let you know.

1 Like