I am going to switch my setup from Linksys E8450 (main router) + Netgear WAX202 (WDS repeater) to something better, which is yet undecided. One of the candidate setups for that "something" is to replace both devices with two Dynalink DL-WRX36 routers.
I would appreciate some WiFi benchmark results if somebody already has this setup.
I use wireless channel 132 at 80 MHz (because Netgear WAX202 does not support 160 MHz) with a WiFi link which is effectively 2x2 (again, because Netgear WAX202 does not support better MIMO configurations). The hope is that the 4x4 configuration at 80 MHz or 2x2 at 160 MHz offered by Dynalink DL-WRX36 will result in a better link, but I need to quantify the word "better".
The current signal level in my setup is -63 dBm. The achieved link rate oscillates between "680.6 Mbit/s, 80 MHz, HE-MCS 7, HE-NSS 2, HE-GI 1" and "907.4 Mbit/s, 80 MHz, HE-MCS 9, HE-NSS 2, HE-GI 1" in both directions. The throughput measured by iperf3 is 500 Mbits/s from Linksys to a wired desktop PC behind Netgear and 450 Mbits/s in the opposite direction, which is "just good enough".
So, if you want to help me with my decision, please:
- Confirm whether WDS works as expected with DL-WRX36 - both as an AP and as a client.
- Specify the channel number and channel width in MHz that you use.
- Quote the WiFi signal/noise strength displayed on the Network > Wireless page of the main AP and the RX / TX rates from the same page, from the row that describes the WDS client.
- Perform
iperf3test in both directions between the two devices. Here is how: on one of the devices (the server - let's say on 192.168.1.1), runiperf3 -s -p 9999, and on the other (the client),iperf3 -c 192.168.1.1 -p 9999 ; iperf3 -c 192.168.1.1 -p 9999 -R. Quote the whole output from the client. - If possible, redo the above measurements both for 80 and 160 MHz channel widths on a channel where it is permitted (in most countries, that's only channel 100).