Help selecting router and switch (1GB; 12 clients)

Many years ago, for cable internet having 500MB down and 50MB up, I purchased a Linksys WRT1900ACS. The WiFi was so poor performing and unreliable that I ended up purchasing a Netgear R7800. The Netgear WiFi performed reliably but its ethernet connection did not perform as well as the Linksys. On ethernet, Linksys would max out the 500MB down whereas the Negear would get 430-450MB down usually.

If I were to move cable internet to 1GB down and 50MB up, neither the Linksys nor the Netgear can fully capture the download speed available. If I was to buy new kit, I'd like to fully utilize the 1GB down and have reliable well-performing WiFi. I would also like to be able to connect 9 clients (e.g., Apple TVs, desktop computers, a laptop, a TiVO, an IP Phone, printer, etc). I also have a spare TP-Link router that I turn on when I have guests that need WiFi.

Is there a 4-CPU router on the market now that can run OpenWRT and provide the 1GB down consistently with reliable WiFi and handle processing needs of 9-10 clients? Also, would you recommend an unmanaged or a managed switch for my client setup? I do utilize the Apple TV screen sharing function with an iPad so I'm assuming the Apple TV and iPad would have to be same connection; I don't know if this would be affected if the Apple TV was plugged into a managed switch, how this would work exactly.

Anybody care sharing their thoughts on this?

1 Like
1 Like

look at a split system perhaps nanopi r4s or x86 mini PC, a managed switch, and several access points.



1 Like

Thanks so much. The DL-WRX36 is just want I was hoping to find.

Greatly appreciate your sharing the information. Thanks!

1 Like

The DL-WRX36 uses target ipq807x, but I don't see this target listed in the 22.03.3 OpenWRT release. Any luck ipq807x target will be available in 22.03.4 release?

No, you'll have to wait for the next major release, 23.XX. Should be due in spring. Until then you can use SNAPSHOT images.

More like late summer/ fall (while it might branch off on spring, it will take several months to stabilize).


Is DL-WRX36 looking like a stable, reliable performer under OpenWrt? Or is it too early to tell?

I've been running the snapshot for a couple of days, no issues so far.
@hnyman is using the same snapshot as me, w/o any issues Dynalink DL-WRX36 Askey RT5010W IPQ8072A technical discussion - #839 by hnyman

1 Like

Like frollic says, so far the router looks good. I have mainly been using it as dumb AP, but likely I will switch it to be my main router (instead of R7800) once I get a serial cable connector for it.

Ps .
In deviation to my usual habits, I have used imagebuilder to compile the firmware for DL-WRX36, and so far no surprises.

1 Like

Hi hnyman,

I'm looking for upgrade from R7800. So sounds like I'm on the right track. Thanks for the feedback!

I have been using E8450/RT3200 and now also DL-WRX36, and both are ok for the CPU power, but both have only internal antennas, so the Wifi range is lower than it is for R7800 with (proper) external antennas, I think.

Of the current ipq807x ath11k offering I selected the DL-WRX36 because it has straight-forward installation process, although it is much more complex and multi-step than with R7800. And because it is one of the most CPU power ipq807x devices there.

(I got burned two years ago with RAX120 v1, which will never be supported due to its early generation 802.11ax wifi chip. But the RAX120v2 looks also promising if its PR gets finalised/polished and accepted. That might have better Wifi range than E8450/RT3200 or DL-WRX36.)

1 Like


Do you think I could expect comparable ETHERNET speed/performance between the Linksys WRT1900ACS v2 and E8450?

I'm wondering if the 250 MHz difference in CPU speed would be noticeable (E8450 is 250 MHz slower).

Did you enable the hardware offload? My WRT1900ACv2 & WRT3200ACM has no issue on delivering 1G NAT throughput, but yes the wireless part is bad....however you might be able to use 1900ACS without WiFi and connect Netgear as AP only

This feature does not exist for mvebu (only implemented on mediatek and ramips hardware so far).

Oh...just checked again, mine was using "software offloading", sorry for mistake, but it's still able to give almost 900Mbps throughput which is not bad.

Are there negative to software offloading? Why isn't this default?

For what reasons would one not want to software or hardware offload?

SQM doesn't play nice with neither sw or hw offloading

Is it correct that this boils down to the following choice:

lower your latency = use SQM
raise your down/up speed = use offload