I went to back to version r13246 from maybe 5-6 days ago and it solved my problems. Maybe some commit since then?
Yes , that's correct, not a driver issue, possibly caused by this https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/commit/b5516603dd90215d5cdc5bac7ea496a6c758bb0f, reverting the commit fix it.
Running master-r13325-289c632425-20200521-ath10k-test I noticed that the temperatures dropped by about 2C and it's not getting colder inside the house, if anything it's getting warmer. Not sure if it's the "old" wifi driver/firmware or other changes around wifi that are contributing to this. I didn't make any config changes and load is what I normally see.
I run 800MHz min freq on the CPU and let it go up from there but never under 800. Highest temp reported by the sensors is 55C, used to be 57-58C.
my current main router is a wrt1900acs v1 and now i'm thinking about getting a r7800 after reading this thread. anyone here can share how its 2.4ghz radio signal strength compares to the wrt1900acs v1? i'm hoping the 2.4ghz radio range on the r7800 is longer than the wrt1900acs. my doorbell camera can sure benefit from a stronger 2.4ghz radio. thanks in advance for your feedback.
Cannot compare with wrt1900, but I can say that the r7800 range is very good.
2 Likes
I think my AC-V2 is pretty much identical to your ACS-V1. What is see is that the R7800 has a better 5ghz range for sure. 2.4 is not that much different. Currently a bit hard to compare as the routers are in the opposite end of the house. typically both are running quite smooth and without to much issues for day-to-day usage.
1 Like
i'm also wondering if there is any negative impact from the r7800 cpu scaling? from what i understand the r7800 cpu could run anywhere from 384mhz on idle to 1700mhz under a load. or is there a setting the turns off the cpu scaling to maintain highest performance?
It is no necessary, but possible.
echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_governor
echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy1/scaling_governor
1 Like
I think DD-WRT keeps it locked at max by default by setting the performance governor as above. I set mine to use min 800MHz and just let it go up from there:
echo ondemand > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_governor
echo ondemand > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy1/scaling_governor
echo 800000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy0/scaling_min_freq
echo 800000 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/policy1/scaling_min_freq
echo 60 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/up_threshold
echo 10 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/ondemand/sampling_down_factor
2 Likes
Yes DDWRT runs the CPU at max frequency 1725 MHz, but a lot of people use the on demand with the settings you are using but with 35 for up-threshold.
I did performance testing and with these settings compared with running at max frequency i could not find any differences.
That said running at max maybe increased the temp with 1 degree so that did not make a huge difference either
2 Likes
Hello i have both routers and for me the WRT1900ACS v1 has better range, not by much but the Linksys would win in a photo finish so save your money for another day
1 Like
good to know and thanks. i know wrt1900acs v1 range is good but the doorbell camera is the farthest wireless network device from the main router hence i'm investigating if there is another openwrt supported router with a much longer range.
IMHO you shoud buy cheapest supported router/ap and setup it as extender/WDS. It'll solve your problem with signal strength in far area.
1 Like
i think you're right but i may pick up a r7800 if a good deal comes along.
1 Like
r7800s are getting more and more affordable. Wireless AX still has multiple issues that are going to take time to sort out OFDMA fully:
r7800 remains one of the most powerful all in one open source options, we are still a ways off from more powerful all in one options. 
1 Like
802.11ax might follow in 802.11ac's footsteps and have Wave 1 and Wave 2 versions, so it's a good idea to wait until ax is mature.
1 Like
I don't really want to derail this thread with 802.11ax topics, but functionality[0] isn't really a problem with the current bunch of 802.11ax devices, prices are[1]. Sure, there might be future improvements lining up[2], but the current crop of 802.11ax devices is already pretty good; it is amazing to see 1 GBit/s ethernet becoming the bottleneck[3], not the wireless.
ipq8065 (such as the r7800 or nbg6817) is still an excellent choice for internet connections up to 400-450 MBit/s, beyond that[4], its successor is becoming interesting.
--
[0] stability, performance, interoperability, range, etc.
[1] and obviously OpenWrt support, respectively the lack of it
[2] such as improved OFDMA and particularly 6 GHz support, but the later will effectively require triple-radio devices, driving the prices up even more
[3] and this is a real problem, as 2.5GBASE-T, 5GBASE-T and 10GBASE-T (think about the switches as well) are even harder to find for SOHO/ home uses (prices, power consumption, heat/ noise, number of ports, …)
[4] ftth is starting to become increasingly popular and common, at the same time TV cable based internet is also pushing beyond 500 MBit/s mark, even up to 1 GBit/s.
Or get 2 UniFi APs, wire them, place them strategically on the ceiling and done. They show up at very good prices at least on my local Craigslist, $35-40. Yes, it does take some wiring work but if you own a house I think it's worth it.
1 Like
Why in the world don't these AX devices have 10GbE switches in them? I remember we went through the same thing a few years ago, many wifi routers still came with 100Mbps switches. Heck there are 40GbE switches and even 100GbE out there! Can't be that 10GbE chips are that much more expensive.
Disclaimer: this will be my last off-topic response about that in this thread.
Really, this is better discussed in a dedicated thread, as it has nothing in common with ipq8065, qca9984 or the r7800.
I couldn't agree more, but looking at the prices for 10 GBit/s switches, even unmanaged ones, prices are still pretty unreasonable to me (and I was a rather early adopter of 1 GBit/s gear back in the day) - even for 1 GBit/s switches with merely ~2 token 10 GBit/s ports (SFP+ or 10GBASE-T doesn't really change the picture, well, 10GBASE-T is even less common) or 4-port switches (are those really useful? personally I wouldn't even look at them, as one expensive 10 GBit/s port is already lost to interface with the remaining 1 GBit/s universe). Please wake me up when -at the very least- 8-port 10 GBit/s switches (it imho doesn't make sense to look at 2.5GBASE-T or 5GBASE-T, they aren't any cheaper, just easier to deal with using existing cabling; I would still like to use them, but I wouldn't pay any kind of real markup relative to 1 GBit/s gear) become affordable for (at least prosumer) home uses.
--
and yes, what I'm actually looking for would be >=24 ports, l2/ l3 management (at least something, even if just smart managed), with at least ~8 of them 10 GBit/s capable (ideally all), maybe ~4 PoE ports, but hey - I'm open to reasonable options, even if they don't completely match my wishes. But 2-4 unmanaged ports for ~500 EUR give or take simply is ridiculous, even more so considering the additional costs for ethernet cards, SFP modules, twinax interconnects, etc.). I don't see any use at all for >>1 GBit/s switches (that's slightly different with routers, but even there I'd like to see at the very least two >>1 GBit/s ports (one WAN, one LAN)) with four or less ports capable of these speeds, to get any use of these new speeds, you'd want at least two systems capable of these speeds in your network, plus a third for interfacing with the legacy world - but considering the prices, for just two systems (or even three) it would be much cheaper to use a direct cross-over link between them, rather than paying half a thousand bucks for a tiny 4-port switch.