Iperf was running on the router (a nanoPi R4S)
1 Like
Okay I'm with OpenWrt (damn, I went crazy after the flash to OpenWrt, I wasn't able to discovery the IP of the WAX202, then I discovered that I plugged the eth cable into the WAN port 
probably this is the first router I see with the "inverted" LAN-WAN port, WAN is the latest, LAN the first 3...) anyway I have a mix of feelings:
from my MacBook Air M1 (about 4-5 meters) and one wall far, I have terrible results, I'm unable to go above 250Mbps, compared to 550mbps with the R7800.
But with the iPhone and iPad, in front of it, I have better results
WAX202
R7800
But in same place of the MacBook I have again better speed from the R7800
WAX202 far
R7800 far
Best speed I have with the WAX is by using channel 36, 80MHz and 18db, I'm unable to connect to it with 160MHz
Anyway I think this is the same as the beginning of wifi AC, good speed near the router, worse far. But the AX on this WAX202 is quite terrible just few meters and 2 walls away, basically the ideal thing is to have both and change the wifi when you're near it.
For example, from the bathroom I have 30-40mbps from the R7800 and 3-4mbps from the WAX (sometimes it also fails to connect). My surprise is the size, it's big. From the pics I thought it was smaller, but also looks almost empty inside
I think I'll send back it to amazon, and I'll wait for a better support, also because on stock firmware the performance are a little better.
If I understand post 15 correctly, 160MHz is not supported.
3 Likes
Yes thanks, but I suspect that also if and when it will be supported, Apple devices will have some issues. Same as the AC.
Why would you lower the transmit power? It can go up to 28 dBm
Albeit not being officially supported yet (in a full release) it’s working really great. Mine outspeeds the previous AP I were using.
Stock firmware does perform better for some device. The top speed I achieved was 730 mbps on a laptop, 2 meters apart from the router.
Also, openwrt unlock fast roaming, which I heavily depend on.
Because more power = more noise.
This is done at 18dbm
Home@MacBook_Air ~ % iperf3 -c 192.168.1.2
Connecting to host 192.168.1.2, port 5201
[ 5] local 192.168.1.103 port 65341 connected to 192.168.1.2 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate
[ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 43.6 MBytes 365 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 37.6 MBytes 316 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 31.0 MBytes 259 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 39.7 MBytes 334 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 37.2 MBytes 312 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 38.2 MBytes 320 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 36.5 MBytes 307 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 40.9 MBytes 343 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 39.7 MBytes 333 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 38.3 MBytes 321 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate
[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 383 MBytes 321 Mbits/sec sender
[ 5] 0.00-10.03 sec 381 MBytes 318 Mbits/sec receiver
iperf Done.
And this at 24dbm
Home@MacBook_Air ~ % iperf3 -c 192.168.1.2
Connecting to host 192.168.1.2, port 5201
[ 5] local 192.168.1.103 port 49152 connected to 192.168.1.2 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate
[ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 29.6 MBytes 249 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 26.4 MBytes 221 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 28.4 MBytes 238 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 27.7 MBytes 233 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 27.5 MBytes 230 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 27.7 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 28.6 MBytes 240 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 25.9 MBytes 217 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 11.4 MBytes 95.3 Mbits/sec
[ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 7.63 MBytes 64.2 Mbits/sec
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate
[ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 241 MBytes 202 Mbits/sec sender
[ 5] 0.00-10.12 sec 239 MBytes 198 Mbits/sec receiver
iperf Done.
Home@MacBook_Air ~ %
If I raise to much the power I get worse performance because it raise also the noise.
And yes, if I test it in front of it, it's a bit faster as I said, but just one wall and few meters and the performance is worse than R7800.
Probably best thing is to test a powerful AX router with stock firmware to achieve both, far and near, good speed. IMO it lacks the external antennas to achieve good performance from far.
(E`in soggiorno anche il tuo? 
)
Anyway I don't need need fast roaming, I want one router/band to cover the whole home (is small, I'm living alone)
1 Like
Thank you for doing those tests giuliomagnifico. You saved me the trouble of picking up a WAX202 to play around with.
I get 400-500 Mbps with my 4x4 ac EA8500 AP's at distance (through a wall or two, around corners, in different rooms). Similar to your R7800 results. Anything very near the EA8500 AP's is plugged into their switches. Few clients connect "near" with WiFi in our home.
Hmm now I'm having trouble to flash the original firmware. I get the timeout every time, someone know when is the correct moment to "put" the firmware? When the led is orange or when the below yellow light start flashing?
Because Netgear reports:
- Wait for the Power LED to light orange and start flashing.
- When the Power LED is flashing, return to the macOS Terminal app and press Enter to execute the put command and initiate the firmware upload.
But the orange LED is never flashing 
In my case, any decent AC router would’ve been an upgrade (I was using 2 archer c6 v2 in fast roaming acting as dumb APs).
For the price I paid for it, it’s a decent entry level wifi6 solution (even tho its MSRP is like 90+ euros, double the price at which I got it).
Once I get back to my home I’ll try lowering the transmit power, since I can afford it (the house is not that small but I have another archer c6 in fast roaming at the other side of the house).
you could try Netgear WAX202 WiFi 6 $30 at Amazon - #75 by ghoffman
1 Like
Oh thanks, I’m not so stupid, I tried many times, classic tftp restore doesn’t work here. I’ll try later in failsafe mode.
https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/10238 will bring some great speed enhancements for the netgear wax202 (but I am not sure if this also speeds up the wifi)
1 Like
Great! A cheap device with those speed is a very good option but only if you’re interested in routing performance, I think in order to obtain some nice Wi-Fi speeds it needs external antennas. Every time I test I router without antennas I see inferior performances.
Another option could be the Netgear rax120, now it’s on sale at $299. But it’s still 10x expensive
"sale" ?
WAX206 ?
Maybe manually replacing the antennas could help with the range and stability?
There are some working solutions for Fritzbox (these devices are very popular in Germany) e.g. https://frixtender.de/kompatibilitaet-der-fritzbox-7590-ax/
As long as the device has some I-PEX MHF2 plugs or some other plugs that allow the internal antennas to be detached, replacing the internal antenna with something of your preference could be worth a try?
It’s priced at 499$. WAX206 doesn’t have external antennas.
I haven’t seen photos inside but I don’t want to void the warranty. I prefer to wait or buy another AX device.
As I said the RAX120 is very expensive but it will (I hope) have OpenWrt support Adding OpenWrt Support for Netgear RAX120 (Nighthawk AX12) and it’s future proof, I mean, you buy one now for 300/350€ but you don’t need anything else for the next 3/5 years. Like when I bought the R7800 lots of years ago.
Anyway this WAX202 is a fantastic device if you have lots of APs around the house but not as a single device or to cover more than 1-2 mid size rooms.
Amazon US has the WAX206 for $90. Meanwhile the WAX202 is no longer $30, it is $53.
1 Like
Still $40 at Office Depot.