Tp-link archer c7 v5 is it good?

i want to buy openwrt router, i think of buying c7 , is it any good ?

Good for?

It's a well supported, solid device - but it's also beginning to show its age.

If you already own one, which copes with your desired WAN speed and additional features, fine - keep using it (until it doesn't anymore, e.g. cable/ fibre WAN connections), there's no reason to replace it.

If you want to buy a new device, ath79 wouldn't be my first choice for the year 202x.

If you can find a bargain on the used markets AND have rather low demands to begin with, maaaaybe (but a little patience might still gain you better devices for similar money).

1 Like

I have four of them in my home. They are extremely mature and are a great option for a cheap wired "mesh".

If I was looking for a single router, for an apartment or something, I would probably choose something else. They are not very fast, by todays standards.


I have quite a few of them - my bandwidth to internet is 100/100 Mbps, I am using a lot of Wireguard and I find them really good.

If you want really high Wifi speeds I think I would choose someting else, when I have HT80 as bandwidth for Wifi my speed (locally) is 300+ Mbps. Unfortunately I have to use HT20 to get my mesh really working.

If you are planning to use it for Mesh - read this awesome guide:

My Archer C7 V2 has a 720 MHz CPU, the V5 has a 750.

I would say both are good for up to a 100 Mbps connection.

Both use the ath10k wireless chip for the 5 GHz band, which is not the best option.

When I move up to the next speed tier, I'll be getting something else...preferably with a MediaTek wireless chip.

The "300+ Mbps" is the bitrate (Mbit/S)...not the same thing as bandwidth.

If I wasnt expressing my self enough clear it is the "channel width" which I am used to express as "frequency bandwidth".

Please read, where "htmode" is explained:

When running my TP-link Archer C7 v5 in HT80 I have 300+ Mbps over Wifi when measuring locally to my LibreSpeed "testserver" or with iPerf.

Unfortunately HT80 seems to make my mesh unstable, please read

Search for " In addition, for HT20/HT40 devices"

Best regards

Pj Nolla E

Channel width has nothing to do with it.

Look up the difference between bitrate and bandwidth.

Here's one -

You can't have 300 Mbps WiFi "bandwidth" on a 100 Mbps "bandwidth" connection.

You can have 300 Mbit/s WiFi "bitrate" on a 100 Mbps "bandwidth" connection.

Unfortunately, you seem to not understand me. I am not measuring my internet connection. I am measuring the Wifi connection from my client(s) to my TP-link Archer C7 v5.

Best regards

I understand that you are using the term "bandwidth" for "bitrate".

Terms matter.

He didn't do that. He left out a useful comma. It is entirely reasonable to refer to RF bandwidth (ie 80MHz) as "bandwidth."

Isn't ath10k good?

When you get some time, watch this video...

I already saw it and I don't remember him saying that it is bad compared to Broadcom.

13:31 to 18:01 - What's wrong with ath10k

Broadcom has very limited support in OpenWrt, due to proprietary not a valid comparison with ath10k.

Felix points out the issues with each...which is good information to have when purchasing a device that you want to run OpenWrt on.

1 Like

FWIW, when I was using a A7v5 (same hardware, just requires a different signature for the bootloader), I was having terrible problems keeping ESP8266's connected. It seemed to choose one at random and drop its packets frequently.
If I went back to the factory firmware it was rock-solid.
So no, I do not trust the current-generation of drivers for ath10k (and I did try the non-ct ones, no help).
That device got replaced with a Cudy WR2100, and I couldn't be happier.
Works with OpenWrt flawlessly, solid performance, very predictable. Not high-end performance, but entirely comparable to the A/C7v5. And it lands at the same price-point.

Since that is a ramips/mt7621 device, you can also use hardware flow offloading in OpenWrt.

1 Like