WNDR3700 - Low WAN to LAN performance


For years I've been using OpenWRT and now LEDE in my WNDR3700.
I have 500Mb up and down connection from my ISP.
When connecting directly to ONU box I'm getting that 500Mb both up and down using speed test.
When connecting to WNDR3700 lan port I'm still getting 500Mb uplink but only ~280Mb downlink.
I've got nothing fancy installed to router and firewall setting is default.
No qos active.

Any obvious reason WAN to LAN performance is way lower than LAN to WAN performance?

Currently using LEDE r2395 but if I recall this lower WAN to LAN performance has been there for quite some time.


You don't have enough CPU.
Hell, I wouldn't have enough CPU with my 4300.

You probably need to look at some of the dual core CPU devices if you want to route 500mbps. Stuff that advertises 1700Mbps AC or maybe a x86 box.

Get an APU2 I'd say :wink:

My brother's running one, it's a beefy little thing.

Been very satisfied customer of WNDR3700 & OpenWrt/LEDE, so eyeballing Netgear R7800 support thread. That should perform a bit better.
Also my ISP is going to give a free speed upgrade to 1Gb up & down starting beginning of 2017, so new box needed if going to utilize that bandwidth (for testing at least).

That APU2 while interesting would require much more tinkering than a box like R7800.

Something like that APU is the only thing that's going to NAT 1gbit without acceleration

Top end Qualcomm-Atheros IPQ8064/ IPQ8065, MediaTek MT7621A or Marvell mvebu devices should be able to do that as well, ar71xx however won't.

However, x86 is definately becoming pretty attractive as a router platform, if you take prices and expected supportable life time into account. The top end routers (at least IPQ806* and mvebu, MT7621A seems to be a tad cheaper) have gotten too expensive in comparison to x86 gear (all what's missing would be a cheap ethernet card with an onboard switch chip and >= 4 ethernet ports, the prices for dedicated multi-port cards simply are insane and mini-ITX boards with at least 2 mini-pcie slots for wlan cards - the APU2 has those, just not enough onboard ethernet ports).

I dunno, you can eBay Intel dual port cards for pretty cheap.

The big problem with itx is now a lot of cards are switching from mini PCIe to NGFF. Which I don't know if it's backwards compatible

The big problem with itx is now a lot of cards are switching from mini PCIe to NGFF. Which I don't know if it's backwards compatible

M.2/NGFF can carry 4 pcie lanes, Sata, USB 3.0 and probably something else too depending on how it is keyed (where the notch is).

The M.2 slots in mobos are for pcie SSDs, which means it has a pcie x4 slot for sure. You can find M.2 to PCIE x4 adapters for cheep as they are passive things moving around electrical contacts.
like this http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/PCI-e-1X-4X-Card-to-NGFF-M-2-M-Key-Adapter-Converter-Card-Board-LM-141X-V1-0-/121992739234?hash=item1c675579a2:g:fi4AAOSw9a5XPzio

Anyway, if you look at the port, if it fits a M-key M.2 connector, it has to support pcie x4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2#Form_factors_and_keying

...the suggestions of replacing the router are nonsense. My WNDR3700 v1 was able to post speedtest results of around 860Mb/s up and down on my old DDWRT install. However, I did something, broke DDWRT, blew the firmware and tried reinstalling. Kept looping my router, and after trying several different DDWRT releases, I finally decided to try OpenWRT.

Install went great, set my passwords, plugged in the cable and did my first speedtest.net run.

Results were around 400Mb/s download, 280Mb/s upload, substantially lower than my results under DDWRT.

Anyone have any insights other than "replace this perfectly viable router"?

In the meantime, I guess I'm back to the DDWRT forums to try and get my router back on DDWRT, but I've really liked what I've seen of OpenWRT so far and want to actually move this router to the platform. But, in the meantime, I really need my wifi back, and might even just go back to stock while I wait for suggestions here.

You can try this and enable SFE let me know how the performance goes.
I am quite curious about SFE on AR7161
Don't forget to enable SFE and reboot

Well, may as well chime in here...

Only just recently praised these things in the best enthusiast thread.....

Albeit, in shifting things around, I came to notice it was getting pressed to it's limits...... had no idea.... apart from what you can notice when it's switched out for faster hardware.

Some disclaimers;

  1. Was placing some demand on WIFI + WAN combined.

( perhaps this is an area that "chokes on the WANSIDE" )....

WAN tops out at 46/12 so...... hmmm.... this is interesting......
I'm guessing this is a choke point kind of thing.

need to run some tests;


Change up the content......

( dual streaming 520p-sh ) vs ( http bench )

Keep an eye on;

All those lil proc-y buckets

Verdict: Even with the hintings of stresses..... I could in no way describe my experience as low..... Shall we say.... Developing signs of limitation.

And from reading this, would seem to have nothing to do with anything prior to layer 4.

DDWRT likely uses flow offloading by default. The problem with flow offloading no matter what OS you use is that you can't run SQM at the same time. SQM (on a CPU fast enough to keep up with it at the ISP speed) usually delivers a considerable improvement in user experience especially with multiple users.

Like most Netgear models this one has a TFTP recovery mode that makes it very easy to flash back to stock. If you want to install DDWRT again it would be best to flash back to stock then follow their instructions to install from stock.

gwlim, you're a human above all others.

Took me a moment to figure out what the hell SFE was, but when I did, my speedtest.net results improved.

My internet connection speed is 2.5Gb/s down, 1.6Gb/s up, so it takes three machines at gigabit speeds to saturate the line for download, and two to saturate the upload.

Before SFE: 220Mb/s download, 186Mb/s upload. Enabling SFE: 816Mb/s download, 262Mb/s upload.

Ping times for tests were 0-1ms, so that's fine. I tried several different speedtest servers, and couldn't really get results that were faster on the upload. I plugged my laptop directly into my modem, and still couldn't get more than about 260Mb/s, so screw it. I'm a happy boy and my remaining problems are upstream of this router now. Will check again later tonight when the speedtest servers are a little quieter, maybe.

So yeah, OpenWRT and the Netgear WNDR3700 CAN push through over 800Mb/s and are not quite obsolete yet. The other people in this thread might want to revisit their problems.

Thanks a bunch!

I beg to differ, you can reach these speeds with seriously obsolete hardware like the WNDR3700v1 only if you forego generality and are satisfied to only achieve these speeds under certain conditions (namely that SFE actually helps you). This is fine and IMHO a policy call, and everybody can and should call the policy for their own network.
BUT pointing out limits and constraints of your wndr3700v1, as others did in this thread, is not a display of a problem of those pointing it out, but really pointing out a weak-point in trying to run 10 year old hardware at modern internet speeds.

1 Like

Well it is not the full story. If you are brave enough there is still the overclock.

I have added an overclocked version to 800MHZ CPU, 400MHZ RAM, 200MHZ AHB, based on the available overclock patch for ar7161.

1 Like
  • Please make a new thread in the future, instead of reviving a 2 year old posting
  • You should be able to revert to DD-WRT in the same manner the first time (after you get back to OEM)
  • DD-WRT has drivers for the WiFi
  • DD-WRT uses an older Kernel

And is likely why the OP reached these speeds on DD-WRT.

OK, you can patch OpenWrt to get the same quality on DD-WRT. This is going to be tedious for many reasons (mainly because they use an older Kernel). It can't be done by the OpenWrt developers though, since the licensing models don't permit.

My main insight is that in the US a brand new WRT32X costs $127 and will route and shape something like 300-400Mbps with SQM. Considering speeds of 400Mbps cost people something like $60 to $120 per month and the WRT32X will last at least 3 years, the extra cost of upgrading the router is equivalent to about $3.5/mo or between 3 and 5% increase in monthly cost for substantially improved overall performance, particularly as most people experience "slowness" more as "waiting for something to happen" (latency) rather than "this download is taking forever" (bandwidth). Since SQM will reduce latency substantially while hardware fast-paths tend to leave latency uncontrolled or even increase it by hardware buffering.... Most people who can afford above 200Mbps connections will be far better served by upgrading their hardware rather than simply ramming packets through using hardware acceleration.