I've one of their $200+ models which is now discontinued. The software is barely OK for something so expensive.
Its missing basic UX measures like in some lists where I've assigned static IPs to over 30 devices, it just shows the IP address and mac address.. good luck figuring out which is which.
Or an option to view bandwidth usage over a time period...which ddwrt has had for several years.
The spider design comes from the need to have lots of antennas for the feature sets they support, and the need for the antennas to be vertically oriented. (They're dipole antennas, which means they radiate to the sides not the tip or base.) If it was smooth box a lot of people would stick it on its side and have terrible coverage as a result. The same problem exists with foldable antennas that get dropped to make it fit on a small shelf, or because they're ugly, or just get knocked down and never stood back up. Keeping costs from being even more astronomical is also why they use standard length antennas not the more expensive sort you see in enterprisy mount to the ceiling models.
More aesthetically pleasing yet less technically capable.
You need as much of a gap and different orientation of the antenna as possible for the multiple streams to work effectively.
In outdoor equipment one antenna is horizontally polarized and the other is vertically polarized. That seems to be a bit of a limit to date, two chains and two streams for long range stuff.
For indoor links the physical separation of the antennas seems to be enough until you get to the extremes of the range, but by then you usually don't have the signal quality to really get the higher speeds any more anyway. The second/third/fourth antenna and radio chains are then used primarily for error correction and improving single chain data rates when signal is weak.
I agree with the numerical advantage of antennas necessitating the resulting spider form factor. I however do not trust TP-Link in their antenna claims. The firm has long marketed more-is-better when it comes to antenna which is not true, and in its early days was known to attach useless antennas in some of their China only models.
Given that most users have Internnet connection in 25-100Mbps range and over-300Mbps is not even available in majority of US markets, why the hell the speeds are needed at home? Even n can serve that. Even if you have a private NAS and a collection of 4k movies on it (~0% of the market), n still can serve that. Let alone ac. And then they have 4Gbps on WiFi and 1GbE. 8x of that old... stuff. Nonsense.
Primary reason to want this is if you are a multi-device home or hosting WiFi lan parties.
These high speed protocols also include better handling of interference from other devices. So, you might think that "Hey, I have 11Gbps to share, so with 2 devices that means I have 5.5gbps per device!" But that isn't how it works. While the two devices are shouting at the router, they are canceling out each others messages. Overcoming this requires extra overhead with the router, which means with 2 devices it is more realistic to get around 4gbps per device when both are actively using the network.
This only gets worse as you add more devices.
So yes, for a single person/single device home. It is overkill. But if you have a home where 1 person is using the nas, another is gaming, and another is watching netflix. You are going to end up with a lot less bandwidth than you counted on.
That being said, probably still overkill to some extent. But not the level you might think.
Because the US isn't the only country in the world. I am pretty happy with my symmetrical 1gbit connection, but still need a router that can really handle it over Wi-Fi with multiple devices.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
Back to Article
The Chill Blueberry - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
In 2030, the top "gaming" router will be just a ball with 62 antennas.Hxx - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
yeah I do think the red one needs more antennas. they could probably squeeze a couple more on each side.milkywayer - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
I've one of their $200+ models which is now discontinued. The software is barely OK for something so expensive.Its missing basic UX measures like in some lists where I've assigned static IPs to over 30 devices, it just shows the IP address and mac address.. good luck figuring out which is which.
Or an option to view bandwidth usage over a time period...which ddwrt has had for several years.
meh.
Death666Angel - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
Turns out, the Goa'uld are already among us, they are just really tiny. :DGunbuster - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
Wrong, the 2030 model will be shaped like Dr. Elizabeth Weir.cosmotic - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
Would it kill these companies to make their hardware look like something other than a space ship?DanNeely - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
The spider design comes from the need to have lots of antennas for the feature sets they support, and the need for the antennas to be vertically oriented. (They're dipole antennas, which means they radiate to the sides not the tip or base.) If it was smooth box a lot of people would stick it on its side and have terrible coverage as a result. The same problem exists with foldable antennas that get dropped to make it fit on a small shelf, or because they're ugly, or just get knocked down and never stood back up. Keeping costs from being even more astronomical is also why they use standard length antennas not the more expensive sort you see in enterprisy mount to the ceiling models.Wardrop - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
Would a cylinder or tall rectangle not be a more logical and aesthetically pleasing design?wr3zzz - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
D-Link (cylinder) Asus (rectangle). I'll take either before TP-Link.0ldman79 - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
More aesthetically pleasing yet less technically capable.You need as much of a gap and different orientation of the antenna as possible for the multiple streams to work effectively.
In outdoor equipment one antenna is horizontally polarized and the other is vertically polarized. That seems to be a bit of a limit to date, two chains and two streams for long range stuff.
For indoor links the physical separation of the antennas seems to be enough until you get to the extremes of the range, but by then you usually don't have the signal quality to really get the higher speeds any more anyway. The second/third/fourth antenna and radio chains are then used primarily for error correction and improving single chain data rates when signal is weak.
wr3zzz - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
I agree with the numerical advantage of antennas necessitating the resulting spider form factor. I however do not trust TP-Link in their antenna claims. The firm has long marketed more-is-better when it comes to antenna which is not true, and in its early days was known to attach useless antennas in some of their China only models.pixelstuff - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
I'd like to know how these absurd looking units compare to something like the Ubiquti UAP-HD units?GTRagnarok - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
I actually like the "dead spider" look.Makaveli - Monday, December 10, 2018 - link
You've had to be a sucker to buy these Draft AX routers with no AX clients out.Looking at you GAMERS!
Gunbuster - Wednesday, December 12, 2018 - link
Meh, real gamers know you cant beat copper.Xajel - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
I'm just waiting for Ubiquiti to release their ax UniFi AP.bcronce - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
I got my first product of their, an AC Pro. Best wifi AP I've ever owned. Ubiquiti is currently the only brand I will purchase wifi from.Sahrin - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
If you're designing an entirely new MAC for a router in 2018, why in god's name would you put 1999's GbE MAC in it.peevee - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
Given that most users have Internnet connection in 25-100Mbps range and over-300Mbps is not even available in majority of US markets, why the hell the speeds are needed at home? Even n can serve that. Even if you have a private NAS and a collection of 4k movies on it (~0% of the market), n still can serve that. Let alone ac.And then they have 4Gbps on WiFi and 1GbE. 8x of that old... stuff. Nonsense.
Cogman - Tuesday, December 11, 2018 - link
Primary reason to want this is if you are a multi-device home or hosting WiFi lan parties.These high speed protocols also include better handling of interference from other devices. So, you might think that "Hey, I have 11Gbps to share, so with 2 devices that means I have 5.5gbps per device!" But that isn't how it works. While the two devices are shouting at the router, they are canceling out each others messages. Overcoming this requires extra overhead with the router, which means with 2 devices it is more realistic to get around 4gbps per device when both are actively using the network.
This only gets worse as you add more devices.
So yes, for a single person/single device home. It is overkill. But if you have a home where 1 person is using the nas, another is gaming, and another is watching netflix. You are going to end up with a lot less bandwidth than you counted on.
That being said, probably still overkill to some extent. But not the level you might think.
knirfie - Thursday, January 10, 2019 - link
Because the US isn't the only country in the world. I am pretty happy with my symmetrical 1gbit connection, but still need a router that can really handle it over Wi-Fi with multiple devices.arguss - Wednesday, September 18, 2019 - link
Do u know what happening with TP-Link Archer AX11000? Can't find anywhere!