Page 4 - Performance Tests
For the tests, the wireless router was placed in the middle of the main floor of my house. An ASUSTOR AS3202T network attached storage equipped with a single Seagate NAS HDD ST4000VN000 4TB was connected to the router via a CAT5e cable on a Gigabit Ethernet connection. On the client side, a 2015 13" Apple MacBook Pro running Totusoft's LAN Speed Test application was used to transfer 500MB test files to evaluate real-world throughput. In our results, "upload" is defined as data transfer from the client to the server via the wireless router; conversely, "download" is defined as data transfer from the server to the client via the wireless router.
A brief description of the test locations is as follows:
- Location 1: Line of sight to router, approximately 2m distance
- Location 2: Non-line of sight to router, bedroom, one floor up
- Location 3: Non-line of sight to router, driveway in front of attached garage, same level
- Location 4: Non-line of sight to router, near end of backyard, one floor down
- Location 5: Non-line of sight to router, open area, one floor down
Compared Hardware:
- TP-Link Archer C2300 (AC2300)
- D-Link Covr (AC2600 Router, AC1300 Extender)
- Linksys Velop (AC2200 Mesh)
- Linksys WRT3200ACM (AC3200)
- TP-Link Archer C3150 (AC3150)
- TP-Link Deco M5 (AC1300 Mesh)
Since wireless channels are generally characterized by path loss, large scale fading, and small scale fading, the router was tested in five different locations described above to comprehensively measure its true throughput performance. This includes a combination of line of sight and non-light of sight spots, different distance and positions relative to the router, as well as shadowing caused by objects between the laptop and the router. In order to overcome inconsistencies due to small scale fading, a relatively large 500MB test file was used. Furthermore, movement of people and objects within the vicinity of the devices during testing was eliminated whenever possible.
Before we continue, I should note this is an AC2300 spec router, so this is the slowest non-mesh network router on paper and should be compared as such. In the first location, both the TP-Link Archer C2300 provided some reasonable performance. Compared to a single Deco M5 node, the download speeds were slower, though the upload speeds were quite a bit faster. Otherwise, I would have expected slightly faster download numbers, considering the Linksys Velop is operating in a similarly configured setup of AC2200. In the second location, the Archer C2300 yet again had slower download speeds when compared to the Velop, though it also had faster upload speeds. Compared to the single Deco M5, you can see how the antenna design is far superior, though this is not too surprising considering how compact the aforementioned router is. As this location was located directly above the router, this shows the antenna array strength above the router too. The third location follows a similar trend, with numbers being quite slow. It was definitely faster than the single Deco M5 or Velop, but the third location seems to be an Achilles' heel, with generally poor performance. Part of this can still be attributed to the power attenuation through a thicker garage wall, but even relative to its speed rating and antenna design, I expected something better. At the fourth location, which is a level down and again not in the line of sight of the router, we have even slower numbers between this and the previous location. Finally, in the fifth location, which was right under the router, the Archer C2300 provided relatively similar results compared to the other tested routers.
Overall, the performance of the Archer C2300 was not the best we have seen, but it was not completely unexpected either. I would have expected similar performance numbers between this and the single Linksys Velop, though there were blows traded throughout the locations. Download speeds peaked at 354Mbps, which is lower than expected. Upload speeds of the Archer C2300 also seemed to be weak overall relative to its speed rating. At locations four and five, these numbers are below what I would have expected for an AC2300 router with three high gain antennas, despite putting up acceptable download numbers.
Page Index
1. Introduction, Packaging, Specifications
2. Physical Look - Hardware
3. Configuration and User Interface
4. Performance Tests
5. Conclusion
