# Asus RT-AC87U vs Asus RT-AC66U



## Blue Dragon

the speed of the router really doesn't matter unless you have serious service (ISP) if you're only doing 25mbps then it'd really only come in handy if you are talking to another high speed computer on your network... the internet side wouldn't be affected. best to check reviews and see which one gets less drops or which ones people reset more often. I was seriously going to go with asus until I researched reviews on it and decided on a nighthawk due to the positives it received. I am happy with it even though it doesn't fit my asus build.


----------



## phamtom

Thanks for your answer, I have 100/20 up and down so I might go for the 87U since i have a lot of Wifi issues


----------



## nick779

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phamtom*
> 
> Thanks for your answer, I have 100/20 up and down so I might go for the 87U since i have a lot of Wifi issues


Wireless AC still has some bugs to be worked out, and remember that your other hardware needs to actually support AC to even benefit from it.

I went with the RT N66U since N is stable, established, and extremely fast with the proper 2x2 or 3x3 wireless card.


----------



## hwoverclkd

Many of the router marketing pitch are misleading many of the consumers. Even if you have 100mbps ISP bandwidth, that will always be your bottleneck. Routers are primarily advertised by their throughput but rarely clear to many that it is your internal (home/office) network speed, between your router and your devices. You can definitely benefit from high-end routers fat bandwidth and faster processors if you have many devices at home.

I have 6 routers at home, 3 of them are AC routers (Netgear, trendnet and asus), with about 12-15 devices connected simultaneously. Trendnet chokes up most of the time, netgear and asus are strong to handle the traffic (single-handedly). If at least 5 of them start video streaming (youtube, Netflix, amazon, etc), that's where my 100/10 ISP throughput becomes the bottleneck.


----------



## coachmark2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phamtom*
> 
> I need to switch routers because my current one blows, would I benefit from the AC87U? I mostly play games. Will the AC66U last me some time? ("future proof")


See below
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blue Dragon*
> 
> the speed of the router really doesn't matter unless you have serious service (ISP) if you're only doing 25mbps then it'd really only come in handy if you are talking to another high speed computer on your network... the internet side wouldn't be affected. best to check reviews and see which one gets less drops or which ones people reset more often. I was seriously going to go with asus until I researched reviews on it and decided on a nighthawk due to the positives it received. I am happy with it even though it doesn't fit my asus build.


Indeed. ASUS usually out-engineers everyone in routers, but they don't have any customer support. Understand that when you buy an ASUS router, you do not get a warranty of any kind. It just doesn't exist. It's printed on the box, but if you ever have an issue they will NOT help you.

Again, when you buy ASUS, you buy with NO WARRANTY. They SAY there is one, but they will not honor it. Buyer beware.

That being said, I buy plenty of stuff without a warranty because it's cheap. If you can find the right price on an ASUS router, it _may_ be a good purchase.

The Nighthawk R7000 absolutely has my recommendation though. Good choice.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phamtom*
> 
> Thanks for your answer, I have 100/20 up and down so I might go for the 87U since i have a lot of Wifi issues


Hmmm.... What kinds of issues?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nick779*
> 
> Wireless AC still has some bugs to be worked out, and remember that your other hardware needs to actually support AC to even benefit from it.
> 
> I went with the RT N66U since N is stable, established, and extremely fast with the proper 2x2 or 3x3 wireless card.


While N is mature and established, 802.11ac does not have any "bugs" to be worked out. It is a standard created by the IEEE. Individual products may still have some issues, but the standard is as good as gold. The standard was developed from 2011 through 2013 and approved in January 2014, but has been stable for quite some time.

It all depends on need, but someone with 100/20 WAN connection? Definitely AC. Time to upgrade from N.

Disclaimer: I have a friend who's on 5/1 and has a WRT54G. He asked me if he should upgrade. I told him no, 802.11g is fine for your WAN speed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *acupalypse*
> 
> Many of the router marketing pitch are misleading many of the consumers. Even if you have 100mbps ISP bandwidth, that will always be your bottleneck. Routers are primarily advertised by their throughput but rarely clear to many that it is your internal (home/office) network speed, between your router and your devices. You can definitely benefit from high-end routers fat bandwidth and faster processors if you have many devices at home.
> 
> I have 6 routers at home, 3 of them are AC routers (Netgear, trendnet and asus), with about 12-15 devices connected simultaneously. Trendnet chokes up most of the time, netgear and asus are strong to handle the traffic (single-handedly). If at least 5 of them start video streaming (youtube, Netflix, amazon, etc), that's where my 100/10 ISP throughput becomes the bottleneck.


This is all pretty much true. It doesn't matter if you can push 200megabits per second through the air if your ISP only gives you 20...









If, as you said, you do some INTRAnet stuff, AC again is greatly beneficial.


----------



## phamtom

Well. I'm sitting 1 meter away of the router with my nexus 5 and can barely watch a YT video at 720p


----------



## coachmark2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phamtom*
> 
> Well. I'm sitting 1 meter away of the router with my nexus 5 and can barely watch a YT video at 720p


There are a bunch of factors at work here...

2.4GHz or 5GHz band?
What application?
What is your current router make and model?
Are there other wireless devices in your area? (read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_interference_at_2.4_GHz)
It may very well be a failing or crappy router, but let's not jump to the conclusion that 720p YouTube isn't working, therefore wireless sucks


----------



## nick779

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coachmark2*
> 
> See below
> Indeed. ASUS usually out-engineers everyone in routers, but they don't have any customer support. Understand that when you buy an ASUS router, you do not get a warranty of any kind. It just doesn't exist. It's printed on the box, but if you ever have an issue they will NOT help you.
> 
> Again, when you buy ASUS, you buy with NO WARRANTY. They SAY there is one, but they will not honor it. Buyer beware.
> 
> That being said, I buy plenty of stuff without a warranty because it's cheap. If you can find the right price on an ASUS router, it _may_ be a good purchase.
> 
> The Nighthawk R7000 absolutely has my recommendation though. Good choice.
> Hmmm.... What kinds of issues?
> While N is mature and established, 802.11ac does not have any "bugs" to be worked out. It is a standard created by the IEEE. Individual products may still have some issues, but the standard is as good as gold. The standard was developed from 2011 through 2013 and approved in January 2014, but has been stable for quite some time.
> 
> It all depends on need, but someone with 100/20 WAN connection? Definitely AC. Time to upgrade from N.
> 
> Disclaimer: I have a friend who's on 5/1 and has a WRT54G. He asked me if he should upgrade. I told him no, 802.11g is fine for your WAN speed.
> This is all pretty much true. It doesn't matter if you can push 200megabits per second through the air if your ISP only gives you 20...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If, as you said, you do some INTRAnet stuff, AC again is greatly beneficial.


You realize that N with the proper wireless card is rated up to theoretically 900Mbps right? Thats 9 times his download speed...

Even on a 5ghz single band the theoretical limit is 450Mbps if I remember correctly. Dual band can approach 600-900Mbps.

The AC standard isnt the problem, the hardware supporting it is. The most common Centrino 7260AC has been plagued with problems since the day it was released and they still have issues....
So why is AC so necessary in your eyes?


----------



## coachmark2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nick779*
> 
> You realize that N with the proper wireless card is rated up to theoretically 900Mbps right? Thats 9 times his download speed...
> 
> Even on a 5ghz single band the theoretical limit is 450Mbps if I remember correctly. Dual band can approach 600-900Mbps.
> 
> The AC standard isnt the problem, the hardware supporting it is. The most common Centrino 7260AC has been plagued with problems since the day it was released and they still have issues....
> So why is AC so necessary in your eyes?


Sigh...

read: Data rate and throughput are not the same

You will never ever ever ever ever ever hit 600 megabits per second of real TCP throughput on 802.11n. It will not happen. Ever.

If your data rate is 450mbps (which would require 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band and a 3x3 antenna array on both ends with everything running with zero interference at 64-QAM), then you might see 200mbps over the air. Maybe. But it requires such a special set of circumstances, it's really not even worth having the discussion over

You are _very_ unlikely to even hit that amount (600mbps) on AC, but AC is usually good for about twice-three times the throughput over N depending upon configuration.

Intel's 7260 has certainly had it's share of issues, I'll grant you that one. But AC as a whole is a thriving standard.


----------



## phamtom

2.4ghz, the router is 8 year old linksis that the ISP provided


----------



## coachmark2

Yeah it's crap. Get something new


----------



## nick779

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *coachmark2*
> 
> Sigh...
> 
> read: Data rate and throughput are not the same
> 
> You will never ever ever ever ever ever hit 600 megabits per second of real TCP throughput on 802.11n. It will not happen. Ever.
> 
> If your data rate is 450mbps (which would require 40MHz channels in the 5GHz band and a 3x3 antenna array on both ends with everything running with zero interference at 64-QAM), then you might see 200mbps over the air. Maybe. But it requires such a special set of circumstances, it's really not even worth having the discussion over
> 
> You are _very_ unlikely to even hit that amount (600mbps) on AC, but AC is usually good for about twice-three times the throughput over N depending upon configuration.
> 
> Intel's 7260 has certainly had it's share of issues, I'll grant you that one. But AC as a whole is a thriving standard.


Fair enough.


----------

