The given reason behind the EnGenius ECW130 is to expand an existing network, increasing the coverage in a more affordable manner – in other words, it’s to add WiFi 5 nodes to a mesh network, where there are few to no WiFi 6 client devices. And here’s the thing, WiFi 6 is not as widespread as some manufacturer would want you to believe, most people have just barely completely migrated towards the 802.11ac standard. Don’t get me started with the WiFi 6E and WiFi 7; they’re great technologies, but have very limited applications at the moment.

So, what can the EnGenius ECW130 offer? The wireless access point has most of the features of the flagship APs of the last generation. There’s MU-MIMO, four spatial streams (4×4), the channel bandwidth rises to 80MHz (no 160Mhz) and I saw that it also supports link aggregation (for up to 2Gbps throughput). But, I have seen that Engenius has made some impressive progress towards ensuring both the security of the network and the easy remote management via the Cloud platform, so are these features also supported by the EnGenius ECW130?

Yes, it does seem that it does have a similar support to the ECW220 and the ECW230, but do bear in mind that there are some premium features that require monthly subscription. That being said, let’s put the EnGenius ECW130 to the test and also see how it performs alongside other wireless access points in a larger network.

Design and Build Quality

I assume that some will think that the EnGenius ECW130 is the successor to the ECW120 that I tested a couple of years ago but besides being part of the same WiFi generation, there is very little in common between these two devices, design-wise. I say that because both still have been built on the same platform – Qualcomm. The Engenius ECW130 has an all-plastic case covered by a white matte finish at the top and dark gray at the bottom. And we’re still dealing with a rectangular access point with rounded corners, but the ECW120 is much smaller than the EnGenius ECW130.

The latter measures 8.46 x 8.46 x 2.2 (21.5 x 21.5 x 5.6cm) and weighs 1.39lbs (630g), so, even if the white finish will help it blend in with the ceiling, the device is not going to go unnoticed. As you may have already guessed, the access point is designed to be mounted on the ceiling (or wall, although the coverage will not be as effective), so there are no silicone feet to keep it in place on a desk.

You do get two mounting ears for the bracket (provided in the package) on the bottom of the device and here, you can also see the ventilation holes. Are these enough to maintain a proper temperature? Although the manufacturer did not rely on a metallic bottom section, there is a metallic piece inside the case to take the heat away from the chipsets. But, to be sure, I used a thermal camera while the access point was a heavier load.

The top of the case is simple and only has the logo along five very small status LEDs. There’s the Power LED (becomes solid orange when the AP is connected to the Cloud), the LAN1 and LAN2 LEDs, as well as the 2.4GHz and the 5GHz LEDs for the wireless networks. As usual, the ports area can be accessed from the bottom of the access point and it’s designed in a manner as to allow cables to hang (for wall mounting) or come from the wall.

There is a DC-in port which is always welcomed since it offers an alternative to PoE, there are two Gigabit Ethernet LAN ports (a rarity nowadays) and a recessed Reset button. The first LAN port is PoE (802.3at), while the second is just for data pass-through, but you do get the option to aggregate them to gain a better throughput. What is missing is the power adapter and, I suppose an Ethernet cable would have also been a welcomed addition.

Internal Hardware (EnGenius ECW130 Teardown)

I always love to open up the EnGenius access points since usually all I have to do is to remove a few screws and then the bottom section just comes off easily. That’s also the case of the EnGenius ECW130 and no, there were no warranty stickers (which is great for any future needed repairs). After detaching the bottom section, I could see the large metallic heatsink and I could remove some additional screws to be able to detach the top side as well, revealing the antennas.

EnGenius went with a curious pattern of antennas which sit on top of a large metallic piece that covers the AP footprint in its entirety. That being said, these are the components that I was able to identify: there was a quad-core 1.4GHz IPQ8064 (two dual-core Krait CPU ARM7 CPUs), 256MB of RAM (DDR3L) from Nanya (2x NT5CC64M16GP-DI) and the Qualcomm QCA8334-AL3C Ethernet switch chipset, but I was unable to identify the storage chip. It’s worth mentioning that the IPQ8064 is a step up from the IPQ4018 chipset of the ECW120.

Furthermore, as for the WiFi, the EnGenius ECW130 uses the Qualcomm QCA9984 802.11a/b/g/n/ac 4×4:4 + two front-end modules (465F, maybe from Skyworks) for the 5GHz radio band and the Qualcomm QCA9985 802.11b/g/n 4×4:4 chip + two front-end modules (same 465F) for the 2.4GHz radio band. If you care for the theoretical data rates, know that it’s 1,733Mbps for the 5GHz band and 800Mbps for the 2.4-GHz band.

EnGenius ECW130 vs ECW120 vs ECW220

WiFi Features

Since the EnGenius ECW130 is a WiFi 5 access point, it cannot make use of the newer technologies such as the OFDMA, BSS Coloring or the extra 6GHz radio, but the question is whether the client device could actually benefit from these features to begin with. Unless you have lots of WiFi 6 and WiFi 6E / WiFi 7 client devices and access points in the area, then no, and statistically speaking, the existing high-end client devices only account for a very small percentage of the market. Yes, even the new ones.

If you read some of my other articles on WiFi routers and access points, I make a point on testing them with both the better equipment and with a slightly less advanced WiFi adapter. That is to show what you’ll get unless you physically change the adapters in all your WiFi devices to support the new features. If you do have a few WiFi 6 client devices, but the vast majority are stuck on the older standard, it is possible to create a mesh network and include APs of mixed WiFi standard (if the budget is important).

And this takes us to an important aspect, how well do the EnGenius access points communicate? And does the user get a seamless roaming experience between mesh nodes? To answer the first question, the EnGenius access points do connect between each other to form a mesh network. And yes, it does have the expected characteristics, which include the self-healing aspect (when disconnecting a node), as well as the auto optimization of the paths between the gateway and the mesh nodes. About the roaming aspect, it is possible to enable the 802.11r Fast Roaming over the entire mesh nodes, so the user should indeed experience a seamless transition between the access points.

Wireless Test (5GHz)

Since pretty much all WiFi access points and wireless routers that I tested in the last couple of years were WiFi 6 devices, I used a main client device that’s equipped with an Intel AX200 adapter and two WiFi 5 client devices (Intel 8265 and Pixel 2 XL). I decided to still keep the same three clients since I was curious whether the AX200 would perform better.

The results show that you don’t really get any meaningful advantage and the AX200 client will behave as any high-end WiFi 5 device when connected to a WiFi 5 AP or router, as expected. So, while the AX200 client device was connected to the 5GHz WiFi network (80MHz), I saw an average of 631Mbps upstream and 333Mbps downstream at 5 feet (-38dB).

At 45 feet, the attenuation was similar to other APs that I tested (-75dB) and upstream, I measured an average of 187Mbps, while downstream, it was 166Mbps. The throughput takes a dive after going at about 70 feet (-87dB), where I saw an average of 13.6Mbps up and 5.4Mbps downstream, which was not really usable for most applications. Switching to the Intel 8265 laptop, I saw a very similar performance to the AX200 at 5 feet, but things quickly changed as I got farther from the EnGenius ECW130 unit.

At 45 feet, I measured an average of 73.2Mbps up and 44.2Mbps downstream. At 70 feet (-88dB), you’re not going to do much with the average throughput unless you don’t mind having 4Mbps up and 2.7Mbps downstream (and most people do mind). I have also added a long-term graph to show how the speed fluctuates over about an hour when using the AX200 and the Intel 8265 client devices.

The Pixel 2 XL is still alive (and not really well) after all these years, so I keep using it as the third client device. It doesn’t have the best range, but it does show how a slightly older WiFi 5 client device will behave. At 5 feet, I saw an average of 474Mbps upstream and 315Mbps downstream.

I could already see that the maximum range was 45 feet since the attenuation went past -80dB (-85dB to be exact) and here, I measured an average of 31.7Mbps up and 9Mbps downstream. The client device would not connect to the access point at 70 feet.

Pages: 1 2

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

Furthermore, the access points are built on different platforms (Qualcomm vs MediaTek), and it was curious to see that the Ubiquiti U6-LR was unable to fully utilize some of the features of the new WiFi standard. The OFDMA was only enabled on the 5GHz radio band – the U6-Pro had no such limitations.

This can have an impact in areas with lots of access points and client devices, but in most cases, the user would barely see any benefit from OFDMA. It’s worth mentioning that the U6-LR does support a slightly higher transmit power, potentially allowing it to reach farther, offering a better range (then again, LR stands for Long Range).

Other than that, the U6-Pro is also more compact than the U6-LR, but both devices have the same number of ports and yes, unfortunately neither has a multi-Gigabit port. That’s a privilege left to the U6-Enterprise. That being said, let’s put the Ubiquiti U6-Pro next to the U6-LR and see which of the two WiFi 6 access points is the better device.

Note: You can also check out the individual analysis of each WiFi 6 access point here: Ubiquiti U6-LR and Ubiquiti U6-Pro.

Design and Build Quality

Ubiquiti is well known for its iconic saucer-shaped wireless access points and this design has been used for the U6-Pro and the U6-LR as well. But there is a fundamental difference: the size. Ubiquiti got a bit anxious when developing the U6-LR, so it increased the size of the device to 8.66 x 1.89 inches (while the nanoHD was way smaller).

Then, the developers have regained some of the confidence and with the switch to a new architecture (to Qualcomm), the Ubiquiti U6-Pro is a bit smaller, measuring 7.76 x 1.38 inches. There is more because the Ubiquiti U6-LR is entirely made of plastic, relying on internal metallic plates to guide the heat outwards (this way, the case doesn’t get hot to the touch, but more heat remains inside).

The U6-Pro went with a similar approach to the EnGenius ECW220S and it made the bottom section metallic to quickly take the extra heat out, while the top is plastic. Yes, the case will be seemingly hotter, but it doesn’t matter when the device is mounted on the ceiling.
I didn’t leave this to interpretation, so I got the thermal camera out to confirm that indeed, both access points have a good thermal management. The photos speak for themselves.

I have mentioned that the APs will end up on the ceiling, but is it possible to leave them on the desk? No, both the Ubiquiti U6-Pro and the U6-LR are designed to be mounted on the ceiling – you can put them on the wall, but the range will suffer a bit. What about the status LEDs? As with the previous generations, both access points use an LED ring to show the status of the network, connection and the device itself. When the LED is blue, it means that everything is working fine, and it will stay white before you adopt the AP to the controller.

When the LED flashes blue every five seconds, it means that the access point has lost its connection to the network. The curious thing is that Ubiquiti has initially advertised the U6-Pro (and, apparently the U6-LR as well) as having RGB, but they later removed that feature due to supply issues.

The ports are positioned in the same area on both devices, so, if you check the recessed spot on the bottom of the U6-LR and the U6-Pro, you should see a single Gigabit Ethernet port (PoE 802.3af) and a Reset button. That’s it.

I understand that the PoE is the superior option, but I am not a fan of removing additional possibilities, so I would have liked to either see a power connector or a PoE adapter in the package, otherwise how exactly Ubiquiti expects the user to power up its access points?
Lastly, I would like to mention that the Ubiquiti U6-Pro and the U6-LR are IP54-rated, so you could technically mount the devices outdoors, but I would make sure that they’re still not completely in the open since neither are built like actual tanks (I do have an article with proper outdoors access points).

That being said, considering that it’s the smaller device, the U6-Pro is the better built and designed access point.

Internal Hardware (Ubiquiti U6-Pro vs U6-LR Teardown)

I have recently revisited the old Ubiquiti nanoHD which was the first time the manufacturer experimented with the MediaTek platform and it seems that they were confident it would work fine with the Ubiquiti U6-LR as well. And it did up to a point, but they got some issues covering the main WiFi 6 features (OFDMA), so the Ubiquiti U6-Pro uses the Qualcomm platform instead.

Indeed, the Ubiquiti U6-Pro is equipped with a dual-core 1GHz Qualcomm IPQ5018 chipset, 1GB of RAM from Kingston (2x D5128ECMDPGJD) and 4GB of storage memory from Mouser Electronics (THGBMNG5D1LBAIL). Furthermore, the access point uses the Qualcomm IPQ5018 as the chip switch and, as for the WiFi, it relies on Qualcomm QCN9024 802.11a/b/g/n/ac/ax 4×4:4 for the 5GHz radio and the Qualcomm IPQ5018 802.11b/g/n/ax 2×2:2 for the 2.4GHz radio band.

The Ubiquiti U6-LR relies on the dual-core 1.35GHz Mediatek ARM MT7622AV chipset, has a bit less RAM since it’s equipped with 512MB from Winbond (2x W632GU8NB-11) and it sports only 64MB storage from Winbond (25Q512JVFQ). Furthermore, the WiFi 6 access point uses the Marvell AQrate AQR112G switch chip and, as for WiFi, it relies on the Mediatek MT7975AN and MT7915AN 802.11a/b/g/n/ac/ax 4×4:4 chips for the 5GHz radio band and the Mediatek MT7622 802.11a/b/g/n 4×4:4 for the 2.4GHz radio.

Note: A lot of users like to see the maximum theoretical data transfer rate, so here it is. The Ubiquiti U6-LR can go up to 2,400Mbps on the 5GHz and up to 600Mbps on the 2.4GHz radio band. The Ubiquiti U6-Pro goes up to 4,800Mbps on the 5GHz and 573.5Mbps on the 2.4GHz radio band.

The Main Features

The Ubiquiti U6-Pro and the U6-LR share pretty much the same set of features which includes OFDMA, but Ubiquiti decided to implement it a bit differently. Unlike the U6-Pro which uses OFDMA on both radio bands, ul and dl, the Ubiquiti U6-LR only implements it on the 5GHz radio band. Will this have a big impact? It depends on whether you’re going to use OFDMA at all because in most cases, the regular user will not be able to see any significant difference in performance.

That’s because OFDMA improves latency and only in very crowded networks will you see an actual perceptible improvement. MU-MIMO is also present and the U6-LR uses a 4×4 WiFi chip for the 2.4GHz radio, while the U6-Pro went for a 2×2:2 chipset, but again, while a few client devices may be able to fully take advantage of this feature, most devices only go up to 2×2. Also, lots of them aren’t even compatible with MU-MIMO in the first place.

Both the Ubiquiti U6-LR and the U6-Pro make use of the 160MHz channel bandwidth which will work great with DFS channels, otherwise the network will actually perform worse due to extreme sensitivity to interference. Ubiquiti has been using its proprietary version of mesh and, while it calls it Uplink, it pretty much works in the same manner as other access points.

It allows the inter-connection of multiple access point to form a larger network and, thanks to fast roaming technologies, the client device should move seamlessly between nodes. I suppose I could also talk about the power consumption. Both WiFi 6 access points rely on PoE to power up and the U6-LR needs a maximum of 16.5W, while the U6-Pro requires less, going up to 13W.

Wireless Test (5GHz)

To make it easier to create these comparison articles, I test the wireless access points in the same manner using the same equipment in the same place.

The Ubiquiti U6-LR and the U6-Pro were connected to a powerful switch (the Zyxel XS1930) which was then connected to a router/gateway for gaining access to the Internet. Then, each was set up to broadcast two WiFi networks, the 2.4GHz and the 5GHz, the latter being first configured to use the 160MHz channel bandwidth, then the 80MHz one.

For the actual tests, I used three client devices, the first is a WiFi 6 computer equipped with an Intel AX200 adapter, while the other two are WiFi client devices (Intel 8265 and Pixel 2 XL).

Lastly, I made sure that the server would not be a bottleneck, so I used the 2.5GbE port, even though a Gigabit connection is the maximum any of the two access points can go up to. That being said, I connected the WiFi 6 client device to the 5GHz network of the Ubiquiti U6-LR (160MHz) and at 5 feet (-35dB attenuation), I saw an average of 888Mbps up and 546Mbps downstream.

At 45 feet, the access point was still going decently well, reaching an average of 181Mbps upstream and 153Mbps downstream. Considering the Long Range claim, I was curious about the throughput at about 70 feet. The attenuation was brutal, reaching -88dB and the speed was 14Mbps up and 1.4Mbps down, so, while you do get a connection, your options are still going to be limited (not much can be done with 1.4Mbps).

Moving to the Ubiquiti U6-Pro, I connected the WiFi 5 client device to the 5GHz network (also 160MHz) and, at 5 feet, I saw an average of 934Mbps up and 625Mbps downstream, which is an excellent performance and better than the U6-LR. But, at 45 feet, things fell apart hard because I saw an average of 43.9Mbps upstream and 12.7Mbps downstream. The problem is that the range doesn’t even reach 70 feet because the client device disconnected from the AP way before that point. So, better at close range, worse farther away.

On the next step, I switched to the 80MHz channel bandwidth on both access points, and it was interesting to see that both the Ubiquiti U6-LR and the U6-Pro performed so similarly at 5 feet.

But the U6-LR still performed better at 45 feet and beyond, even though the U6-Pro did reasonably well at 45 feet. At 70 feet, the client device once again failed to connect to the U6-Pro, so that’s a bit of a bummer, especially when other access points from the competition did not have this issue. Afterwards, I connected the WiFi 5 client devices, the laptop equipped with an Intel 8265 and the Pixel 2 XL.

Pages: 1 2

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

UPDATE 03.25.2023: I have added the Meraki Go GR12 WiFi 6 AP the best wireless access points list

UPDATE: The Xclaim Xi-3 AP has been removed from the list because the manufacturer decided to announce that the entire series has reached EOL in 2021.

Zyxel WAX650 WiFi 6 Access Point	TP-Link EAP660 HD Wireless Access Point	EnGenius ECW230S Wireless Access Point
Read More	Read More	Read More

Ubiquiti U6-LR Wi-Fi 6 Access Point	Meraki Go GR12 Wireless Access Point	Linksys LAPAC1750C Wireless Access Point
Read More	Read More	Read More

It’s true that the wireless access point has the role of converting the data received from a wired Ethernet cable into wireless signal (2.4GHz, 5GHz or 6GHz) but a wireless router can do pretty much the same thing, so one my ask why would you need a separate access point?
The routers can definitely do a great job at serving all the close-by clients, but, there are always WiFi dead spots where the signal just won’t reach and so, if you have a rather large house, you may need at least one additional wireless access point to help with your network.

While the main purpose of an AP is to extend your network, some manufacturers have taken up to a new level, adopting the mesh networking technology, so you can use one or two small devices in your home (which are usually very easy to set up) or you can use a bunch of them and create a mesh network, where your clients can seamlessly roam the building and have uninterrupted access to the Internet and a steady, strong signal.
Note 1: If you have an old router laying around, you may try to convert it to an access point and save some money in the process.
Note 2: I purposely left out the Outdoor Access Points, which will be the subject of another article.

CHECK OUT: THE BEST OUTDOOR WIRELESS ACCESS POINTS

Best wireless access points brief comparison

Which is the fastest wireless access point

After I tested all six wireless access points, the TP-Link EAP660 HD dethroned the Zyxel WAX650S on the 80MHz, and in terms of price, it’s absolutely unbeatable at the moment of writing. It’s not surprising that the WiFi 6 access points take the lead considering that they makes use of a few new technologies, as well as some improved features from the previous WiFi standard. All devices were tested in the same space and the client device for the WiFi 5 APs was either a computer equipped with an Intel 8265 adapter (the older one was equipped with an Asus PCE-AC88 PCIe), while the WiFi 6 access points were and will be tested using a computer equipped with a TP-Link TX3000E (AX200) adapter. Furthermore, since most WiFi 6 APs have multi-Gigabit ports, the server device will also have a multi-Gigabit port, as to not throttle the performance of the wireless access point.

Be aware that being the fastest access point doesn’t necessarily mean you have the best device for your network, because the software and other features, as well as the price can weigh just as heavy on the value of the access point. For example, the security features of the EnGenius ECW230S puts it way ahead all of its competitors and the extra tools that help the system admins makes this device one of the best wireless access points for system administrators since it’s far easier to get an accurate idea of what happens on the network even from outside the site.

While the distance may seem like a decent enough objective way of comparing the performance of the best wireless access points, the attenuation is a far better point of reference since it’s easier to also reproduce these results at home or in the office. The 45 feet in my office will differ than those in your home. But a -70dB attenuation will make it clearer about what to expect in terms of WiFi speed at a certain spot in your home.

That being said, I did test a few WiFi 6 access points that did support the 160MHz channel bandwidth and we do have a few different models taking the lead. But be aware that the 160MHz width is very sensitive to interference (less non-overlapping channels), so, to get these type of results, you need to have little to no amount of walls and preferably no other WiFi device to interfere with the data transfer. In a crowded area, it’s actually best to downgrade to 40MHz since not even the 80MHz can show decent results.

As you can see, the Xyxel WAX650S retakes its top place, but the TP-Link EAP670 gets very uncomfortably close at 5 feet, although losing momentum immediately after. The U6-Pro and the WAX630S are very similar in performance, while the U6-LR showing an advantage after 15 feet and forward (especially at 70 feet).

The wireless access point with the best coverage

As you can see the focus was towards the 70 feet, which is why the two TP-Link access points remain at the top even at the 45 feet mark (because it means that you get a better speed farther from the wireless access point). And yes, TP-Link is again towards the top when checking the throughput with a limited amount of client devices connected at the same time (two WiFi 5 and one WiFi 6 as seen in the individual analysis of each device).

1. Zyxel WAX650S WiFi 6 Access Point

Read the full review

The Zyxel WAX650S is currently one of the best WiFi 6 access points on the market and yes, it’s a bit more expensive than the other devices from this list, but this is a device which competes against enterprise-level access points, so its performance is on a different level. Sure enough, it does make use of the OFDMA technology, it has support for MU-MIMO, Beamforming and 160MHz channel bandwidth, but what I found the most interesting is the support for PoE++. It seems that you will need a powerful PoE Ethernet switch (such as the XS1930-12HP) to be able to use the most out of this access points and yes, the WAX650S does come with a 5GbE port to allow you to go beyond the old Gigabit limitation.

Additionally, I do appreciate that the device can be used in stand-alone mode in a proper way (there is a sufficiently comprehensive software), as well as with the NXC controller or, if you have a larger network, it will work just fine with the Cloud Center platform.
The Zyxel access points are usually designed on the larger side and the WAX650S is definitely out there as a bulky networking device. Indeed, at 9.25 x 9.06 x 2.11 inches, this is an access point that you’re going to see as soon as you enter the room, so perhaps mounting it on the wall would be more aesthetically pleasing than on the ceiling. That being said, I know that some other manufacturers have opted for some aluminum or zinc alloy, but Zyxel decided to keep the budget for the inside of the AP, so it made the case entirely from plastic.

It’s a hard plastic, so it’s fine and the heat management is also well made considering how crammed up everything is on the inside – there are some fairly hot points, but it’s mostly just warm to the touch.
If you turn the device upside down, you can clearly see the two dedicated areas for mounting the device on the ceiling (or on the wall) and in between them, there’s a carved in area where you can find the 12V DC-In Power connector (to power up the AP via a power cable), a 5GbE Uplink port (which can work in 1GbE and 2.5GbE mode), a LAN1 Gigabit Ethernet port (to connect wired clients) a recessed Reset button (press it for about 10 seconds to return the AP to factory default settings) and a grounding screw. I also opened up the case of the WAX650S and I could see that it went with the quad-core 2GHz Qualcomm IPQ8072A, 512MB of RAM and 512MB of flash memory, which is excellent.

I have already praised the Zyxel WAX650S for having a great wireless performance and, when I tested it, I used a MacBook Pro + a QNAP QNA-UC5G1T adapter as the server (to get that multi-Gigabit connection) and a computer equipped with an AX200 WiFi adapter as the client. This way, on the 5GHz (160MHz channel bandwidth), I saw an upstream throughput of 1,1650Mbps at 5 feet and 351Mbps at 30 feet. Using the 80MHz channel bandwidth, the speed went down to an average of 884Mbps at 5 feet and 338Mbps at 30 feet. The 2.4GHz performance (40MHz) was also very good, so I managed to measure an average of 241Mbps at 5 feet (upstream) and an average of 122Mbps at 30 feet.

If you intend to use only a single Zyxel WAX650S unit (or two), then you can use the stand-alone user interface (accessible by going to its IP address – can be found using the ZON utility) and just like the NWA1123-AC HD, it does offer a satisfying experience, offering more than the few basic options that we got with the NAP303. But the Zyxel WAX650S will also work great with the NCC and you can connect to it by using either the Nebula app (Android or iOS) which does make the process very painless or using the Nebula Control Center which will require a few more steps.

The Dashboard will display blocks of info for every type of device connected including the AP area (which shows the number of Online APs, the Total number of APs and the Heavy Loading) or the AP Client area, but, to monitor and configure the access point, you need to go to the AP area (from the top menu) and, if you click on it, it will summon a small drop-down menu with options grouped into two categories: Monitor and Configure. Under Monitor, you can view all the adopted APs and by clicking on any of them, it will take you to a dedicated page which includes more in-depth details about the device (as well as some Live tools to help you diagnose any connection issue); there’s also the Client list (click on any to view more details about that specific client), the Event log, the Summary report (general AP stats) and more.

The Configure group of options includes the SSIDs where you can set up general SSID settings for all the APs on the current Site (every new adopted access point will receive these settings); you can also configure the Radio settings (maximum output power, the channel width or the DCS setting), the Port setting (can be set for each individual AP), the Authentication settings (includes the WLAN security, enabling the Captive Portal), the Assisted roaming, the U-APSD, the Walled garden, the Layer 2 isolation or the Intra-BSS traffic blocking), the SSID schedule or the possibility of personalizing the Captive Portal (which is very useful especially for hotels or airports).

2. TP-Link EAP660 HD WiFi 6 Access Point

Read the full review

TP-Link has been one of the main providers of affordable consumer-friendly wireless access points and, ever since the WiFi 6 standard was launched, pretty much all manufacturers of SMB-suitable hardware raced to quickly release networking devices that could take advantage of the newer technologies. I am familiar with the EAP series (the EAP245) that was using an early version of Omada and it seems that in the meantime, TP-Link has made some serious advances and it now includes both gateways and switches (besides the WiFi APs), so what better time to showcase these advancements than with a new WiFi access point, specifically the EAP660 HD.

Similarly to most other ceiling wireless access points, the TP-Link EAP660 HD went with a simple design, the case having a circular shape and the entire device is covered by a white matte finish. But, despite keeping everything as minimal as possible, the access point is still very large and substantially thick, measuring 9.6 x 9.6 x 2.5 inches, so it’s going to be very much visible on the ceiling. As I have seen with some Ubiquiti access point over the years (such as the UAP-AC-PRO), the wireless access points that are designed to sit on the ceiling have a tendency to run fairly hot, but it seems that TP-Link has taken the necessary precautions against such behavior. Indeed, the full-plastic case and the multiple openings will help the AP to remain only a bit warm in the middle of the case.

Just like the EAP245, the TP-Link EAP660 HD has a single fairly small LED sitting at the top of the case and it’s supposed to properly show the status of the access point. The LED indicator will quickly flash when the AP is upgrading the firmware, it will become solid when the device is working properly; the LED will be flashing red and blue if the device has experienced an error. If you’re looking for the ports area, you’ll find it at the bottom, in a dedicated section. From the left, there’s a recessed Reset button which, when pressed and held for 5 seconds, returns the AP to factory default settings; further to the right, there’s the Power port and a single 2.5GbE port (to connect to the router – it’s PoE compatible).

Yes, unfortunately, TP-Link decided to not add an additional Ethernet port for wired clients (since the AP is going to end up on the ceiling or on the wall), so, only wireless clients will be able to connect to the EAP660 HD – unless you use a multi-Gigabit PoE switch (such as the Zyxel XS1930 or the Zyxel MG-108). Inside the case, the EAP660 HD is equipped with a quad-core 2GHz Qualcomm IPQ8072A SoC, backed by 512MB ESMT RAM (2x M15T4G16256A) and 128MB ESMT F59D1G81MB-AZM1P0H9N storage. Also, there’s the Qualcomm Atheros IPQ8072A 802.11b/g/n/ax 4×4:4 chip for the 2.4GHz radio and a Qualcomm Atheros IPQ8072A 802.11a/n/ac/ax 4×4:4 for the 5GHz radio.

Now that we had a look at the hardware, let’s see what kind of performance this wireless access point can deliver. To do so, I connected a computer to a multi-Gigabit switch, the Zyxel XS1930-12HP which was then connected to the EAP660 HD and then a WiFi 6 client (AX200) was connected to the 5GHz network (80MHz). Upstream, I measured an average of 979Mbps at 5 feet and 562Mbps at 30 feet; from the server to the client, the WiFi 6 access point delivered 882 Mbps at 5 feet and 546 at 30 feet. Afterwards, I connected the wireless client to the 2.4GHz network and, from the client to the server, at 5 feet, I measured an average of 368Mbps and, at 30 feet, the speed went down to 179Mbps. From the server to the client, I measured and average of 337Mbps at 5 feet, while at 30 feet, the throughput decreased to 172Mbps.

The TP-Link EAP660 HD can either be run as a standalone device (the usual choice for home users) or as part of a larger environment by using the Omada controller. To do the former, you need to run an instance of the controller on your hardware (a PC, a Raspberry Pi or using a dedicated device, such as the OC300). The Chinese-based manufacturer has been pushing back against Ubiquiti’s dominance for years and, after some questionable decisions from the latter company, it does seem that TP-Link may be able to persuade some of the users that felt neglected. I am saying that because the Omada controller has the same feel as the UniFi, as well as very similar interface and controls.

3. EnGenius ECW230S WiFi 6 Access Point

Read the full review

The EnGenius ECW230S is the upgraded version of the ECW230 which has now received extra antennas for WIPS and Zero DFS radios that were needed to make full use of the improved Diagnostic Tools. So, because of all these new features, the EnGenius ECW230S is essentially the best security-focused WiFi 6 access point at the moment, having a clear focus towards detecting rogue APs, every type of interference, as well as making the sys admin life a whole lot easier.

And it also helps with the budget because you no longer need to go to the site as often because the ECW230S allow you to see everything that happens within that network (what the client are doing) in actual real-time. It’s quite fascinating to see how EnGenius managed to add all the powerful components (plus the new antennas), while still keeping the EnGenius ECW230 incredibly compact (especially when compared to one of its competitors, the Zyxel WAX650S).

And it’s also one of the most elegant wireless access points that I have tested, sporting a flat minimalist plastic case covered by a white matte finish. The bottom side is metallic, but the ECW230S will most likely end up on the ceiling and it’s going to look great. Of course, EnGenius has included everything that’s necessary for mounting the device on the wall or ceiling, but since there are no silicone feet, you won’t be able to keep it on the desk.

On the front of the wireless point, there’s a fairly subtle bar of LEDs (which are quite bright, but can be turned off) and, from the left, there’s the Power LED, the LAN LED and the two LEDs for the WiFi networks (2.4GHz and 5GHz). Turn the access point around and you’ll be able to see a carved-in area that contains a recessed Reset button, the 12VDC power port and only one Ethernet port. It makes sense to use only one port for ceiling wireless access points, but it’s still annoying if you want to put it on the wall next to a printer (which may have used a secondary port).

The good news is that it’s a 2.5GbE port that supports 802.3at PoE Ethernet switches or PoE adapters (the same as on the ECW230). I also opened the case to check its components and it does make use of the same quad-core Qualcomm Atheros IPQ8072A chipset (clocked at 2.0GHz) that the ECW230 uses, as well as the 256MB of flash memory, but the RAM got a bump from 512MB to 1GB. For the WiFi, there’s the IPQ8072A chip (QCN5054) for the 5GHz radio and the IPQ8072A chip (QCN5074) for the 2.4GHz radio, so it’s the same as on the ECW230 again.

In terms of wireless performance, the ECW230S did really well and, using a WiFi 6 client (AX200) on the 2.4GHz radio band, I measured an upstream speed of 302 Mbps at 5 feet. Then, it decreased a bit to 283 Mbps at 15 feet and it managed 243 Mbps at 30 feet. Even at 45 feet, the 131Mbps throughput is perfectly usable for most applications. Furthermore, I tested the wireless access point using the 5GHz radio band (80MHz – the maximum channel bandwidth available) and the upstream throughput was 774Mbps at close range, 656Mbps at around 15 feet and a decrease to 435Mbps at 30 feet.

The EnGenius ECW230S allows you to access a very basic web-based configuration utility by entering the IP address of the AP into a browser of your choice, but this is a Cloud-managed access point, so you’ll get far more by adopting the device to the EnGenius Cloud platform. The point of all Cloud platforms is to allow an easy management for more than a single access point, Ethernet switch or gateway, as well as a quick configuration deployment to one device, a group of devices or all at the same time.

So, the ECW230S wireless access point will work great along with other EnGenius products. Of course, GUI is feature-packed, so I will mention a few: there’s the Captive Portal with the Splash Page (as well as various Authentication types, including by voucher or RADIUS), in-depth radio settings and more. But the stars of the show are the AirGuard and the advanced Diagnostic Tools. To get a brief idea about what to expect, well, you get to see the user activity in real-time (Live Clients) and you can also check for interference – the type of interference, also in real-time.

The AirGuard is also incredibly useful for detecting Rogue access points, as well as RF Jamming, Malicious Attacks and more.

4. Ubiquiti U6-LR Wi-Fi 6 Access Point

Read the full review

The Ubiquiti U6-LR is currently, one of the best WiFi 6 access points that’s still limited by a Gigabit connection from the new WiFi 6 series. And this shows that Ubiquiti didn’t really care to compete with the other brands yet (the WAX650S has a 5GbE port) and focused more towards making a smooth and fairly inexpensive transition for the SMBs and enterprise clients towards the newer technology without a radical change in the infrastructure.

Whether it was the right choice or not is up to the customers, but the truth is that the U6-LR is a very capable wireless access point, more than able to hold its ground against its main competitors, even if it’s much cheaper. Then again, we’re not going to ignore the phenomenal advancements that EnGenius did in terms of security with its ECW230S and ECW220S.
While Ubiquiti made the nanoHD much more compact than the UAP-AC-PRO, this isn’t really a trend that the manufacturer followed, so the Ubiquiti U6-LR is again on the larger side, measuring 8.66 x 1.89 inches.

But the look is pretty much the same as the other APs, so the case has that saucer shape, it’s covered by a white matte finish and at the top, there is a narrow canal that circles around to let the LED to shine through.

The LED is bright and it has the same functions as on the nanoHD: white means that the access point is not yet paired, solid blue means that the AP is added to the network and flashing blue means that the device is searching for the uplink. The plastic case on the UAP-AC-PRO was completely sealed, allowing the user to mount it outdoors and it seems that the U6-LR is built in a similar manner, being IP54-rated. So yes, you can mount the Ubiquiti U6-LR outdoors, but I would avoid putting it into the open since it can’t really compare to the properly rugged access points available on the market.

There are no ventilation cut-outs anywhere on the case of the U6-LR, so water and dust cannot enter the enclosure. Despite that, the wireless access point does not seem to get hot, unlike its predecessors (the UAP-AC-PRO). One design choice that I’m not really fond of is the removal of the secondary LAN port which means that on the bottom of the Ubiquiti U6-LR, you only get a Reset button and a Gigabit PoE+ Ethernet port (802.3af).

Considering that Ubiquiti didn’t give any option to power up the device using a power cable, you either have to use a PoE switch (you can read here a list of the best Ethernet switches on the market) or a PoE adapter. All Ubiquiti wireless access points make use of the UniFi Controller software in order to undergo any configuration changes to the device and to the network. The UniFi has been long regarded as the best controller for SMB equipment and it has created a blueprint which has been followed by many other manufacturers (TP-Link is replicating the experience very well with the Omada controller).

As a quick overview (you can read more by checking out the dedicated review), the interface has a left vertical menu, with the first option being the Dashboard. Here, you can see a graphical representation of the download and upload latency / throughput, the number of devices on the 2.4 and 5Ghz channels, the number of devices, clients and the Deep Packet Inspection. Then, there’s the Map, where you can view or create a graphical topology of your network and the Devices which display a list of all the UniFi devices discovered by the Controller.

Further down, you can see the Clients which display a list of the network clients and allows you to configure them, the Statistics (number of Clients, the Top Access points, a Quick Look over the most active AP and client, as well as Recent Activities) and Insights. I have tested the Ubiquiti U6-LR using a couple of computers, one as the server and the other as the client (I have actually used three different clients, one equipped with an AX200 WiFi 6 adapter, one with an Intel 8265 WiFi 5 adapter and the last was a smartphone, a Pixel 2 XL).

As you can see, from the client to the server, I saw an average of 888 Mbps at 5 feet on the 5GHz network using the 160MHz channel bandwidth and 757Mbps on the 80MHz mode. Using the Intel 8265 client, the throughput at 5 feet was considerably lower at 661 Mbps (80MHz), with the Pixel 2 XL offered a maximum of 375Mbps. At 30 feet, I saw an average speed of 377Mbps using the client equipped with the AX200 client device (on 5GHz, at 160MHz) and an average of 314Mbps using the 80MHz channel bandwidth.

Using the Intel 8265 adapter, the throughput was very similar, scoring an average of 311Mbps, while the Pixel 2 XL couldn’t really catch up, offering only up to 185Mbps. I have tested the Ubiquiti U6-LR a lot more in depth in the dedicated article, where you can also see the signal strength, the long-term speed fluctuations and the downstream performance.

5. Meraki Go GR12 Wireless Access Point Review

Read the full review

Ubiquiti has been the default manufacturer of SMB-suitable networking devices to offer an accessible alternative to the enterprise-level products, but Cisco didn’t want to miss out on such an important growing market, so it has made available a few new wireless access points (WiFi 6) to compete with the existing players.

But do know that the Meraki Go series, despite being a branch under Cisco, does focus a lot more on user-friendliness and simplicity. Also, other brands such as EnGenius, Ubiquiti, TP-Link and Zyxel do offer Cloud-based controllers which can handle multiple types of devices. But the Meraki Go line is not yet as diverse, so only the APs can be managed and configured using a Cloud application app.

In terms of design, the Meraki Go GR12 follows a minimalist look and it’s one of the few in this list that isn’t a ceiling-mount type.

Indeed, the wireless access point can be mounted on the wall thanks to its dedicated mounting holes or you can just leave the device on the desk since it does have some silicone feet to keep it in place. The case is made of plastic and it’s covered by a white matte finish, and the device is also fairly compact, measuring 7.95 x 5.55 x 1.02 inches. Yes, it’s a rectangular case, so it didn’t follow the common saucer shape.

I suppose it could have added a few LEDs for the status, but the developers have decided that the single LED approach is the better one. When it’s orange, there are issues with the hardware and, when the LED becomes blue, then it has access to the Internet, as well as some connected client devices. Now let’s talk a bit about the heat management. The case of the wireless access point is made of plastic, but the manufacturer has included some metallic pieces inside to dissipate the heat.

I used a thermal camera to check out the temperature and it showed that the Meraki Go GR12 doesn’t get hotter than the average WiFi 6 AP.
Moving to the bottom of the Meraki Go GR12, we see an info label and next to it, the manufacturer has dedicated an area for the ports: there’s a Power port, followed by a Gigabit Ethernet port (802.3af PoE) and a small recessed Reset button (to return the device to factory default settings).

I have also opened the device to see the main components and the wireless access point uses a quad-core 1GHz Qualcomm IPQ6010 chipset, has 1GB of RAM, 256MB of storage and uses the Qualcomm QCA8081 as the switch chip.

I have mentioned that the Meraki Go GR12 uses an application for monitoring and configuration purposes, but I haven’t mentioned anything about a web-based interface. And there is one available, well, kind of because the layout and the settings are pretty much identical to the mobile app. And yes, both rely on the Cloud to gain access to the interface. The app will show a healthy amount of status information and you can also configure the WiFi networks, although not that many advanced options are available (there is support for WPA3).

I saw that the app would also allow me to set up a Landing page (useful for hotels, hospitals and airports) and, despite the seemingly simplicity, it’s still necessary to adjust the default settings if you want the client devices to communicate between each other. Now let’s have a look at the wireless performance of the Meraki Go GR12.

Since it has a single Ethernet port, I had to rely on a PoE switch (I chose the Zyxel XS1930 multi-Gigabit PoE++ switch) and, after creating two SSIDs, one for the 2.4GHz and the other for the 5GHz connection, I used multiple WiFi clients (both WiFi 5 and WiFi 6) to test the throughput.

That being said, first, I connected the WiFi 6 client to the 2.4GHz WiFi network and, from the client to the server, I measured an average of 198Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 153Mbps at 30 feet; next, from the server to the client, I measured around 172Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 108Mbps at 30 feet.

Afterwards, I connected the WiFi 6 client device to the 5GHz WiFi network and, from the client to the server, I measured an average of 791 Mbps at 5 feet, while at 45 feet, the speed decreased to 110 Mbps. From the server to the client, at 5 feet, I got around 438 Mbps and, at 30 feet, I measured an average of 129Mbps.

6. Linksys LAPAC1750C WAP

Read the full review

The Linksys LAPAC1750C is part of the new wireless access points that support the Cloud controller out-of-the-box, but besides this new software, the device is still identical (in terms of hardware) to the five year old LAPAC1750. Despite that, the LAPAC1750C is still suitable for today’s exigence (they rarely change that much in this market), so, it still respects the design trend of compact circular or hexagonal-shaped devices that can be easily positioned anywhere (even on the ceiling). The case of the LAPAC1750C is basically identical to any other from the LAPAC series, so we’re dealing with a hexagonal shape, but not with sharp angles, adopting soft, rounded corners instead (everything covered by a white matte finish). On the top you can find the Linksys logo, along with the model and a small bar for the LED lights just underneath. There’s also a narrow canal surrounding the top of the device and from this place, the case flows from the narrower top side towards a larger footprint.

When compared to the likes of Ubiquiti UAP-AC-PRO or even the Zyxel NWA1123-AC HD, the LAPAC1750C is among the largest I have tested so far, measuring 9.57 x 9.33 x 1.72 inches but it does weigh a bit less than the Zyxel AP (1.12 lbs). The LAPAC1750C is meant to be positioned on the wall or on the ceiling, as it comes with the whole kit for mounting (including a drill layout template), but, if you decide to keep it horizontally on a desk, there are four small round silicone feet that should ensure a reasonable level of stability.

Turn the wireless access point upside down and you’ll be greeted by lots of punctured holes which ensure a proper airflow along with a carved-in area where you can find the ports and connections: there’s a Power port (only use the adapter that came with your AP), a single Ethernet Gigabit port (PoE+) and a red Reset button.
The LED light from the top of the case will glow a solid green if the system is normal and no wireless client is connected (it will blink when the device is booting). The LED indicator will also blink a blue light if there is a firmware upgrade in progress and will be solid blue if at least one wireless client is connected; lastly, the LED indicator will be solid red if the booting process has failed or the firmware update was unsuccessful.
Note: While some other wireless access points come with a PoE injector, Linksys has decided to not include one in the package.

Generally, the access points focus on different things than routers (like multiple SSIDs with multiple VLANs), so it won’t come as a surprise that the LAPAC1750C may not outshine a AC1750 router in terms of wireless performance, even though the access point itself is branded as AC1750. Despite that, the LAPAC1750C Pro is a worthy performer and the test results are really good.
To test the wireless performance, I took two computers, one as a client (ASUS PCE-AC88), the other as a server and, first, I connected them to the 2.4Ghz radio band. This way, from the client to the server, the LAPAC1750C reached an average of 133 Mbps at close range (5 feet) and it slowly decreased to 120 Mbps at 30 feet. From the server to the client, I measured and average throughput of 104.9 Mbps (at 5 feet) and afterwards, I got 94.2 Mbps at 30 feet.

After I connected the computers to the 5GHz network, things were a lot better. At close range, from the client to the server, I measured an average speed of 564 Mbps and then, the speed decreased to 243 at 30 feet. From the server to the client, the access point managed to deliver an average of 302 Mbps and around 185 Mbps at 30 feet.
In terms of wireless performance enhancing features, the LAPAC1750C is quite bare-bones, lacking the MU-MIMO technology which has the ability to serve multiple clients at the same time, instead of letting them compete for the bandwidth, but it does come with support for the 802.11k Roaming technology which negates the need for re-authentication every time the client roams to a new node (Fast Basic Service Set Transition).

The reason of existence of the LAPAC1750C is the centralized management system which allows the creation of access points clusters that can then be managed by a single controller. The Linksys Cloud Controller, as its name suggests, is Cloud-focused, but the manufacturer has made it free for 5 years – you can still use the LAPAC1750C in the offline mode, where you simply enter the IP address of the device and do the necessary configurations. To access the Cloud controller, you’ll need a Linksys account and to simply pair the AP to the software (the process is very simple and painless). Some of the main features that the controller offers are VLAN tagging, Bandwidth Limit, Splash Page (offers a very comprehensive way of creating a splash page: you can modify the styles, the login instructions, the terms of use policy, the authentication type (password-only at this time) and more), Client Isolation, 802.11k and some Tools (which includes a Ping Tool and the Rogue Access Point Detection).

The local web-based utility will only work for one access point at a time (while the controller allows for a mass deployment of APs with fast an easy monitoring and configuration process), but it does have some additional features, such as WDS, Workgroup Bridge, SSID Isolation and RADIUS support for the Splash Page. I do expect that Linksys will make the Controller a more complete solution and I do hope that more types of devices are underway to be added under a single software.

What should you take into account before choosing a wireless access point?

Wireless Performance and Range
Obviously, the most important aspects of a wireless access point is the downlink and uplink throughput and how far can the signal reach. For example, if you use the 2.4GHz radio band, chances are that the signal will go for a long way, but the speed won’t be strong, while if using the 5GHz radio band, the speed will be greatly improved, but don’t expect huge distances to be covered.
Also, you need to take into account the interferences, the number of clients, the surface that needs to be covered and if you need more than a single access point.

The Web Interface/App
This is also a very important aspect, because you need to be able to configure and, if needed control a large network. Ideally, a good interface is easy to navigate, the settings are clear and intuitive and the AP should have as many features as possible for you to fiddle with.
Also, you need to check out whether you can access the interface through an Internet browser or you need to use an app (or both) and if the software allows you to remotely control the network.

Price
Lastly, we have the price to worry about, because you need to know where you stand based on your budget. Usually, the consumer-type access points are cheaper, but they lack a lot of the features of an enterprise-level AP.
You should also keep in mind that some popular products can be overpriced (because of their popularity) and that there could be some rare gems from yet-unknown or rising networking manufacturers that could deliver the same experience at a lower price.

What features should you look for in wireless access points?

PoE
The Power over Internet is quite a simple concept (but extremely important) that allows your access point to receive power through a twisted pair Ethernet cabling (so you get both electrical power and data, using a single cable).
Why is it useful? Many organizations like to place the wireless access points on the ceiling in order to help the wireless clients achieve the best possible range, but they have to rely on extension cords (which have an ugly appearance and require a qualified electrician to install them).
That’s why it’s better to use the PoE system, as you can install it yourself and it protects you devices from underpowering or overload. Some of the access points on the market have a PoE injector included in the package, while other do not (you will have to buy it separately), so be sure to check it out before purchasing, if this is a mandatory feature for your network.

Concurrent dual band
You may be surprised that some access points call themselves dual band, but, despite expectancies, it allows you to choose only one band at a time. A good example is the Linksys WAP300N, which has both the 2.4GHz and the 5GHz radio bands, but you can only use one or the other.

Load-Balancing
I’ve touched the subject of load-balancing when I talked about the more popular dual-band routers on the market and the importance of this feature was clear for any business owner that values a stable network. Is this function also relevant for wireless access points? Absolutely yes.
First of all you need to understand that the load-balancing feature was created to be used with more than one access point. This is because its role is to diminish the network congestion by spreading the sessions among the existing APs in such a way that they share the client load.
So, if you have a large number of clients in a smaller space, instead of overloading a single access point, the load balancing spreads all the connected clients over all the APs, therefore there will be less interruptions and more bandwidth available.

The Man in the Middle (Defence against rogue access points)
A rogue access point is an unauthorized WAP installed (usually with malicious intent) on a secure network. Therefore, the network becomes vulnerable to different types of attacks and can be accessed either from inside the facility or remotely (the more common occurrence).
That is why it is very important that the access point to have a reliable wireless intrusion detection system which audits all the APs on the network on a regular basis to see if they are on the managed list and if they’re connected to the secured network or not.

Beamforming
The Beamforming technology allows your access point to focus the signal towards each client and to concentrate the data transmission towards a specific target, instead of broadcasting it all over the room, therefore minimizing the data waste.
If a few years ago this technology was optional and exotic, nowadays, almost all devices have this feature implemented (still, make sure to check before the purchase). Also, you need to know that every major manufacturer will have its own way of using this technology and it may have a different name and different performance, but the functionality should remain basically the same.

Mesh Networking Support
The mesh network support is one of the most important features to look for when buying an access point because it allows you to add other APs and create a network where all the nodes (APs) cooperate with each other when distributing the data.
An interesting characteristic of a mesh network is that the data is propagated along a path and it travels from one node to the other until it reaches its destination. This way, it has to find the best road and, if needed to reconfigure itself in case of broken paths (using self-healing algorithms).
It also allows for an interrupted experience when travelling into a large building, by automatically switching from AP to AP so you won’t notice any disconnects.

802.11n or 802.11ac?

Future-wise, an investment into Access points that feature the AC standard should be the better choice. If you want to create a network using APs compatible with the 802.11n standard, you don’t have to worry, because, if needed you can replace them in time and the N-access points and AC-access points are compatible with each other and work great with clients of both breeds.
Now, if you are curious about the technical differences between the two standards, let’s just say that the 802.11ac standard delivers up to 3 times faster speeds and, while a N-access point can handle no more than 30-35 clients in order to maintain a reasonable bandwidth for all, an AC-access point has no such limitations.
Lastly, the price could make a difference, because, as expected, the AC technology is way more expensive than the N technology.

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

If you’re not familiar with the brand, know that the Meraki Go line was developed as a way for Cisco to have some presence into SMB and home-based networking market. For this reason, the software has been tuned in a manner as to accommodate people that are not tech-savvy and I know that it’s a bit strange coming from Cisco, but that’s the vision that the developers saw fit to implement.

Even so, the user does get a web portal management platform, as well as a Cloud-managed mobile app to monitor and configure the network. Furthermore, the Meraki Go GR12 does offer the main WiFi 6 features which includes OFDMA and I also saw the support for TWT and BSS coloring which is usually left out from the cheaper AP models. Additionally, the Meraki Go GR12 does have support for meshing, allowing the creation of a larger network where the user can fast roam from AP to AP (PMK and OKC), but the channel bandwidth only goes up to 80MHz (the 160MHz can be difficult to use in a crowded environment anyway).

Also, the PoE port is Gigabit, which is fine considering the targeted audience. That being said, let’s put the Meraki Go GR12 to the test and see how well it performs and how it compares to its main competitors.

Design and Build Quality

For the first batch of WiFi 6 access points, the manufacturers cared more about the tech than the size, so we did get huge APs, such as the WAX650S or the EAP660 HD. But, over the last year, I did see a noticeable shrinking in size and considering that the Meraki Go GR12 was recently released, the case is very compact. Indeed, at 7.95 x 5.55 x 1.02 inches (20.2 x 14.1 x 2.6 cm), the Meraki Go GR12 is one of the smaller WiFi 6 access points on the market and I did like that the manufacturer made the device rectangular, instead of the usual circular shape.

That’s because the Meraki Go GR12 is not a ceiling-mount-only access point – it can be installed on the ceiling, but the developers made sure to include a couple of mounting holes for attaching the device on the wall as well. Plus, there are four silicone feet, so it’s also very possible to just leave the access point on the desk. Now let’s talk about the thermal management.

Some manufacturers have decided to use the metallic bottom part of the case to guide the heat outwards, but the Meraki Go GR12 is all plastic, so they went with a different approach, right? Kind of because after opening up the case, I did see that there was a metallic piece which had the role of dispersing the heat away from the main chipsets. This way, the case remains warm and doesn’t get hot to the touch. I did check how hot the device can get and as you can see from the thermal photo, it’s acceptable.

The WiFi 6 access point relies on a single LED to tell the status of the network and connection. If this LED is solid orange, then there is a hardware issue (it will also be orange while the AP is booting up), otherwise, if it’s green, then there are no connected clients and, as soon as some WiFi devices do connect, the LED will become solid blue.

I suppose I also need to mention the rainbow LED when the AP is initializing. Looking around the case, there are no ventilation holes and just at the bottom, there is a recessed area for the Ethernet port which does support PoE (802.3af) and it’s a Gigabit port. Next to it, the Meraki Go GR12 has a 12V power port which is a nice alternative to powering up the device via a PoE switch (useful if you want to use a single AP).

Lastly, there is a recessed Reset button to return the device to its default factory settings. Considering that there are no silicone covers or seals, nor any IP rating, it means that the Meraki Go GR12 is an indoors-only WiFi 6 access point.

Internal Hardware (Meraki Go GR12 Teardown)

Before opening the case of the Meraki Go GR12 there’s good news and bad news. The good news is that there are no warranty voiding seals, the bad is that underneath the four silicone feet, Cisco decided to use unconventional screws. And although I had a healthy variety of Allen keys, none of them fit, so I had to just force my way through using a regular straight screwdriver. I mean it worked out in the end and after detaching the top cover, I could see the metallic piece for heat dissipation, while on the bottom part, there was the PCB.

At a closer inspection, I also saw three antennas, two for the 2.4GHz and 5GHz radio bands, while the third is for Bluetooth (you can see it on the right side of the PCB – it’s Bluetooth version 4.4). It’s a bit of a strange pattern since the PCB connects directly onto one antenna – after removing the board, I could see the second heat dissipating metallic piece attached to the bottom plastic part of the case.

The main components were hidden underneath some aluminum heatsinks and, after removing them, I could identify the quad-core 1GHz Qualcomm IPQ6010 CPU, which is the same as on the EnGenius ECW220. There were also 256MB Spansion MS02G2 NAND flash storage memory, 1GB of RAM from SK Hynix (H5AN8G6NDJ), a Qualcomm QCA8081 switch chipset, an MG21 A020HI cellular gateway chip and a MPSN46 MP5496 power management solution.

As for WiFi, the Meraki Go GR12 uses the Qualcomm QCN5152 802.11a/n/ac/ax 2×2:2 chip for the 5GHz radio band and the Qualcomm QCN5121 802.11b/g/n/ax 2×2:2 chipset for the 2.4GHz radio band. I need to mention that the access point did not have any of that thermal glue paste thing nonsense, so kudos for that.

Meraki Go GR12 vs TP-Link EAP610 vs EnGenius ECW220S vs Ubiquiti U6-Pro

WiFi Features

The main WiFi 6 feature that’s supported by the Meraki Go GR12 is OFDMA which is a great way of handling very crowded networks, ensuring that more data is transmitted across multiple sub-carries (the channel is divided into smaller resource units) without using the entire channel for the transmission. As expected, OFDMA gets to be used only when there are compatible client devices and when the WiFi area is truly over-crowded, this being the last resort at having a reliable WiFi connection.

But is it ul and dl on both bands? Since there was no mention on their website, I checked out the user interface which has revealed that no such setting is available to the user. Unfortunately I don’t really have the means of testing if the support is actually there since that kind of equipment is tens of thousands of dollars, so hopefully it’s there. That’s the same as with BSS Coloring. This is a phenomenal feature which should help mitigate the co-channel interference and it’s not really something you see on inexpensive WiFi 6 access points.

MU-MIMO and Beamforming are present and, as expected, you do need to use compatible client devices to see these features in action. Additionally, the Meraki Go GR12 can inter-connect with multiple other compatible access points to form a mesh network, but be aware that you can only use Meraki Go APs and they can’t be combined with Cisco Meraki access points. Lastly, I need to mention that the omni-directional antennas have a 5.6dBi gain for the 2.4GHz radio and a 5.3dBi gain for the 5GHz radio band.

Wireless Test (5GHz)

The Meraki Go GR12 has a single Ethernet port, so to create the client – server system, I had to connect the access point to a switch. As usual, I chose the Zyxel XS1930-12HP which was way overkill for this project, but it nicely powered on the GR12 (that, by the way, only needed 11W at the maximum load).

Afterwards, I connected a server PC and three client devices, one WiFi 6 (AX200) and two were WiFi 5 client devices. The latter two are still very much relevant considering that the overwhelming majority of people has devices that rely on this standard. The first series of tests were conducted while the WiFi 6 laptop (AX200) was connected to the 5GHz network (80MHz channel bandwidth – the interference was not that bad, so I could go all out). This way, I was able to measure an average of 791Mbps upstream and 438Mbps downstream at 5 feet, but do bear in mind that the attenuation was -44dB, which is not that great considering the distance.

Moving a bit farther from the access point, I saw 439Mbps at 15 feet and 228Mbps at 30 feet (upstream), and the throughput was still very much usable at 45 feet, where upstream, it was 110Mbps, while downstream, it dropped to 45.9Mbps. At about 70 feet, the attenuation was already too much (-88dB) so the values that I got weren’t surprising: 11.5Mbps up and 2.2Mbps downstream. Moving to the WiFi 5 laptop equipped with an Intel 8265, the signal strength and attenuation is pretty much the same across the entire testing area, so I expected very similar results to the AX200.

At 5 feet, it was not as good though, reaching 698Mbps up and 207Mbps downstream, but going a bit farther, the throughput got quite similar. At 30 feet, it was 267Mbps and at 45 feet, it was 131Mbps (both upstream).

At 70 feet, things again kind of fell apart, considering that upstream, I measured 6Mbps and downstream it was only 1.6Mbps, so not really a good connection for any type of applications or services, unless very basic. The second WiFi 5 client device is the Pixel 2 XL which I keep on resurrecting for these articles – I need consistency between tests.

That being said, the Meraki Go GR12 didn’t really like the Pixel phone (or the other way around) because despite a fairly reasonable attenuation, I was only able to reach 45 feet – going farther immediately disconnected the client device.

Pages: 1 2

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

Even so, while the EAP610 is your regular ceiling-mount AP, the EAP615-Wall is designed to be mounted on a wall and provide pass-through PoE for a secondary device. Don’t expect to chain-connect a couple of PoE access points because the power that’s actually sent is approximately 12W, so there’s only a handful of options available.

Let’s not brush off the EAP610 that easily because this is the second version that got shrunk to better compete with the likes of ECW220S and the WAX630S, both very compact access points.
Of course, both the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall support OFDMA, MU-MIMO and both can connect to the Omada controller. There’s also the possibility to use seamless roaming and, in the case of the EAP610, to mesh it with other compatible access points.

Still, we’re dealing with two devices built on very different platforms (MediaTek vs Qualcomm) and, while the EAP610 seemed to have the upper hand on paper, I was surprised by how well it actually performed with both WiFi 6 and WiFi 5 client devices. So, let’s put them side by side and see which AP is the better one.

Note: You can also check out the individual analysis of each WiFi 6 access point here: TP-Link EAP610 and TP-Link EAP615-Wall.

Design and Build Quality

I have mentioned that the TP-Link EAP610 has gotten a smaller case which is excellent news especially since the heat management is still fairly decent and, no, there were no radical design changes, the case simply shrunk, while retaining the same look. So, we’re dealing with a 9.6 x 9.6 x 2.5 inches access point that has a metallic bottom and a plastic top, all covered by a white matte finish. But, when putting the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall next to each other, the latter is still more compact.

Indeed, when a device measures only 5.6 x 3.4 x 0.8 inches, there is very little competition but this did come at the cost of a few more degrees F since the case is completely sealed off. And no, it’s not built for outdoors conditions, that’s what the EAP610-Outdoor access point is for. Mounting the TP-Link EAP610 is simple since all you need to do is attach the bracket on the ceiling, connect the PoE cable (optionally, also the power cable) and simply rotate the device into place.

The TP-Link EAP615-Wall doesn’t differ that much in this respect because the same rule applies for both AP. Ideally, you need to feed a cable through the ceiling or in our case, the wall, but the EAP610 does allow some leeway in terms of positioning, while the EAP615-Wall does not. It requires a wall junction box to be properly mounted on the wall, so keep that in mind before purchasing it.

The TP-Link EAP610 has a single LED to show the status of the access point and it will turn on if everything is in working condition, otherwise, if it encounters an error, the LED turns off. The TP-Link EAP615-Wall has the same approach, so there is also a single LED. But, in terms of ports, the EAP615-Wall is better equipped, sporting not one, but four Ethernet ports, the first two being Gigabit and used for connecting client devices, while the third is PoE Out (yes, also Gigabit). The PoE In Ethernet port is on the rear panel of the AP.

I know that TP-Link mentioned that the PoE output can go up to 12W, but I had some issues powering up even some of the more basic PoE devices, so I am fairly sure that the actual output barely exceeds 10W.

UPDATE 02.16.2023: A reader reached out to me recently to point out that I have missed some Advanced settings which have the role of enabling the PoE port. This setting can be found in the Omada controller interface > EAP615-Wall > Config > Advanced, and then scrolling down until reaching the ‘ETH Port Settings’. Here, it is possible to enable the ETH3 PoE Out, just make sure that the EAP615-Wall is not powered by another access point. I was able to power up every access point that I have available, including the EAP670 and the EAP660 HD, but do be aware that on a higher load, the devices may disconnect from the EAP610-Wall.

The TP-Link EAP610 has a single Ethernet port since the assumption is that you can’t or won’t connect wired-only client devices using a cable hanging from the ceiling (which is a fair assumption) and it’s also Gigabit.

There is also a Power port if you don’t want to use PoE, an option that’s missing from the EAP615-Wall which is stuck with using just PoE for power.

Internal Hardware (TP-Link EAP610 vs EAP615-Wall Teardown)

Despite both access points being AX1800-class devices, the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall are built on completely different platforms. And, when I tested each of them independently, I did open up their case to see the exact components. This way, I could see that the TP-Link EAP610 uses the quad-core Qualcomm IPQ6000 SoC clocked at 1.2GHz, 256MB of RAM ESMT M15T4G16256A, 128MB of flash memory from ESMT (F59D1G81MB) and, as for WiFi, the access point is equipped with the Qualcomm QCN5022 802.11b/g/n/ax 2×2:2 chip for the 2.4GHz radio band and the Qualcomm QCN5052 802.11a/b/g/n/ac/ax 2×2:2 for the 5GHz radio band.

The TP-Link EAP615-Wall relies on the dual-core 880MHz Mediatek MT7621DAT chip which seems to be a step down from the SoC used by the TP-Link EAP610 and there is also less RAM and storage available. There are 128MB from Mediatek (MT7621DAT) and 16MB NOR flash from XMC (QH128AH16).

As for WiFi, the access point uses the Mediatek MT7905DAN 802.11a/b/g/n/ac/ax 2×2:2 chip for the 5GHz radio band and the Mediatek MT7975DN 802.11b/g/n/ax 2×2:2 chipset for the 2.4GHz radio. Based on these specs, the TP-Link EAP610 should be more powerful than the EAP615-Wall, but the actual wireless tests may yet paint a different picture, especially in regard to the single client performance. Also, the extra RAM do matter if you intend to run additional applications, such as VPN.

The Features

TP-Link uses pretty much the same set of WiFi performance-enhancing features on all its access points, especially the entry-level ones. So, both the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall support OFDMA which is one of the highlighted features of the WiFi 6 standard, having the role of serving multiple client devices at the same time on the same channel using RUs (resource units), but know that you won’t see the actual benefit unless you’re in a very dense WiFi environment, with lots of other APs and a huge amount of compatible client devices.

The MU-MIMO is also present, as well as BeamForming, but I assume that what you’re most interested in is the mesh technology. The implementation on the TP-Link EAP610 allows you to use any unit as a mesh node or main AP, so you can roam between access points without noticing any disconnections. Obviously there is more to that because there’s also the path optimization and self-healing technique. But the TP-Link EAP615-Wall has been a bit weird in this regard.

When I tested it, I quickly brushed off the compatibility since I saw that I could enable the mesh function in the controller, but it doesn’t see to be actually supported. The logic behind this choice is for security reasons since the targeted audience for the wall units is mostly anything related to the healthcare facilities, where roaming can become a security issue. Then again, the sys admins can just turn that feature off.

In any case, the TP-Link EAP615-Wall still does support Seamless Roaming, so, as long as the client device supports 802.11k/v, you should be able to move from AP to AP in a seamless manner. Just be aware that the Omada controller is required for this function to be enabled. Lastly, know that the TP-Link EAP615-Wall does not support the AI Roaming, while the EAP610 does support it. Now let’s talk a bit about the PoE pass-through.

TP-Link says that the EAP615-Wall should be able to power up devices that require up to 12W (or 13W in the EU). But, during my tests, the AP wasn’t able to power up any device, even if it didn’t require that much power. I tried it with PoE cameras, the Omada OC200 controller and even the EnGenius SkyKey I, and it didn’t work.

Wireless Test (5GHz)

If you read the individual analysis of the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall, you know that I tested these two wireless access points in a very similar manner. The AP would be connected to a PoE switch (which powers it) and then I connected a server PC to the Ethernet switch as well.

Afterwards, I took three client devices, one was WiFi 6, while the other two were WiFi 5 devices. This way, I could more clearly see the difference between the two standards. Additionally, I also included the attenuation since, even if the distance seems like the better way of comparing the performance between two or more AP, it’s difficult for the user to reproduce the same throughput values inside their homes. That’s because the interference will be very different, so the attenuation remains the more solid and objective way of seeing the proper difference between the the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall.

That being said, connecting the WiFi 6 client device (Intel AX200) to the TP-Link EAP610 (80MHz) showed that it’s possible to go up to 702Mbps upstream and 363Mbps downstream at 5 feet. The throughput had a gentle fall at 15 feet, but it did go down quite a bit after going past the 30 feet limit. Still, at 70 feet (-82dB attenuation), I still got 112Mbps up and 48.7Mbps downstream, which is excellent.

After connecting the same AX200 client device to the TP-Link EAP615-Wall, I noticed that, while the throughput wasn’t as good at 5 feet, it did prove far more consistent up to 45 feet. At 70 feet (-87dB),I measured an average of 50.8Mbps upstream and 14.2Mbps downstream. Does that mean that using the Mediatek platform and a less powerful chip is better? It depends on the number of client devices. If you don’t connect that many compatible WiFi 6 devices, then you should see an overall better performance with the TP-Link EAP615-Wall.

But, if you need to go above, let’s say, 20 client devices, the EAP610 should still be more stable. Switching to the WiFi 5 client devices, I noticed that, while there was a difference in terms of performance, it wasn’t that radical, well, up until reaching the 70 feet mark. That’s where the TP-Link EAP615-Wall either had an inconsistent performance or completely disconnected.

Wireless Test (2.4GHz)

Keeping the same system as before, I connected the WiFi 6 client device to the 2.4GHz network and I did see a slight advantage for the TP-LInk EAP615-Wall, and it’s interesting to see that this advantage has remained valid even after testing the performance of the two WiFi 5 client devices.

And that’s excellent news considering that the TP-Link EAP615-Wall may end up connecting to client devices from the older generation a lot more (due to being installed in potentially more industrial complexes).

The Software

Both the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall offer a stand-alone mode which is pretty much identical on both devices. And it’s not there just for status info, no, it does offer a fairly comprehensive set of options. So you’re not actually completely dependent on the manufacturer’s severs, such as the case of the EnGenius APs (for example, the ECW230S). To reach the Omada controller, I relied on the OC200 which I connected the PoE switch that powered both access points – the EAP615-Wall can also provide one of its Ethernet ports.

The interface is identical for all Omada devices and, as expected, the dedicated section is also the same for the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall. And it’s worth mentioning that TP-Link has taken a lot of inspiration from the UniFi controller which is a great thing if you want to move away from Ubiquiti. TP-Link’s offering is obviously more inexpensive.

The Conclusion

Despite both being AX1800-class access points and sharing a lot of elements and technologies, the TP-Link EAP610 and the EAP615-Wall target a very different demographic, so, depending on your needs, one access point is going to match your expectations better than the other. If you need to create a larger network in an office where the APs can go on the ceiling without needing to connect wired clients, then the TP-Link EAP610 is the better choice. Otherwise, healthcare facilities seem to be the targeted audience for the EAP615-Wall, but then again, if you have a couple of client devices that need to be connected via wire and don’t mind mounting the wall partially in the wall, then you can also give this AP a shot. Just be aware that some of the features are missing, such as the mesh tech and the AI roaming.

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

And that’s pretty much the point of upgrading to WiFi 6 because you will see a proper difference when you have lots of compatible client devices connected to the AP. Besides OFDMA, the TP-Link EAP615-Wall supports 80MHz channel bandwidth and, considering that it’s an AX1800-class device, it does seem similar to the EAP610.

It’s indeed similar, but only to a certain extent because the hardware is less powerful, and the antennas have a lower gain. It makes sense since the purpose of the TP-Link EAP615-Wall is a bit different. The access point has a PoE pass-through port to allow powering up another PoE device without having to add another cable and there are also two additional Ethernet ports for those older client devices. So, it’s a bit different than the ceiling-mount Omada APs, but how well does it actually perform, and should you go a bit higher to the EAP610 v2? Let’s find out.

UPDATE 02.04.2023: Emiel Wieldraaijer (from EMRO) reached out to let me know that I can enable the PoE port from the Advanced settings.

Design and Build Quality

I did mention the similarities to the WiFi 5 EAP235-Wall plate access point, but it goes a bit farther than that because the TP-Link EAP615-Wall has the same dimensions. Indeed, both APs measure 5.6 x 3.4 x 0.8 inches (14.3 x 8.6 x 2.0cm), so the case is incredibly compact and slim. And the rectangular shape has been kept, having the plastic covered by a white glossy finish. The slim case will easily blend in with the wall and if it wasn’t for the single LED at the bottom, you would hardly notice its presence.

That is if you managed to conceal the Ethernet cables because the case does support the connection of four cables about which we’ll talk in a minute. Before that, it’s worth mentioning the mounting system which consists of a single metallic bracket that you need to attach to a wall junction box (86mm, compatible with both US and EU standards).

That’s why you need to be aware that similarly to most other wall plate access points, there is a section with an Ethernet port that protrudes a little bit. This means that the Ethernet cable needs to come from junction box and into the access point, so you have a bit less freedom to where you can install the device than you would with other types of access points. That being said, is it possible to mount the TP-Link EAP615-Wall outdoors? The device has no IP rating and, even if there are no ventilation cut-outs, it was not built for outdoor conditions.

Since there are no ventilation holes, does the TP-Link EAP615-Wall get hot? Due to its compactness, it will get a bit more warm than other access points, but I suppose it’s in line with the likes of ECW220S.

I have mentioned the single LED and its functions are the same as on the EAP610. If the LED is on and solid, then everything is in working conditions, but if it’s off, then, either the LED is turned off manually (using the upper-placed button) or the AP has encountered an error. If the LED blinks, then you’re either initializing, resetting or upgrading the access point. So yes, not really the most reliable way to know the status of the AP, especially since it has more than one Ethernet port (at least they kept a minimalist design..).

All the Ethernet ports are Gigabit, the rear-placed one being the PoE In port which powers up the TP-Link EAP615-Wall. At the bottom, there are two Ethernet ports (ETH1 and ETH2) for any cabled device, while the third is PoE Out, so it can be used for powering up another PoE device.

Be aware that the PoE In port needs a PoE+ device (switch or adapter) in order top power up a PoE 802.3af device since the output can only go up to 12W (or 13W for the EU version). Next to the ports, TP-Link has also added a recessed Reset button.

Internal Hardware (TP-Link EAP615-Wall Teardown)

TP-Link has made the teardown process of the EAP615-Wall very simple since all I had to do is remove the two screws from the bottom and then carefully detach the top cover using a prying tool. It’s a win for the right to repair movement but be aware that you need to know what you’re doing otherwise you can still lose the warranty. That being said, the first thing that you’re going to see is the bottom side of the PCB and not much is going on here.

I was able to identify the 16MB NOR flash memory from (XMC QH128AHIG) and, underneath the aluminum cover, I could see the two chipsets for the WiFi radios (which are the same as on the Asus RT-AX53U). The TP-Link EAP615-Wall uses the Mediatek MT7975DN 802.11b/g/n/ax 2×2:2 for the 2.4GHz radio and the Mediatek MT7905DAN 802.11a/n/ac/ax 2×2:2 for the 5GHz radio band (I could not see any obviously placed front-end module, so there seem to be no signal amplifiers).

Next, I removed the four screws that held the PCB in place and, after taking out the large metallic heatsink and the aluminum cover, I could identify the dual-core 880MHz Mediatek MT7621DAT chipset and it seems that the device uses the integrated 128MB of RAM (Mediatek MT7621DAT).

TP-Link EAP610 vs TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor vs Zyxel WAX630S vs TP-Link EAP660HD

This means that the TP-Link EAP615-Wall is almost identical to the Rock Space AX1800 WiFi 6 extender. And yes, it doesn’t have that much in common with the EAP610 or the EAP610-Outdoor.

WiFi Features

The TP-Link EAP615-Wall uses pretty much the same features to enhance the WiFi performance as the other two AX1800 WiFi 6 access points that I tested (the EAP610 and the EAP610-Outdoor). This means that there is support for OFDMA on both radio bands – it’s not enabled by default, so you will need to enter the Settings and turn this feature on manually. OFDMA (Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiple Access) is quite the big deal because the way it works is by dividing the channel frequency in sub-carriers which then take the data and pushes it towards multiple client devices at the same time without unnecessarily having to wait their turn.

And it works really well alongside BSS Coloring which is another piece of the puzzle to negate the terrible impact of the co-channel interference. TP-Link mentions BSS Coloring, but I did not see any option that can be enabled or disabled in the features, so I am a bit skeptical whether it actually supports it or not, especially considering the price tag. But, to use these features, it’s absolutely necessary to have compatible client devices because going a WiFi standard below (WiFi 5 or lower), the support will be gone.

Sure, the WiFi 6 APs are backwards compatible, but you’re not going to see any performance improvement above what you would get using a WiFi 5 access point. The support for MU-MIMO and Beamforming are kept across standards, but again, you do need compatible client devices and I saw that TP-Link does advertise the support for their proprietary mesh technology. It’s not compatible with OneMesh, which includes most of the newer TP-Link routers, but with other Omada access points which are adopted to the SDN.

And TP-Link also promises a seamless roaming between multiple APs which, I think should be mandatory when creating a mesh network. Indeed, the TP-Link EAP615-Wall has support for the 802.11k/v standards, just be aware that there is no support for the TP-Link’s proprietary AI Roaming.

Wireless Test (5GHz)

To test the TP-Link EAP615-Wall, I decided to connect the access point to a PoE switch and, since I am lazy and had the unmanaged switch TRENDnet TPE-LG80 on the desk after I finished writing the analysis on how many Watts does a PoE switch use, I used this switch for following tests.

Besides the access point, I connected a cable from the router to the switch and also the server device (which has a 2.5GbE port, but it’s irrelevant in our case since the TP-Link EAP615-Wall is a Gigabit AP). Then, I connected three client devices, the first being a WiFi 6 computer (equipped with an Intel AX200 adapter), the second is a WiFi 5 laptop (equipped with an Intel 8265 card) and the third is the good ol’ Pixel 2 XL (also WiFi 5).

This way, while the WiFi 6 AX200 client device was connected to the 5GHz network (80MHz), I saw an average of 653Mbps upstream and 338Mbps downstream at 5 feet. Even if the attenuation was raised a bit (from -41dB to -46dB), the throughput remained almost the same at 15 feet as well, with a slight drop happening at 30 feet. At 45 feet (-72dB attenuation), I saw an average of 276Mbps upstream and 115Mbps downstream, which is still very good for any type of application.

At 70 feet, the signal strength dropped quite a bit (-87dB), but I could still browse the web and watch videos since upstream, it was 50.8Mbps and down, it was 14.2Mbps. Moving on to the first WiFi 5 client (Intel 8265), I saw that I got a better throughput at 15 feet than at 5 feet, where I measured 625Mbps upstream and 274MBps downstream. But the speed dropped quite a bit at 45 feet (-75dB), where I measured 123Mbps up and only 6.1Mbps down, and yes, the client device would no longer connect to the access point at 70 feet.

Pages: 1 2

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

Despite being (WiFi) generations apart, the Ubiquiti U6-LR and the nanoHD have a lot in common since both devices use the Mediatek platform and both access points rely on 4×4 MIMO antenna configuration for the 5GHz radio band. The design is also fairly similar, although one is bigger than the other, and, as expected the Ubiquiti UniFi U6-LR and the Ubiquiti nanoHD can be paired to the UniFi controller.

But, there are also lots of differences since one AP is WiFi 6 and the other is WiFi 5. The most important one is the OFDMA tech, even if it’s just enabled for the 5GHz band because it can make a difference in very dense environments with lots of APs and client devices.

The CPU, RAM and storage is also better on the U6-LR, but the PoE power consumption is also higher. Even so, probably the number one concern is the lack of widespread adoption for the WiFi 6 standard at the client device level, for now anyway. And that begs the question on whether you should invest in a WiFi 6 AP such as the Ubiquiti U6-LR or skip it altogether while waiting for the WiFi 7 and keep using the Ubiquiti nanoHD. Let’s find out.

Note: You can also check out the individual analysis of each WiFi 6 access point here: Ubiquiti U6-LR and Ubiquiti nanoHD.

Design and Build Quality

I really liked the direction that Ubiquiti took with the nanoHD since, at 6.30 x 1.29 inches, it has to be the most compact access point that the manufacturer has made available. But the fifth gen made Ubiquiti stumble and they reverted to the large circular cases, so the U6-LR is way larger, measuring 8.66 x 1.89 inches.

The interesting thing is that the U6-Pro has a smaller case, not as small as the nanoHD, but it’s a sign that Ubiquiti finally calmed down after switching to the WiFi 6 standard. If we ignore the size, both the Ubiquiti U6-LR and the nanoHD have the same, dare I say iconic design.

There’s the saucer case covered by a white matte finish and the LED ring always shining down on us. From the ceiling. These two access points can only be attached on the ceiling (I suppose it will work on the wall as well), and that’s because there are no feet to keep them steady on a desk.

Ubiquiti has made mounting their access points very simple despite seemingly having complicated accessories, so that’s a plus (for both APs). It was interesting to see that the Ubiquiti nanoHD is not advertised as suitable for outdoor conditions, but the U6-LR is IP54-rated, so you can technically mount it outside. Just keep it away from direct sun and rain because I do not trust that these devices can actually withstand harsh outdoor conditions for prolonged periods of time.

But, even if there is no IP rating, the Ubiquiti nanoHD still doesn’t have any openings and, just like with the U6-LR, the case seems to be completely sealed. How does that fare for the temperature?

Another popular Ubiquiti access point, the UAP-AC-Pro had some issues with the heat management, but the nanoHD was far better in this regard. Sure, the Ubiquiti U6-LR performs a little bit better, but considering the size of the nanoHD, I would say that the access point has a good heat management. Both of them do, actually, so don’t worry about having very hot access points on your ceiling.

The LED is pretty much the same across generations and I don’t really mind since why fix what’s not broken. And yes, both the Ubiquiti U6-LR and the nanoHD will have a flashing white LED when they’re starting up and, as soon as the APs are connected to the UniFi and to the Internet, the LED will turn solid blue. As for the ports, both access points offer a single Ethernet port and a recessed Reset button (positioned on the rear side of the devices).

And, while you’d be justified to believe that the U6-LR should have at least a 2.5GbE port, well, that’s not the case at all. No, Ubiquiti ignored its competitors (ECW230S and the WAX650S) and used Gigabit ports on the U6-LR, the same as on the nanoHD.

Internal Hardware (Ubiquiti U6-LR vs nanoHD Teardown)

The Ubiquiti UAP-nanoHD is the first access point that the manufacturer had the courage to switch platforms and, while a lot of people were skeptical about whether the device will perform at least as well as the UAP-AC-Pro, it seems that the AP has managed to rise up to its predecessor and still remain a good option even today for SMBs.

If the admins were bold enough, it would have been decent even in a more corporate environment. That is until the WiFi 6 entered the game and the Ubiquiti U6-LR was essentially designed as a replacement (at least price-wise).

That being said, I did open up both wireless access points and, as you can see, the Ubiquiti nanoHD sports a dual-core Mediatek MT7621AT T937-AMTH MIPS CPU clocked at 880MHz which seemed decent enough a couple of years ago, but may raise some eyebrows today (we will see during the wireless test that it performs decently well). Besides the CPU, the nanoHD also uses 128MB of RAM from Winbond (W632GG6MB) and 32MB of NOR flash from MXIC (MX25L25635FMI).

The U6-LR is clearly better equipped, featuring a dual-core Mediatek ARM MT7622AV chipset clocked at 1.35GHz, 512MB of RAM from Winbond (2x W632GU8NB) and 64MB of flash memory from Winbond (25Q52JVFQ) and 16MB from MXIC. As for WiFi, the nanoHD uses a Mediatek MT7603EN 2×2:2 802.11b/g/n for the 2.4GHz and the Mediatek MT7615N 4×4:4 802.11a/b/g/n/ac for the 5GHz radio band. The Ubiquity U6-LR uses a similar chip for the 5GHz radio, the MT7975AN 802.11a/b/g/n/ac/ax, while the 2.4GHz chip is much better: the Mediatek MT7622 802.11a/b/g/n 4×4:4. Up to this point, it’s fairly clear that the U6-LR has the upper hand, but it does come at a price.

And I am not talking about the actual price tag of the device (both the U6-LR and the nanoHD cost pretty much the same at the moment of writing), it’s about the power consumption. The nanoHD requires a maximum of 10.5W from a PoE switch or adapter which is excellent considering the wireless performance, while the U6-LR needs almost double that amount, maxing out at 18.5W which is still lower than the power hog WAX650S, but still needs a lot more than its predecessor.

The Features

The Ubiquity UAP-nanoHD was developed to offer one of the most complete package of features and it was impressive until the WiFi 6 showed that we can go father (wait until you see what the WiFi 6E and the 7 has to offer). Indeed, the AP offered 160MHz channel bandwidth, the MU-MIMO technology, as well as the Beamforming, all requiring compatible client devices, but in 2022, this is less of an issue – don’t get your hopes too high because the market is still underserved in this regard.

The Ubiquity U6-LR can also go up to 160MHz (channel bandwidth) and it offers pretty much all the features of the nanoHD, but it does come with a few new ones. And yes, I am talking about the OFDMA technology which aims to solve some of the issues caused by overly dense networks where the data transmission latency gets very high (since everyone needs to wait its turn on the channel).

The idea is to divide the channel into multiple resource units which can then be used to transmit data to multiple devices at the same time. It’s a fantastic technology, but know that you won’t see any benefit unless there is an unusually high number of APs in your area and you use WiFi 6 client devices. So, I suppose it would make a lot of sense in a healthcare facility, a hotel and even offices. But I am not going to deny that even the regular apartment buildings may have issues if everyone is broadcasting the router signal at its maximum.

Obviously, the better benefit would be the actual switch to 6GHz, but, while some WiFi 6E access points are available already (such as the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E and the EnGenius ECW336) and even some WiFi 7 APs are on the way (from TP-Link, at least), there is almost no adoption at the client device side and some compatibility issues need to be ironed out (such as Microsoft’s stupid move to block 6GHz for any Windows version underneath 11). Before moving on to the tests, let’s talk a bit about the antennas.

The Ubiquiti nano-HD uses 2.8dBi single-polarity antennas for the 2.4GHz radio and 3dBi dual-polarity antennas for the 5GHz radio. The U6-LR is far better equipped, sporting 4dBi antennas for the 2.4GHz band and 5.5dBi antennas for 5GHz. And it makes sense considering the Long Range written in the name of the AP. Would these translate to a better coverage than on the nanoHD? Most likely, yes.

Wireless Test (5GHz)

I have tested the Ubiquiti nanoHD more than two years ago and, considering that I have changed the testing procedure a bit since then, I simply retested the device to create a better comparison between it and the U6-LR. This involved connecting the access point to a PoE switch which was, in turn, connected to the router via cable. And then I connected the wireless client devices to the 5GHz network (160MHz channel bandwidth) of the Ubiquiti nanoHD and the first one that I used was the laptop equipped with an Intel AX200 adapter (WiFi 6).

Even if the AP is not WiFi 6, it should still be able to reproduce the best possible results due to it being backwards compatible. This way, I could see that at 5 feet, the throughput was 629Mbps upstream (-41dB) and 346Mbps downstream. The throughput fell quite a bit after reaching the 45 feet point (-77dB) which makes sense considering that the 160MHz channel bandwidth is easily crippled by interference, but it still managed to reach 31.4Mbps upstream and 13.7Mbps downstream at 70 feet (-87) which could be somewhat usable.

The same client device performed miles better on the Ubiquity U6-LR and it was expected considering the actual compatibility with the WiFi 6 standard. At 5 feet, I measured an average of 888Mbps upstream and 546Mbps downstream (-35dB attenuation in the same conditions as the nanoHD). At 70 feet, where the attenuation goes to -88dB, the client device still connects to the U6-LR, although barely.

Upstream, I saw an average of 14Mbps and downstream, it was 1.4Mbps. Switching over to the 80MHz channel bandwidth, we do see a slight decline in performance, mostly near the AP, which makes sense if you understand the advantage that the 160MHz channel bandwidth can bring to the table.

But, it does require a pretty much interference-free medium to operate properly – which is why I look forward to the wide adoption of the 6GHz radio. Let’s talk numbers: at 5 feet, I saw an average of 757Mbps up and 488Mbps downstream, while at 45 feet, it was 207Mbps up and 167Mbps down which is impressive. At 70 feet (-86dB) things weren’t that great and I saw an average of 17.9MBps upstream and 6.7Mbps downstream.

I think it’s cute that Ubiquiti calls this AP long range since there are WiFi 6 access points that reach farther, even at a similar price tag. I know that the comparison so far has not been that fair since the nanoHD is a WiFi 5 access point, but you still got an idea about what to expect when your client device is WiFi 6. To level the field a bit, I used a WiFi 5 client device, the laptop that is equipped with the Intel 8265 2×2 WiFi card.

This way, while it was connected to the Ubiquiti nanoHD, I saw that the average throughput at 5 get was 565Mbps upstream and 301Mbps downstream. Moving farther from the AP, at 45 feet, the average speed was 123Mbps up and 97Mbps downstream. At 70 feet, the throughput was 5.5Mbps upstream and next to zero downstream, so try to maintain the attenuation no greater than -80dB to get a semblance of usable WiFi speed.

Pages: 1 2

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

The reason for its initial unpopularity was because Ubiquiti decided to leave Qualcomm in favor of MediaTek and at release, there were some missing features (and a lot of bugs). The good news is that the Ubiquiti NanoHD was quickly updated and, since some time has passed from its launch, the access point has proven to be as reliable as its predecessor, while also offering more features and improving the wireless performance.
Indeed, the Ubiquiti NanoHD is not only smaller than the UAP-AC-PRO, it also features 4×4 spatial streams (5GHz) and there is now support for MU-MIMO, as well as the full integration with the UniFi Network controller.

Yes, I know, the WiFi 6 standard is already here, so why bother with an access point from the last generation? I tested some mid-range AX routers (such as the Asus RT-AX58U and the Netgear RAX40) and it’s clear that the technology is not yet mature enough for proper adoption the tech got better over the years, but even so, a reliable Wave 2 AC access point should be fine for a few more years. That being said, let’s have a closer look at the Ubiquiti UAP-nanoHD and see if it’s indeed a worthy successor to the UAP-AC-PRO.

UPDATE 31.12.2022: Since I decided to do a comparison article with the U6-LR, I have retested the 5GHz performance of the Ubiquiti nanoHD to include longer distance tests and the attenuation.

Design and Build Quality

The Ubiquiti UAP-AC-PRO is one of the best designed wireless access points on the market, featuring a saucer-shaped case that would almost seamlessly integrate with the wall or ceiling and then there’s the circular LED that shone from underneath a circular canal surrounding the middle top section of the device. It’s a hard-to-beat design and the Ubiquiti NanoHD looks pretty much the same, only a tad smaller.

That’s right, the Ubiquiti NanoHD has kept the same minimalist look and, to keep up with some of its competitors (I noticed that the newer APs have become smaller – check the EnGenius EAP245), the device now measures 6.30 x 6.30 x 1.29 inches, so the reduction is mostly done to the footprint of the wireless access point (the device weighs 10.6 ounces, so it’s only a bit lighter than its predecessor). The case is also covered by a white matte finish and I noticed that while the UAP-AC-Pro was completely made of plastic, the Ubiquiti NanoHD does have a plastic top, but the bottom part seems to be made out of zinc alloy to better dissipate the heat (and this device does need any means to keep the temperature low).

The narrow canal for the LED is also a bit wider which means that the light will shine brighter on the NanoHD and it still has the same role as on the UAP-AC-PRO: if the LED is white, then the AP is not yet configured and waiting to be paired, otherwise, if the LED gets solid blue, then the device has been successfully added to a network and it is working properly; when the LED rapidly flashes blue, then the UniFi controller is trying to locate the access point and, when the LED is flashing blue slowly, then the Ubiquiti nanoHD is in an isolated state (doesn’t receive Internet from the router). If you flip the device upside down, you will immediately notice that the silicone cover from the UAP-AC-PRO is gone and the port(s) area is now fully exposed. Here, you will be able to find a Reset button (press and release it quickly to restart the nanoHD and, if you press and hold it for more than five seconds, then the device will return to its factory default settings) and a single Gigabit Ethernet port (802.3af PoE+).

I know that it does make sense for a ceiling PoE wireless access point to only use a single LAN port, but Ubiquiti has added a canal to let the cable flow through if needed, so they did take the possibility that some users may simply keep it on a flat surface and an additional Ethernet port would have been a welcomed addition for connecting nearby wired clients.

In order to install it on a wall or ceiling, Ubiquiti has added a mounting kit in the package (screws, nuts, metallic backing plate and a mounting bracket) and there’s also an 802.11af PoE adapter, so you don’t have to buy your own. Like I said before, there is no silicone cover to protect the port, so, while the UAP-AC-PRO was advertised as suitable for outdoors, the UAP-nanoHD is an indoors-only wireless access point (as I opened the case, there was no glue or anything of the sorts to keep any water from reaching the internal hardware, specially around the Ethernet port).

When dealing with a device of this size and no cut-outs for keeping the temperature low, it’s easy to assume that the Ubiquiti nanoHD is going to get warmer than its competitors (and the UAP access points are known for running a bit hot).
As expected, this is the case with the NanoHD and, yes, the zinc alloy bottom does a good job at dissipating the heat, but the case still gets hot to the touch at the bottom, near the port.

Internal Hardware

To open the case, you need to use a prying tool and carefully go around the middle until the top part will pop off (there are no hidden screws as on other devices) – be careful though, since this will most likely void the warranty. The first thing that you’re going to notice is the antenna pattern on the PCB, as well as some other components: there’s a M-Tek G24101SCGX 1941H 100/1000 Base-T transformer module, a MT3058 939J1 step-down converter and a Mouser C1585-AL CoilCraft signal transformer.

Flip the PCB upside down to see the main components: there are 32MB of NOR flash memory from MXIC (MX25L25635FMI-106), a dual-core Mediatek MT7621AT T937-AMTH MIPS CPU clocked at 880MHz and 128MB SDRAM DDR3 from Winbond (W632GG6MB-15). I know that some users have brought up the MediaTek vs Qualcomm debate in regards to the UAP-nanoHD, but, almost two years after its release, the access point seems to be doing fine. As for the wireless capabilities, Ubiquiti relies on the Mediatek ARM MT7615N 4×4:4 for the 5GHz band (802.11ac) and on the Mediatek MT7603EN for the 2.4GHz band (802.11b/g/n).

The Ubiquiti UAP-nanoHD features a maximum theoretical data transfer rate of 300 Mbps on the 2.4GHz band and a maximum theoretical data transfer rate of 1,733 Mbps on the 5GHz band (this makes it an AC2000-class device).


Features and Wireless Performance
The Ubiquiti nanoHD has kept most of the features of the UAP-AC-PRO (it has also improved a few), so if you intend to use several access points on a larger site, you can take advantage of the mesh technology. Yes, Ubiquiti calls it Uplink, but it functions in a similar manner to the proprietary implementation from the WiFi systems (such as Google WiFi or Eero WiFi): one access point will be connected to the router, while the other UAPs get spread across a larger area and all these devices will communicate wirelessly to create multi-hop systems and connect to far away clients. It’s worth mentioning that one wired UAP unit (that connects to the router) can support only up to four wireless downlinks (APs) which is sensible since even with a couple of dual-band routers, you have to deal with the backhaul traffic which will eat up a large portion of the bandwidth.

Another interesting feature is the support for the Fast Roaming (similar to the 802.11r, but with a far wider compatibility) which makes sure that the handshake between wireless access point is done before the clients starts moving (the client doesn’t need to re-authenticate at every AP, so the handoff between them is done a lot faster).

The UAP-AC-PRO lacked the MU-MIMO technology which is now a part of the Ubiquiti NanoHD, so, if you have compatible clients, they will be served at the same time, without needing to compete for the bandwidth. The UAP-nanoHD will also have a better wireless performance due to the BeamForming technology which has the role of focusing the signal towards the compatible clients, instead of broadcasting it everywhere, therefore reducing the interference.

In order to test the wireless performance of the Ubiquiti NanoHD, I had to rely on an unmanaged PoE switch, the TRENDnet TPE-LG80 (since it has a single Ethernet port..): I connected the server PC to the switch, as well as the Internet cable from the router and the access point.

The client device will first connect to the 5GHz WiFi network (since the Ubiquiti NanoHD supports it, I set it to 160MHz channel bandwidth) and it’s necessary to mention that the client computer was equipped with a TP-Link TX3000E WiFi adapter.

UPDATE: I have retested the Ubiquiti nanoHD to include some additional data (larger distance + signal strength), but I haven’t changed neither the client device, nor the setup that I used when I first tested the device.

This way, from the client to the server, at 5 feet, I measured an average of 629Mbps (-41dB) 665Mbps and, at 30 feet, I saw an average of 439Mbps 242Mbps. At 70 feet, the attenuation was -87dB which would defeat most APs, but the Ubiquiti nanoHD still managed to offer an average of 31.4Mbps. Downstream, I measured an average throughput of 346Mbps at 5 feet 310Mbps and, at 30 feet, the speed went down to an average of 224Mbps 226Mbps. At 70 feet, I saw an average of 13.7Mbps. Afterwards, I switched the channel bandwidth to 80MHz and ran the same test again.

This way, I measured an average of 647 Mbps at 5 feet (from the client to the server) and an average of 193 Mbps at 30 feet. From the server to the client, I saw an average of 310 Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 196 Mbps at 30 feet.

Next, I connected the client to the 2.4GHz network (40MHz) and, from the client to the server, I measured an average of 182 Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 70.5 Mbps at 30 feet. From the server to the client, I got an around 171 Mbps at 5 feet and, at 30 feet, I measured an average of 40.7 Mbps.

I’m quite sure that most of you will use whichever WiFi adapter is in your laptop, so I decided to change to client and use one equipped with an Intel 2×2 8265 WiFi card. This way, while the client device was connected to the 5GHz network (80MHz, since this is the limit for this card), from the client to the server, I measured an average of 565Mbps (-48dB) 512Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 263Mbps 228Mbps at 30 feet. At 70 feet, the average throughput was 5.5Mbps.

Downstream, I saw an average of 301Mbps 207Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 144Mbps 103Mbps at 30 feet; at 70 feet (-87dB), the throughoput was pretty much zero. Lastly, I ran the same tests while connected to the 2.4GHz network and, from the client to the server, I saw an average of 185 Mbps at 5 feet and an average of 74.5 Mbps at 30 feet. From the server to the client, at 5 feet I measured an average of 177 Mbps and at 30 feet, I saw an average of 53.3 Mbps.

Pages: 1 2

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

Even so, the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E is a tri-band WiFi 6E access point which supports OFDMA, BSS Coloring, WPA3, as well as the new 6GHz radio band, all that while also keeping a surprisingly affordable price tag. But there’s a catch. The Zyxel NWA220AX-6E is actually a dual-radio access point, so you can’t use the 5GHz band at the same time as the 6GHz.

It does seem that the antennas are shared between the 5GHz and the 6GHz (as well as the chip) and it would have needed a more powerful CPU to handle the simultaneous throughput from 3 radios. Unfortunately, this makes the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E one of the few WiFi devices that isn’t backwards compatible, so who exactly is the targeted audience? It’s mostly (smaller) businesses and it’s some form of futureproofing. At the moment the WiFi 6E client devices get widespread enough as to warrant a complete switch, you only turn on the 6GHz radio and you’re good to go.

Let’s not forget that larger companies don’t change the hardware that often and the ability to flip a switch and be up to date is appealing. But things can get complicated because new technologies emerge and Zyxel would have to keep the device updated for a very long period of time, plus there’s the risk of being overshadowed by the WiFi 7 standard which will already enter the market next year. So yes, the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E takes a bit of a gamble, but even so, let’s put it to the test and see how it performs.

Design and Build Quality

The Zyxel NWA220AX-6E is only a little bit thicker than the WAX630S, so it’s nice to see that the manufacturer has kept the new line of WiFi 6E access points as compact as possible (especially since the WAX650S was a beast of a device).

So yes, at 7.09 x 7.09 x 1.65 inches (or 18.0 x 18.0 x 4.2 cm), the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E is not going to stand out that much from the ceiling. That’s also due to the white matte finish and because the top of the access point has gotten simpler. The punctured holes design is gone and so is the side LED which is not replaced by a curved line underneath the logo. And that’s all that’s going on at the top of the device. At the bottom, the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E is pretty much identical to the WAX630S, so we get the punctured holes pattern to help with the heat diffusion a little bit.

Of course, I did check the actual heat management using a thermal camera and you can see the results yourself. There are some spots where the temperature is a bit higher (where the chips push the heat outwards), but overall, there are no signs that the AP may overheat.

Still on the bottom of the device, we can see the same pattern for mounting the bracket as on the WAX630S (the plastic bracket can be found inside the package). Know that this is a ceiling-mount-only AP, so I advise against attempting to leave it on the desk since it will most definitely fall off (I suppose it is possible to install it on a wall). Next to the bracket area, there is a grounding screw and a recessed Reset button plus an entire area for the ports and connectors.

There are two LAN ports which is a rarity for this type of access point, the Uplink port being 2.5GbE (and supports PoE+), while the LAN1 Ethernet port is Gigabit only and it should be a great addition for any nearby client device that requires a more stable connection to the Internet (via cable, of course). There is also a DC 12V power connector and I know that some manufacturers have begun phasing it out (Ubiquiti), so it’s nice to see it still present on the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E. If you look closely on the sides, you can see the same Console connector as on the WAX630S and the WAX650S that’s there for diagnostic purposes.

Before moving on to the teardown process, let’s talk a bit about the LED. Its functions are the following: if the LED is soldi green, then the AP is connected to the NCC and there are client devices connected, and if it became bright blue, then there are no client devices connected. If the LED starts flashing blue, then the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E is running a Channel Availability Check with DFS and, if it’s solid red, then the AP has failed to boot up or is experiencing a system failure. Be aware that slow flashing red doesn’t mean an error, but that the Uplink connection has been disconnected (no Internet). As a side note, I have to mention that I got a PoE adapter in a separate package.

Internal Hardware (Zyxel NWA220AX-6E Teardown)

The teardown process for the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E is very simple since all I had to do was to take out the four screws from the back panel (the grounding screw doesn’t need to be removed) and then I used a prying tool to detach the top cover.

Doing so, I was able to see that Zyxel has added a large metallic heatsink that curves around the plastic case and a smaller metallic heatsink that gets in direct contact with the main chips (by direct I mean through some pads and a few aluminum covers). As for the chips, I could identify 512MB of NAND flash memory from Winbond (25N02JWZEIF) + 8MB of NOR flash also from Winbond (25Q64JWSIQ), the Qualcomm QCA8081 PHY controller and the dual-core 1GHz Qualcomm IPQ5018 CPU which I have also seen on the Ubiquiti U6-Pro and the TP-Link EAP670 (both good performers).

The RAM can be found on the underside of the PCB underneath a protective band – we’re dealing with 2x 512MB of RAM from Micron 2CP75 D9SGQ (1GB in total). As for WiFi, I could identify the Qualcomm QCN9024 802.11ax 4×4:4 for the 6GHz radio, same as on the EnGenius ECW336 WiFi 6E access point and while I am not an electrical engineer, after following the pattern of the antennas, it does seem that the same chip is also responsible for the 5GHz as well (awaiting potential future correction) – there are also 4x CMP4 front-end modules as well as 2x AAT3152IWP-T1 DC regulators.

As for the 2.4GHz band, it uses the 2x Qorvo QPF4211 CCFC front end modules. I have detached the PCB to check what’s underneath and I could see another large metallic heatsink that covers a very interesting antenna pattern.

Zyxel NWA220AX-6E vs WAX630S vs WAX650S vs ECW336

How easy it is to repair?

Wireless Features: 6GHz or 5GHz?

The Zyxel NWA220AX-6E suffers from dual personality disorder since it can behave as either a WiFi 6 access point or as a WiFi 6E AP, but not both at the same time. That means that at the moment, unless you have the large majority of your client devices already on the newer WiFi 6E standard, you’re pretty much forced to disable the 6GHz and only use the 5GHz radio. This is why I think it may be wiser to see the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E only as a WiFi 6 access point, at least at the moment.

That being said, if you’re one of those people that has managed to change the WiFi adapters to all your client devices so that all are WiFi 6E, then know that the 6GHz radio is a phenomenal new addition. Unlike the 2.4GHz and the 5GHz, the channel bandwidth is far wider so even if you’re going to use the 160MHz (which I suggest you do), then the available non-overlapping channel rises to seven. This translates to better signal, better throughput and less interference which is pretty much the goal of any WiFi standard upgrade.

When you’re using the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E as a WiFi 6 AP, you’re still getting access to OFDMA, MU-MIMO and even BSS Coloring. I am not going to get into much detail, but just know that most of these new technologies and even the older ones, such as MU-MIMO require compatible client devices otherwise you’re not going to see any actual improvement. Additionally, know that OFDMA will show its potential if the access point operates in a very crowded and dense WiFi environment. As for the antenna gain, the 2.4GHz band supports a peak gain of 3dBi, the 5GHz can go up to 5dBi and the 6GHz supports a peak antenna gain of 6dBi.

Wireless Test (5GHz)

I said in the hardware section that I suspected that the 5GHz and the 6GHz are handled by the same chip and, after testing the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E, I am fairly sure I was right. That’s because the performance has been phenomenal on both radio bands. We’ll first start with the 5GHz. I connected the Zyxel NWA220AX-6E to the Zyxel XS1930 multi-Gigabit switch which was connected to the Asus RT-AX86U and a server PC that had a 2.5GbE port, so there should be absolutely no bottleneck anywhere.

Then, I connected the WiFi 6 client device (AX200) to the 5GHz network (160MHz) and I checked how well the AP performs at various points inside the house. At 5 feet, the throughput went past Gigabit and reached 1.13Gbps upstream and 584Mbps downstream (-40dB attenuation). At 30 feet, it fell to 902Mbps upstream and 394Mbps downstream, while at 45 feet, I measured an average of 383Mbps up and 233Mbps upstream. The farthest point is at about 70 feet (-84dB) and I saw an average of 37Mbps upstream and 17.3Mbps downstream.

And it makes sense since the 160MHz is not that great with the coverage, but very powerful near the access point – you can also see just how great the performance can be as long as you don’t have that much interference.

It’s not possible to see these numbers in an apartment, hotel or any other crowded area with lots of wireless APs (I wrote a quick guide to the best channel bandwidth for most people). Moving forward, I adjusted the channel bandwidth to 80MHz and, as expected, the speed was not as impressive as before (but far more achievable in slightly more difficult conditions).

At 5 feet, I measured an average of 895Mbps up and 451Mbps down, which is still a very good performance and even at 45 feet (-76dB), the throughput was still fairly high: 394Mbps up and 184Mbps down. At 70 feet, I measured an average of 91Mbps up and 52.8Mbps downstream, which remains more than usable for most applications. The second client device is a WiFi 5 laptop (equipped with an Intel 8265 adapter) and, at 5 feet, I saw an average of 634Mbps upstream and 275Mbps downstream.

At 45 feet, the speed went down to 264Mbps up and 145Mbps downstream, while at 70 feet, it was still possible to use some light applications considering that I saw an average of 32.8Mbps up and 17.2Mbps downstream. Lastly, I used the Pixel 2 XL (WiFi 5 client device), and it performed decently well.

At 5 feet, the throughput was 617Mbps upstream and 384Mbps downstream. But what’s interesting is that even if I saw an average of 188Mbps up and 115Mbps downstream at 45 feet (-73dB), at 70 feet, the phone would no longer see the network.

Wireless Test (6GHz)

To be able to run this test, I used the WiFi 6E client device once again (a PC equipped with a TP-Link AXE5400 adapter and running Linux) and, after switching the WiFi network to 6GHz (the 5GHz vanished), I could connect to the server device. Some additional configurations were necessary, such as the use of WPA3. I ran the same test as before and this time, I only used the 160MHz channel bandwidth since it was the most relevant for our case.

This way, at 5 feet, I saw an average of 1.6Gbps upstream and 880Mbps downstream which was the best performance I have seen so far on a WiFi networking device.

Pages: 1 2

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com

UPDATE 02.10.2019: The XCLAIM XO-1 Outdoor AP has been removed from the best outdoor wireless access points list because the manufacturer decided to announce that the entire series will be EOL by 2021 (at the moment, the status is End of Sale).

UPDATE 11.19.2022: The TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor WiFi 6 Access Point has been added to the list.

QUICK NAVIGATION: FEATURES TO LOOK FOR BEFORE CHOOSING THE BEST OUTDOOR WIRELESS ACCESS POINT

EnGenius EWS850AP Outdoor WiFi 6 AP	TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor WiFi 6 Outdoor Access Point	DrayTek VigorAP 920RP
Read More	Read More	Read More

MikroTik NetMetal ac2	Ubiquiti Bullet M2	Ubiquiti UniFi AP Outdoor+
Read More	Read More	Read More

ALSO CHECK OUT: THE BEST INDOORS WIRELESS ACCESS POINTS

Best outdoor wireless access points brief comparison

Which outdoor wireless point reaches the farthest?

1. EnGenius EWS850AP WiFi 6 Outdoor Access Point

Read the full review

After the WiFi 6 standard was launched, the manufacturers have immediately implemented it into their new networking devices and, while the outdoor access point market is a bit slower at adopting new technologies than the indoors-focused devices, EnGenius has released the EWS850AP, an outdoor access point that has managed to blow out of the water every other outdoor-suitable access point in terms of wireless performance. And it’s not only when connected to WiFi 6 clients, but the WiFi 5 client devices have also seen better stability, performance and coverage. This is because of the new and the improved features (yes, they’re draft-stage, but still plenty impressive), such as the OFDMA (downstream and upstream on both bands), the BSS Coloring, the 1024-QAM modulation and TWT. Of course, features such as MU-MIMO and BeamForming are still here, but one of the most interesting additions is the 2.5GbE PoE port which, with the help of the aforementioned WiFi 6 features, should help achieve a better throughput than with the last generation.

Most outdoor access points are fairly large and with lots of antennas all around (the ENH1750EXT had six of them), but the EnGenius EWS850AP has kept a four-antenna layout (two for the 5GHz band and two for the 2.4GHz band) with a rectangular main body made of hard plastic on the front and a metallic alloy on the rear side. The case measures 7.48 x 4.88 x 1.85 inches and it’s covered by a white matte finish, displaying only the logo on the front side. I have also checked out the fully metallic Mikrotik NetMetal ac2 and I did appreciate that it’s most likely the most shock-proof outdoor access point available, but the plastic and metal combo on the EWS850AP will work just as well, especially since the manufacturer has made sure that it’s weatherproof. Indeed, the outdoor AP is IP67-rated, so it’s sealed against dust ingress, and you should be able to submerge the device under water down to 3 feet for 20 minutes. I don’t think people will go swimming with their access point, but it goes to show that a powerful storm will not harm the EWS850AP.

The lightning is and will remain the worst enemy of outdoor electronic devices, so you should always make sure that it is properly protected (use surge protectors) – EnGenius has added EDS protection (8KV in air and 4KV on contact) and surge protection of up to 1KV. It will also survive some fairly extreme temperatures considering that it will remain operational the the temperature goes down to -4 degrees F and up to 140 degrees F. To help you see the status of the device and of the network, EnGenius has added four LEDs on the side of the access point: a Power LED, a LAN LED (will blink amber when you make a connection at 2.5Gbps) and two LEDs for the WiFi networks. At the bottom of the device, there’s a black knob that you need to remove in order to expose the 2.5GbE PoE port (supports 802.3af/at). In case you don’t have an Ethernet PoE switch, you don’t have to worry because EnGenius has added a PoE adapter inside the package (48-54V).

Inside the case, the EnGenius EWS850AP is equipped with a Qualcomm IPQ6010 HE031COC SoC, 2x 512MB RAM from Nanya (2010 NT5CC256M16ER-EK 947516W0EF), 128MB of storage memory from MXIC and a Qualcomm QCA8081 Ethernet PHY transceiver. There is also a Qualcomm QCN5021 802.11b/g/n+ax 2×2:2 chipset for the 2.4GHz band and a Qualcomm QCN5052 802.11ac+ax 2×2:2 chip for the 5GHz band.

After installing the EnGenius EWS850AP in the preferred spot, you can either use the device in standalone mode or you can adopt it into the ezMaster controller and configure + monitor it along with multiple other compatible EnGenius devices. The standalone mode can be accessed by simply inserting the IP address that’s given by the router into the URL and the GUI is decently easy to follow even for newcomers. There’s a main menu on the left where you get to check some various status info, change Wireless settings (includes using WPA3), set the Guest Network and enable Management VLAN, run various Network tools and more. The fun starts when using the ezMaster controller but know that you will need to run an instance on your PC, or you can use the SkyKey which attaches magnetically to any metallic surface and will keep the network always running without requiring too much power.

ezMaster is similar to other controllers, so you will need to register the outdoor access point and then add it to the newly created network (from an organization). Afterwards, you will have some dedicated settings which are going to be applied only on the device itself, as well as some general settings that are going to be adopted by all devices from the same category that are a part of the same network. Some of the features that can be found on the ezMaster are the Captive Portal, the Traffic Shaping, the Hotspot 2.0, Fast Roaming and more.
I have tested the EnGenius EWS850AP both indoors and outdoors and in both cases, it has offered an excellent wireless performance. Indoors, the results (which you can check in the full review of the outdoor access point) have rivaled those of Zyxel WAX650S (on the 80MHz channel width) and the EnGenius ECW230.

Outdoors, it has offered better results than the two newest access points that I have tested in the same location, the DrayTek VigorAP 920RP and the MikroTik NetMetal ac2, showing 414Mbps upstream near the access point (70 feet) using an AX200 client device (5GHz, of course) and up to 154Mbps as far as 670 feet away. Even downstream things were great since at 70 feet, I saw 335 Mbps and at the max distance, 670 feet, I got an average of 31.8 Mbps. I have also tested the device using an AC client (Intel 8265) and it did good as well, showing 287 Mbps at 70 feet and 50.3 at 670 feet. The 2.4GHz performance was also very good as you can see from the graph, so if you need a fairly large area to be covered by WiFi, you can’t go wrong with the EnGenius EWS850AP, even if you don’t yet have WiFi 6 client devices.

2. TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor WiFi 6 Access Point

Read the full review

TP-Link wasn’t as popular in the business market as it was for home-suitable hardware, but that changed after Ubiquiti showed signs of weakness (with the latest controversies) which allowed the Omada platform to grow and capture some of the business market as well. And, while a bit unconventional for a Cloud SDN, the TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor is indeed an access point built for outside conditions, while also working perfectly fine with other Omada devices.

The TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor has a long rectangular plastic body, covered by a white matte finish and, while there are no antennas that point out of the case, there are four fairly high gain antennas inside (2x 4dBi and 2 x 5dBi). The device measures 11.0 x 4.2 x 2.2 inches, so it’s fairly large, but the size is less important outdoors, while the protection from the elements is the most important aspect. As expected, TP-Link did make sure that the access point will survive outdoor conditions, so the EAP610-Outdoor has a lightning protection of up to 6kV and the enclosure is IP67-rated.

This means that the device can withstand water jets for a long period of time without being unaffected so it should do fine if you live in an area with frequent violent storms. Just make sure to also add some more protection against lightning to be on the safe side (such as surge protectors).

Ideally, you will mount the device on a pole (and you do get a PoE adapter inside the box), but TP-Link does offer a bracket for wall mounting as well – I would have liked to see a metallic bracket, but I suppose the zip ties should suffice. That being said, the area on interest is the bottom side, where you can find a Grounding Terminal, a Gigabit Ethernet Port (802.3at PoE and Passive PoE) and a recessed Reset button (press and hold the button for 8 seconds using a paper clip to return the access point to the factory default settings).

I would have liked to see an array of LED lights, but we only got a single status LED which gets solid green when everything is fine and flashes yellow, when the outdoors access point encounters an error (just check the Omada interface to get an accurate idea about what’s going on). Inside the case, the TP-LINK EAP610-Outdoor is equipped with a Qualcomm Atheros IPQ6000 chipset, 256MB of RAM from ESMT (M15T4G16256A), 128MB of flash memory (ESMT F59D1G8MB-ASM1P1AWL) and an Atheros AR8033 chip dedicated for the WLAN. As for WiFi, the AP uses the Qualcomm QCN5022 for the 2.4GHz frequency band and the Qualcomm QCN5052 for the 5GHz.

In order to install the TP-LINK CPE510, you need to be aware by a couple of things: you need to maintain a clear line of sight between the access point and the wireless devices that will connect to the network and an elevated position is the ideal one, while keeping an eye to maintain the number of trees and other obstructions to a minimum. That’s what I did to test the TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor but I also ran some tests indoors, which you can check in the full review.

But the idea is that the 5GHz radio reaches farther than the 2.4GHz one, the latter also suffering from a low throughout after I connected WiFi 5 client devices. It did a lot better with WiFi 6, which does surprise and it shows that you need to take the WiFi 6 networking hardware into account only if you have the client devices that can use all the awesome new features. Outdoors, I did see some light interference from passing cars, but, as I said, an elevated position should keep those annoyances at bay.

As for the throughput, it was goods, not as powerful as with the EnGenius EWS850AP, but still, 345Mbps at 70 feet and 148Mbps at 350 feet are decent results. Even at 570 feet, it’s possible to browse the web and even be more daring with your applications since you can get 67.5Mbps upstream 57.9Mbps downstream.

Software-wise, the TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor does have a stand-alone interface and it’s surprisingly feature-rich, so you don’t have to bother with the Omada SDN or Cloud platform if you only want to use this single AP to cover your yard or other similar areas. If you need to use more than one TP-Link EAP610-Outdoor in a resort or other outdoor spaces, then adopting them to the Omada is the wise choice. In any case, the standalone interface is fairly simple, featuring a top horizontal menu for Status, Network, Wireless, Management and System.

It’s worth mentioning that you can enable OFDMA for both radio bands from under the Wireless settings. To access the Omada SDN, I continued to use the OC200 which helped me add other Omada devices in the past to the controller. And the GUI is very reminiscent of the UniFi controller, displaying some dedicated info on the right side for the outdoor access point – you can monitor and configure its individual settings from there, but be aware that there are some global settings that will be provisioned to the AP as well.

3. DrayTek VigorAP 920RP Outdoor Wireless Access Point

Read the full review

Similarly to Ubiquiti, DrayTek has aimed towards bringing enterprise-level features to the SMB and consumer market, with the focus on adopting the VPN technology to lower-cost routers (such as the widely popular Vigor 2925ac), but, over time, the reach of the Taiwanese Company has expanded and it has also developed high-end indoors and outdoors access points.

Quite recently, Draytek decided to renew its SMB-suitable VigorAP line with three new outdoor PoE wireless access points, from which I’m going to focus on the dual-band VigorAP 920RP, a device that besides being rugged enough for harsh outdoor conditions, it also takes advantage of some Wave 2 features to enhance the wireless performance (such as MU-MIMO).

The DrayTek VigorAP 920RP features a relatively thick case, the front being made of sturdy plastic, while the rest of the body is made out of a metallic alloy; the device is covered by a white matte finish and it has two antennas that point upwards from the top (detachable and upgradeable – the RPD model also comes with an internal directional antenna for Point-to-Point deployment). The front of the device is simple and plain, with only the logo and model name, while the rear side is covered by metallic fins to ensure a proper heat management.

It’s obvious from the industrial look and the fact that it lacks any cut-outs to expose the internal hardware that we are dealing with an outdoor-suitable device, so everything is sealed and protected from the elements. The VigorAP 920RP is IP67 certified, therefore, it can survive submersions under water down to 3 feet for about 30 minutes and it has complete protection against dust (if you live in an area with lots of strong storms, it is advisable to take advantage of the grounding kit, as well as add lightning surge protectors or dedicated rods to ensure that the device will survive unscathed). Furthermore, the 920RP will operate if the temperature ranges between -40º to 158º Fahrenheit and if the humidity level (non-condensing) is within 5 to 95%.

Along with the VigorAP 920RP access point itself, DrayTek also provides, in the box, a mounting kit and a couple of U-screws, so you can either mount the unit on the wall or on a pole (you can also use zip ties), just be aware about the dimensions and the weight of the device (10.0 x 6.3 x 3.1 inches and 2.42 lbs). The package also contains an Ethernet cable and a Quick Start Guide, but it lacks a PoE Injector, so you’ll either have to rely on a PoE switch or buy your own adapter.

While the front is quite plain, the back of the VigorAP 920RP is lot more crowded because of the protruded fins, but they have a key role into maintaining the temperature as low as possible and, thanks to the alloy case, the device remained cool even when it was put under stress.

If you search the case for the usual array of LEDs, you won’t find any because DrayTek decided to position them in an unorthodox manner: on the bottom, the first (out of three) sealed cut-outs is covered by transparent plastic and it exposes two sets of three LED indicators, each set showing the status of one Ethernet port – the first LED indicates the Activity (blinking green when the system is ready), while the second and the third LED will light up green when there are clients connected to the 2.4GHz and/or the 5GHz network (solid when the WiFi is ready and flashing when the data is either being sent or received).

Underneath the second removable cover, there’s a PoE-In RJ45 Ethernet Gigabit port (used to power the device and to connect it to the Internet) and underneath the third cover, there’s a PoE Out Ethernet Gigabit port (useful if you want to connect additional wired devices, such as a PoE camera which can also be mounted on the same pole). Between the two sets of LEDs, there is a small recessed Reset button (to return the device to the default factory settings).

Inside the case, the VigorAP 920RP is equipped with a Qualcomm Atheros IPQIPQ4029 SoC, 256 MB of RAM (from Winbond) and 128 MB flash storage (from Toshiba) / 4MB (from MXIC), a Qualcomm Atheros QCA8072 switch chip and a TPS23754 802.3at PoE controller.
Before installing the DrayTek VigorAP 920RP, you should be aware of two things: first of all, it is ideal to install the device as high as possible to achieve a better link quality and secondly, the antennas should point towards the router (or at least in its general direction, considering that they’re not really omnidirectional).

In order to install the unit, you have to remove the covers (to reveal the two ports – as said before, the second should only be used to connect additional wired clients), insert an Ethernet cable into the LAN PoE port (middle port) and the other end of the cable to the PoE injector and plug the Power cord into the DC port of the PoE injector. Afterwards, in order to configure the device, you need to plug another Ethernet cable to the PoE injector and into a computer.

In order to configure the VigorAP 920RP, Draytek provides a web-based utility, which can be accessed by going to the device’s IP address (check it in the router’s UI), using any web browser – immediately after accessing the interface, you should change the password (to do so, got to the Administration Password). If you run the Quick Start Wizard, you can select a different Operation Mode (can be Universal Repeater or AP-Bridge – Point-to-Point or WDS Mode). Other areas of interest are the General Management, which includes the ability to create a Black List or enable Auto Provisioning; there’s also the AP Discovery, the Station Control Fast Roaming (802.1x) or the Band Steering.

Since this type of devices are rarely used as a standalone, a controller is a necessity when you have to deploy multiple access point on various sites and, thankfully, the VigorAP 920RP can indeed be adopted within a larger environment containing not only access points, but also Vigor routers. Unlike the other access points that I have recently tested (such as the Ubiquiti UAP-AC-PRO, Zyxel NWA1123-AC HD or TP-Link EAP245), I did not get immediate access to the controller, but I had to request it from the official website via email.

Once received, things remained less user-friendly, since I had to also install OpenJDK and MariaDB and, once everything was installed, I could choose between local and remote. Choosing the former for testing purposes did not finish the process, since, I also had to go to the Vigor ACS 2 interface (the controller) and to the standalone interface and pair them (read the full review for instructions). What I do like about the VigorAP 920RP is that it doesn’t force or persuade you to use the controller and you can get almost every option and feature using the default interface.
Note: Inside the device, DrayTek has implemented a buzzer to let you know where the AP is located.

The DrayTek VigorAP 920RP has a large coverage and I could connect to the network even at about 670 feet, but, depending on your devices, you may not want to go beyond 400 feet because smartphones and tablets are limited by the FCC regulation for public exposure. Obviously, the less noise and interference, the better the signal and range (in an area with lots of trees, buildings and other 2.4GHz devices, you will not maintain a stable signal). But, in line of sight, I could get around 76 Mbps on the 5GHz network and 105 Mbps on the 2.4G at 70 feet. Further out to about 460 feet, I measured an average of 8.95 Mbps on the 5 GHz network and 27 Mbps on the 2.4GHz network; at 670 feet, only the 2.4GHz network remained relatively reliable and I could measure an average of 7.5 Mbps.

4. MikroTik NetMetal ac2 Outdoor AP

Read the full review

MikroTik has managed to grab a seat among the most popular manufacturers of networking products in the world due to its excellent SMB-suitable hardware and especially thanks to the flexibility of the RouterOS. But, this opinion is shared among the IT specialists, while the home users have usually steered clear of MikroTik products. And it’s understandable because while the feature-packed RouterOS is a great piece of software, it requires a rather steep learning curve before starting to understand how things work. That being said, Mikrotik has recently released the NetMetal ac2 which has kept the rugged build of its predecessors, but it has improved the internal hardware and considering that not many manufacturers offer a fully metallic enclosure at an affordable price point, it’s worth adding it to the best outdoor access points list.

The NetMetal ac2 has the same exterior as the NetMetal 5, featuring a robust metallic case that can be divided into three parts, the middle being the access point itself. Remove the two large spring-operated screws and you will be able to access the antenna area (as well as the Auxiliary ports that need to be drilled) and no, Mikrotik did not add any antennas in the package. You should be able to use a couple of 4-5dBi antennas if you’re not planning to cover a larger area, but if you want to go for a PtP system, you need to purchase a high gain antenna that can fully utilize the new hardware. The other side has a different opening mechanism (it remains attached on one end) and here are positioned all the ports and connectors. I know that some of you are very fond of the RBSXTG-5HPnD-SAr2 which is another affordable outdoor wireless access point, but Mikrotik was a bit vague about how resistant it was to the elements. The NetMetal ac2 clearly has the IP66-rating in its specs list, so it is protected against dust ingress and against powerful jets of water directed towards the enclosure. This means that a storm won’t pose any problems, just make sure to add some protection against lightning if you want to mount the AP on a pole.

As for the cold weather, the NetMetal ac2 should remain operational when the temperature ranges between -40 degrees F and 158 degrees F, so it’s more suitable for milder winters. I also opened the case of the NetMetal ac2 to see its internal hardware and the device is equipped with a quad-core Qualcomm IPQ4019 CPU (the ARM 32-bit architecture), 16 MB of flash memory (from Winbond), 256MB of RAM (from Nanya) and a Qualcomm QCA8072 dual-Ethernet Phy controller. It’s also worth noting that Mikrotik relies on a silicone band to keep the water and dust from entering the enclosure. Inside the package, there is the NetMetal ac2 unit, a PoE adapter (not that many manufacturers add one in the box), a power adapter, a mounting ring, a mounting bracket and a Quick Setup Guide. The wireless access point was definitely designed to be mainly mounted on a pole (there is a dedicated area for it on the rear side), but Mikrotik has also added the bracket if you want to attach the AP to a larger antenna or even a wall.

On the front of the NetMetal ac2, there is a small rectangular zone which contains eight LEDs, from which three will show the status of the power, SFP and Ethernet, while the last five will show the wireless signal strength: the LEDs go from bottom to top and will light depending one the calculated dBm, therefore, the lowest will be lit, if the signal is less or equal to 89dBm and the highest will be lit if the signal is equal or less than 61dBm. As I said before, you need to remove a metallic cover to access the ports and after doing so, you’ll be able to see a DC power port, a Reset button, an SFP port, a 10/100/1000M Gigabit Ethernet port (802.3af/at PoE), a microSIM slot and a USB port.

MikroTik NetMetal ac2 uses the RouterOS (level 4 license) as the operating system which will help you configure your network. You can easily access the software entering the AP’s IP, but you can also use the Mikrotik Winbox utility (the WebFig and the Command Line Interface are also available) to connect to the IP address and, when prompted to insert the user name and password, insert admin and leave a blank space for password (the Winbox can also be used to connect to the MAC address of the device). The Level 4 license for the RouterOS includes the ability to configure the device as a WISP Access Point, CAP, CPE, PTP Bridge, PTP Bridge CPE, Home MEsh and Home AP Dual. Furthermore, if you decide to use more than one Mikrotik access point for your site, you should give CAPsMAN a chance: it’s a controller that allows the admin to quickly manage and configure multiple access points at the same time. I’m not going to lie, if you’re going the web-based UI route, the configuration of the MikroTik NetMetal ac2 is not as straight-forward as it should be, but the good news is that you can find everything online (and there’s even a wiki page dedicated to RouterOS, so it can help those that have just begun using Mikrotik devices).

Mikrotik seems to be aware that the newcomers will feel intimidated by their ‘corporate’ approach, so they also made available a mobile application that offers a better step-by-step initial configuration wizard and it’s actually quite impressive that Mikrotik has managed to include pretty much every feature of the RouterOS available on the web-based GUI on their app.

I have tested the Mikrotik NetMetal ac2 using a couple of 5dBi antennas and yes, you will have a better coverage using some high gain antennas, but even with this setup the wireless access point did very well indoors (you can check the test results in the full review) and it performed similarly to the VigorAP 920RP when outdoors. As with any long-range wireless access point, the performance will be almost entirely dependent on the WiFi adapter on the client device. In my case, I used the same laptop with the Intel 8265 WiFi card (as with the VigorAP 920RP) and, while keeping the line of sight as clear as possible (yes, there were some trees in the way), the performance was decent. That being said, on the 5GHz network, at 70 feet, I measured an average of 93.8 Mbps and on the 2.4GHz network, I saw an average of 39.3 Mbps.

Changing the direction and increasing the distance to 460 feet, I measured an average of 41.3 Mbps on the 5GHz network (802.11ac) and an average of 13.5 Mbps on the 2.4GHz network. The farthest point that I tested the NetMetal ac2 was at 570 feet (I did try at 650, but there was too much interference to get a usable throughput); at this location, I measured an average of 41.6 Mbps on the 5GHz network and an average of 20.2 Mbps on the 2.4GHz WiFi network.

5. Ubiquiti Bullet M2 Titanium WAP AirMax BM2-TI

Ubiquiti Networks is a relatively young networking company which mainly focuses on the enterprise market and, at the same time it addresses the emerging and under-served markets. Ubiquiti is well known for its UniFi series, as well as airMAX and airFiber, and I have already had a look at an indoor wireless access point solution (the Ubiquiti UAP-LR Enterprise AP), which proved to be a reliable piece of technology at an acceptable price. Moving forward, I am going to focus on a unique piece of technology, called the Ubiquiti Bullet M2 Titanium, which is part of the AirMax series.

The Bullet M2-Ti doesn’t look like the other devices from this list: there is no rectangular or circular shape, because Ubiquiti adopted a rather unorthodox approach when it designed the M2. As the name suggests, the M2-Ti looks like a bullet, having a cylindrical body made of aircraft-grade aluminum, covered by a grey finish. While holding the M2-Ti in hand, it’s clear that we are dealing with a rugged device, which can withstand the elements: it is waterproof, but don’t submerge it under water (since it can handle only splashes of water), does a better job with moisture (than its plastic counterpart), it remains operational between a temperature of -40 to 80 degrees (it withstands strong winters), it can handle humidity between 5 to 95% (condensing) and it has a high resistance to shock and vibration (ETSI300-019-1.4).

The choice to make the Bullet M2 of aluminum was a good move from Ubiquiti, since the previous plastic model was having a hard time during harsh weather. The Bullet M2-Ti does not have an antenna, only an upper N-Type connection gasket (which is weatherproof), so you can add any type of antenna you wish.

Inside the package, you get the Bullet M2 unit, a PoE Adapter (24V, 1A), a power cord, a Quick Start Guide and an N-type right angle adapter. You won’t get any type of straps for mounting it on a pole, so you will have to get those yourself and, since this device is vulnerable to lightning, you should also add a Lightning/Surge Arrester between the Bullet and the antenna. The device itself is very small and compact, its dimensions being 7.5 x 1.8 inches and its weight, 0.43 pounds.

The powder coated aluminum case of the Bullet M2 does not have any LED lights to reveal the status of your network, nor any visible ports, but if you unscrew the black bottom part, it will reveal a single 10/100 Ethernet Port (a passive, proprietary PoE, which is not compatible with the usual PoE equipment: either 802.11af or the 802.11at standards) and the removable part includes a Rubber Washer, a Cable Gland Body, a Compression Seal and a Compression Nut.
Inside the case, the Ubiquiti Bullet M2 is equipped with an Atheros AR7241 MIPS 24KC processor clocked at 400Mhz, 32 MB of SDRAM, 8 MB of flash memory and an Atheros AR928x for the wireless network interface controller. The Bullet M2-Ti uses the 2.4GHz radio frequency (802.11a/b/g/n) and it lacks the 5GHz radio band (the Bullet M5-Ti has this feature).

The hardware installation of the Bullet M2-Ti consists of removing the Cable Gland Body (the black bottom part), afterwards unscrew the Compression Nut and remove the Compression Seal. Now, take an Ethernet cable and insert one end through the Compression Nut and add the Compression Seal around the cable. Next, put the Ethernet cable through the Cable Gland Body and connect the cable to the Ethernet port at the bottom of the Bullet unit. Lastly, screw all of the parts tightly together to ensure a proper protection.

You can now take the other end of the Ethernet cable and insert it into the PoE port of the PoE injector and insert the power cord into the injector and into a wall socket to power up the device. On the upper part, you can add a powerful antenna to ensure a strong signal (sure, you can choose a directional antenna if you only want to use the Bullet for PtP applications, but, an omni-directional antenna is the better choice, especially if you want to use the M2 as an access point and cover a large area all around the device). If you want to configure the Bullet M2, you need to connect a second Ethernet cable to the LAN port on the PoE injector and into a computer.

Ubiquiti offers a web utility called airOS that can be accessed by typing https://192.168.1.20 into a web browser (before this, you need to configure the host system to use a static IP address). From here, you will be prompted to enter the user name and password (it’s ubnt for both). The interface has a horizontal top menu with links towards the main sections: airMAX logo, Main, Wireless, Network, Advanced, Services and System. The airMAX logo allows you to enable the airMAX feature, choose the airView port (the airView feature gives you real-time spectral views, as well as waterfall and waveform in order to easily identify noise interferences), enable the Long Range PtP Link Mode and enable the airSelect. The Main section shows the status of the device and it allows you to monitor the system by giving a graphical live representation of the throughput, showing the AP information, the Interfaces, the ARP Table, the Bridge Table, the Routers and Log.

The Wireless section includes the Basic Wireless Settings (choose the Wireless Mode – Station, Access Point, AP Repeater -, enable the WDS, choose the SSID, the WiFi standard, channel width, the output power calculate the EIRP limit and more) and the Wireless Security (includes the RADIUS MAC Authentication and MAC ACL, as well as the Security type: WEP, WPA, WPA-TKIP, WPA2, etc).
The Network section allows you to choose the Network Role (choose the Network Mode: Bridge, Router or SOHO Router), the Configuration Mode (can be Simple or Advanced and both include a lot of options: Port Forwarding, DHCP Address Reservation, VLAN Network, Bridge Network, Firewall, IPv6 Firewall, Traffic Shaping) and change the Management Network Settings. The Advanced section allows you to configure the Advanced Wireless Settings (includes the RTS Threshold, Distance, Aggregation, Sensitivity Threshold, Installer EIRP Control), the Advanced Ethernet Settings (LAN0 Speed) and the Signal LED Thresholds.

The Services section allows you to configure the Ping Watchdog (a vital feature which reboots the device automatically in case the Gateway router resets, so you don’t have to diagnose the problem yourself and restart the Bullet manually), the SNMP Agent, the Web Server, the SSH Server, the Telnet Server, the NTP Client, the Dynamic DNS, the System Log and the Device Discovery. The System section gives you access to the Date Settings, the System Accounts, the Device name and the Interface Language, it allows you to perform a Firmware update, enable the Reset button, choose the Location, Reboot the Device and perform the Backup or Return to Factory Defaults. Next to the Logout button on the top menu, there is a Tools drop down menu which contains the following options: Align Antenna, Site Survey, Discovery, Ping, TraceRoute, Speed Test and airView.

Ubiquiti takes great pride into the airMAX feature (you may have noticed it while configuring the Bullet M2), which has the role to transform the device into a potent TDMA Base Station, so you can scale your network using Point-to-MultiPoint configurations, while maintaining a low latency and a high throughput speed. The problem is that people don’t understand that this feature can solely be used in collaboration with other ubnt devices. If you want to use the Bullet M2 as a regular access point and connect your smartphones, tablet, smartTVs and so on to the network, you must disable the airMAX feature and switch to the 20MHz channel (don’t forget to setup a strong passkey for security purposes). In terms of wireless performance, the Bullet M2 depends mostly on the type of antenna you buy for it (for example, I used a 6dbi antenna and had a stable throughput at 500 to 600 feet in a zone with some mild interferences, so it can perform even better if there aren’t many conflicts).

6. Ubiquiti UniFi AP Outdoor+ (UAP-Outdoor+)

The young networking products manufacturer, Ubiquiti Networks, is getting more popular with every released device and is one of the fastest ascending networking company in the world, slowly becoming a serious rival to the already established and more traditional manufacturers, such as Cisco and Juniper. Of course, Ubiquiti’s approach is to give businesses and home Internet users access to technologies that before, were accessible only at enterprise-level prices. I already had a look at an interesting outdoor device from Ubiquiti called the Bullet M2 Titanium WAP AirMax BM2-TI, but, since, some of the most popular devices from Ubiquiti are part of the UniFi series, I had to also test the UniFi AP Outdoor+.

Similarly to the EnGenius ENS202EXT, the Ubiquiti UniFi AP Outdoor+ features a long, rectangular case, which is covered by a white glossy finish and, from the top, there are two 5 dBi Omni antennas that point upwards (white is the default colour choice for almost every other outdoor access point from the market). Design-wise, the UAP-Outdoor+ looks nice, especially because of the soft, rounded corners and it’s laudable that this isn’t a large device (it only measures 8.07 x 3.27 x 1.46 inches and weighs 10.37 oz, with the antennas connected), so it will blend in nicely with the environment.

Unsurprisingly, the UAP-Outdoor+ is not water-proof and it does not have any IP or NEMA rating, which should be common sense when we’re talking about an outdoors device and it will raise some concerns, especially if people want to use this AP where the weather is unforgiving. Regardless of that, the UniFI AP Outdoor+ will handle outdoor conditions just fine, but you need to be careful not to submerge the device under water completely and if there are frequent heavy storms, you may want to position it where it won’t be directly hit by the storm – otherwise, disconnect it for a while and let it dry before activating it.

Also, remember that the device will function if the operating temperature is between -22 to 149 degrees F and if the humidity is between 5 to 95% (non-condensing). The true enemy of any outdoor access point is not the water, but the lightning. If a lightning strikes your access point, in the best case scenario, you will lose the antennas, otherwise, it will fry your entire device, so it is important to keep it safe by installing a lightning rod and use surge arrestors (and of course, use the ground wire). The good news is that the UAP-Outdoor+ has an ESD/EMP Protection of 24KV. If you worry about RF exposure, then install the antennas at least 10 inches from any person and be aware that the device should not be operating in conjunction with other antennas or transmitters.

On the front of the access point, underneath the small plastic protrusion, there’s a small LED light which shows the status of your system: if the light is white, then the system is initializing, if it’s alternating between blue and white, then the device is busy (wait until it finishes the process), if it’s flashing a blue light, then you initiated the Locate process and the device is finding other APs; if the LED is solid blue, then the device has been integrated into a network and lastly, if the LED is solid blue, but with occasional flashing, it indicates that the AP is in an isolated state. If you slide the bottom part of the UAP-Outdoor+, it reveals the Secondary 10/100Mbps Ethernet port (suitable for creating a bridge), a small Reset button (press and release quickly to reset the device or press and hold the button for more than 5 seconds to return the AP to factory default settings) and the Main 10/100Mbps Ethernet port (used to connect the AP to the LAN and DHCP server – the power can be provided by either the included PoE adapter or a 48V, 802.3ad compliant switch). On the top, there are two RP-SMA connectors for the two 5 dBi omni-directional antennas.

Note: The package contains the UniFi AP Outdoor+ unit, the two external antennas, a wall mount bracket, a metal strap, three M2.9×20 screws, three M3x20 screw anchors, a passive PoE adapter (48V, 0.5A), the power cord and a Quick Start Guide.
Inside the case, the Ubiquiti UniFI AP Outdoor+ is equipped with an Atheros AR7242 CPU (clocked at 400MHz), 8MB of storage memory, 32MB of RAM (Winbond) and an Atheros AR9283 b/g/n 2×2:2 chipset (for the 2.4GHz wireless capabilities). This outdoor access point does not support the newer 802.11ac standard, nor the 5GHz radio band (so, you will have to settle with the more crowded, but with a longer range, 2.4Hz radio band).

The UAP-Outdoor+ can be mounted on the wall or on a pole. To wall mount the device, you need to take the wall mount bracket and use the screw anchors and the screws to sturdily fix the bracket on the wall and then, take the AP unit and slide it inside the special notches until it locks into place. To mount the access point on a pole, you need to slide the metal strap through the back of the UniFi AP and use a screwdriver to securely fasten the strap to a pole. After you either fixed the UAP-Outdoor+ to a pole or a wall, slide open the bottom part (lift the locking tab first), insert one end of an Ethernet cable into the Main port and the other end into the PoE port from the PoE adapter. Next, take another Ethernet cable and connect one end to the LAN port on the PoE adapter and the other to a switch or computer (to configure the system). Lastly, you have to insert the power cord into the other side of the PoE adapter and connect it to a power outlet.

Ubiquiti gives you access to an interesting software called the UniFi Controller (it can be downloaded from downloads.ubnt.com/unifi), which allows you to manage and view the statistics of your wireless network. After you install the utility, the UniFi Setup Wizard will launch automatically: it guides you through selecting the country and the timezone, as well as selecting the device you want to configure (if you have more than one), configuring the WiFi (SSID, Security key and create Guest SSIDs), creating the administrator name, email and password and, lastly, entering or creating the Ubiquiti account user name. Now, that you finished the initial setup, you can log into the interface.

The controller’s interface is very comprehensible and looks extremely modern and fresh (as expected from Ubiquiti). On the header, there’s a Refresh button, the Current Site (Overview, Add a new site and Import site) and the user name (Preferences, Edit and Logout). On the left, there are the main options (aligned vertically) and sectioned into two separate arrays: the first series includes the Dashboard, Statistics, Map, Devices, Clients and Insights, and the second series includes the Events, Alerts, Settings and Live Chat Support (each of these options opens a new central window).

The Dashboard window has a colourful graphic representation of the system status (includes sections such as Download/Upload Throughput and Latency, the Speed Test Monitor, the Devices on the 2.4GHz and the 5GHz Channel, the number of WLAN, LAN and WAN devices, the type of Clients (Ubiquiti, Desktop, Android or Apple) and the Deep Packet Inspection). The Statistics window provides you with a visual representation of all your clients and the network traffic, it shows different stats about your Clients, the Current Usage of the Top Access points, a Quick Look over the most active clients and access points, and the Recent Activities.

The Map window is one of the most interesting features of the controller: it allows you to upload custom map images of your home or neighbourhood or simply use Google Maps™ to show a graphic representation of your network system topology. After selecting the proper area map, you can place device icons (such as UniFi AP/AP LR, UniFi AP AC Lite/LR/Pro or, in our case, UniFi AP Outdoor+), each with its own status colour; you can also add filers to show the 2.4GHz or 5GHz devices, display labels for each client, display a visual representation of the wireless range of your AP or of the network connections between your access points.

The Devices window displays all the connected UniFi devices discovered by the controller (you can apply filters to view different status information) and the Client window displays all the connected clients (again, you can apply various filters to view different type of clients and status info). The Insights window display different types of status information and filters it by the Known Clients, Neighbouring Access Points, Dynamic DNS, Remote User VPN and so on.

The Events tab shows you the recent events, as well as the corresponding device icon, name message and time. The Alerts tab displays a list of all the important events (when there’s a new alert, there’s going to be an orange circle near the bell icon). The Settings tab allows you to configure the Site, the Wireless Networks, the Hotspot 2.0, the Networks, the Routing & Firewall, the Guest Control, the Profiles, the Admins, the User Groups, the DPI, the Controller Access, the Maintenance and the Auto Backup.
To get the best wireless performance, you may need to pick non-standard channels (such as 8 or 13) since the 2.4GHz channel is overcrowded and the network may under-perform. So, in good conditions, the Ubiquiti UniFI AP Outdoor+ will be able to provide a stable wireless performance and a coverage of up to 600 feet (close-by, at around 40 feet and with about 15 clients connected at the same time, I measured an average speed of 27 Mbps).

FEATURES TO LOOK FOR BEFORE CHOOSING THE BEST OUTDOOR WIRELESS ACCESS POINT

First of all, what is an outdoor wireless access point?
Simply put, a wireless access point is an interface that takes the data from a wired connection (LAN), converts it to a 2.4 or 5GHz wireless signal and further transmits (and receives) it to all devices that have a wireless adapter. It differs from a router in the sense that it lacks the built-in switch functions, the NAT capabilities and it won’t serve internal IP addresses to connected device.

An outdoor wireless access point works pretty much the same as an indoor WAP, but there are usually some additional features:
1. The case has to be rugged, so it can handle the weather elements.
Obviously, this is a vital feature to look for when dealing with an ‘outdoor’ device, because it has to be able to handle extreme temperatures (the biggest problem is the winter, as most devices fail during this season), humidity (most will handle between 5 to 90%), rain and storms (it is important that there are no exposed orifices and all ports and connectors are covered and protected against water – most manufacturers won’t provide a full water-proof experience, where you can submerge the device underwater, but the access points should be able to handle water splashes) and it should handle a beating in case of a hailstorm.

2. It should be protected against lightning strikes.
The combination between the high altitude mounting and the antennas can be deadly for your wireless access point, since antennas will act as magnets to electricity. The first way to protect your devices is to use lightning rods on top of the poles, which will attract the lightning away from the WAP. Next, you should use surge arresters and surge protectors (with a proper grounding) so, in case your device gets hit by lightning, the damage will be minimum (it’s cheaper to change an antenna than the entire access point unit).

3. The antenna signal gain.
Some may say, the higher the better, but, depending on the applications, it may be wiser to choose an antenna with a lower gain (the higher gain pattern usually radiates the signal through objects, so, if the gain is lower, you get a shorter distance but as broader area, while the higher gain will send the signal far away, but will cover less area). Also, be aware that some devices use omnidirectional antennas (suitable for access point applications) and other use directional antennas (less angle, it requires aim and it’s better for Point-to-Point applications, like wireless bridge). By default, omnidirectional antennas will have a lower gain, while directional antennas will have a higher gain.

4. How much area can it cover?
This one is interlinked with the previous section because it’s dependent on the antenna type. If you want a hotspot (wireless access point), it is advisable to not go further than 400 feet because some devices won’t be able to transmit the data back (some phones and tablets) and to use omni-directional antennas (it won’t go too far, but will cover a broad area). For Point-to-Point applications, you need a directional antenna, so the devices will be able to transmit and receive over miles of space (some devices in this list were able to send the signal to more than 10 miles).

5. Easy setup.
Unfortunately, it’s not really straight forward to configure a wireless access point and many devices are simply WiFi radios, ready to be configured as either Access Points, WDS (Access Point, Bridge or Station), as Client Router, Bridge or SOHO Router. This implies that you get a heavy set of features and you need a bit of know-how to properly configure the setup you want. Sure, some manufacturers have made it relatively easy (Ubiquiti and TP-Link), while others decided that it’s better for the users to go the hard way (a steep learning curve) and feel victorious when they actually make the devices work (Mikrotik, Cisco and EnGenius).

6. Newest technologies implemented.
Since networking products are becoming more and more affordable, you can expect even the newest technologies implemented in devices with reasonable prices. For example, TP-Link and Ubiquiti have specific technologies that enhance the signal between devices from the same family, others have included mesh capabilities, MIMO and so on.

7. Power over Ethernet.
Obviously, it’s ideal to power up the device using only the Ethernet cable, but, so far I haven’t found a device (with a reasonable price tag) that didn’t require a Power adapter to be connected to PoE injectors (which are passive and proprietary to a specific manufacturer). But, hey, you don’t have to run a second cable on the pole, which is a positive thing.

8. The WDT feature (Watchdog Hardware Timer)
This feature is very important because it verifies periodically if the Gateway (usually router) sends Internet data and if there has been a reset, it automatically reboots the Access Point, so you don’t have to do it manually.

Mark B

Mark is a graduate in Computer Science, having gathered valuable experience over the years working in IT as a programmer. Mark is also the main tech writer for MBReviews.com, covering not only his passion, the networking devices, but also other cool electronic gadgets that you may find useful for your every day life.

www.mbreviews.com