Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
The actual transfer speed of USB 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, and/or Type-C will vary depending on many factors including the processing speed of the host device, file attributes and other factors related to system configuration and your operating environment. Kereskedelmi kategóriás biztonság– A Tend Micro™ technológiájára épülő AiProtection blokkolja és semlegesíti a hálózatra kapcsolódó okoseszközöket veszélyeztető fenyegetéseket Over the course of a week, my family and I used the RT-AC86U daily to watch videos, listen to music and do all kinds of work. It worked well for League of Legends playing or watching the pros do it on Twitch, and it served me well with a few hot laps with Real Racing 3. Ultragyors Wi-Fi - Az AC2900 W-Fi adatátvitelét a NitroQAM™és az 5 GHz-es négy adatfolyamos technológia úgy felturbózza, hogy még a legforgalmasabb otthoni hálózatokat is könnyedén lekezeli
Media prioritisation, when activated, seems on point and we noticed no discernible difference in gaming performance between this and the slightly cheaper Linksys WRT3200AC, though as ever the results are going to depend on the traffic in your home, your individual internet connection, and the speed of your brain and mouse.
The aggressive design of the case, and its inflexible form factor, won't be for everyone, and for all its tooltips the extent of Asus' firmware is probably way overblown for most.
The Asus RT-AC86U had the WPS and the WiFi On/Off buttons together on the right side, while the RT-AX86U has positioned the WPS button on the left side and the LED On/Off button on the right – everything else can be found on the rear side of the routers. The RT-AC86U has its LED On/Off button in the middle, while the four Gigabit LAN ports lie on the right side and the Gigabit WAN port, the two USB ports (2.0 and 3.0), as well as the Power button and the Power port sit on the left side (there is also a camouflaged Reset button within the cut-out pattern). The ports and connectors on the Asus RT-AX86U feel more relaxed (more space in between them), so you can find the Power button next to the Power port, a small recessed Reset button, two USB ports (both 3.0), four Gigabit LAN ports (from which the first is a Gaming port – will have the highest priority) and there is one WAN port, as well as a 2.5GbE port which can either work as LAN or WAN. You can use ethernet cable to connect AiMesh router LAN port and AiMesh node WAN port first and run the adding node process to build the mesh system.When the Asus RT-AC86U came out, I was impressed by how compact it was considering the powerful internal hardware and that Asus has managed to maintain the same dimensions and the look of the Asus RT-AC68U (it measures 8.6 x 6.3 x 3.2 inches). But then came the Asus RT-AX58U with an even smaller case (measures 8.8 x 5.0 x 6.3 inches), but even so, it does occupy more space from the desk than the RT-AC86U and the reason for that is because the aforementioned router was built to sit vertically. So, just like the RT-AC68U, the RT-AC86U has three antennas pointing upwards and a built-in stand (that cannot be removed) to keep the device in its place, regardless of the number of cables are connected. But, unlike the plain front of the RT-AC68U, the RT-AC86U has an Y shaped front with a couple of red sections which, according to Asus, should qualify it as being a part of the gaming series (of course, there are some gaming-specific feature built into the software as well).
Verdict: I do like the slim profile of the RT-AC86U and while it clearly has everything that is required from an excellent WiFi 5 router, the Asus RT-AX86U is simply better – sure, both have a great airflow, there are all the expected ports, but the extra 2.5GbE port that can work as either WAN or LAN and the two USB 3.0 ports ensure that the Asus RT-AX86U wins this round. Internal Hardware Fixed envrams exposed issue. Thanks to Quentin Kaiser from IoT Inspector Research Lab contribution. Based on a week of testing using Ixia’s ixChariot’s network simulation benchmark in my 100-year old 3,500-square-foot home, the Asus RT-AX86U was equal parts reliable router and gaming companion. At 15-feet, it had a peak throughput of 929.7Mbps. That can’t compare to the Netgear Nighthawk RAX80’s 1.39Gbps maximum output, but it’s 4 percent ahead of the TP-Link AX6000 (888.2Mbps), 7 percent ahead of the Netgear Nighthawk XR1000 (859.1Mbps) and 12 percent faster than Linksys MR9600 (822.0Mbps).
That said, the bandwidth available at 50-feet dropped to 285.3Mbps, which was just a hair ahead of the Netgear RAX80’s 271.3Mbps. It was behind the TP-Link AX6000’s 396.7Mbps and the Linksys MR9600’s 363.3Mbps. Kivételes teljesítményű processzor–Élvezd a simább hálózatkezelést és a gyorsabb adatátvitelt a PC-kategóriás, 1,8 GHz-es, 64 bites, kétmagos processzorral The RT-AC86U's throughput of 603.5Mbps and 589.6Mbps at 50 feet and 100 feet lagged behind the Archer C2300's 913.8Mbps and 613.2Mbps. It, however, outperformed the Norton Core's 601.4Mbps and 483.8Mbps at these distances.
Rendkívül széles lefedettség– A nagy teljesítményű antennák, az ASUS AiRadar és a Range Boost megszünteti a vétel nélküli területeket, a MU-MIMO pedig maximalizálja a többeszközös teljesítményt. Next, the Asus RT-AX58U supports the 1024-QAM technology that has the role of improving the throughput capabilities of the router and I know that this technology is a highlighted feature for the WiFi 6, but Asus has been taking advantage of the NitroQAM (1024-QAM) for a while now and yes, the Asus RT-AC86U does have it implemented as well. Clients which connect to the guest network can be viewed in the network map -->view list --> interfaceThe Asus RT-AC86U is advertised as an AC2900-class router, which means that it does feature a maximum theoretical data transfer rate of 2,167 Mbps on the 5GHz band, while on the 3.4GHz band, it features a maximum theoretical data transfer rate of 750 Mbps. The Asus RT-AX58U is advertised as an AX3000-class router, suggesting that the maximum theoretical data transfer rate on the 5GHz band is 2,402 Mbps and on the 2.4GHz band is 574 Mbps. Verdict: Despite being limited by the vertical-only position, I did find the Asus RT-AC86U to be more refined than the RT-AX58U and there is just a lot more attention to details design-wise – the removable antennas are also a plus. At the same time, the Asus RT-AX58U is a lot smaller and it does have a neutral look, so it’s easier to go unnoticed in a living-room. Other than that, both routers have the same number of ports (the RT-AC86U does have an additional USB port, although I doubt many will make use of it) and neither overheats, so this round ends in a tie. At our terminal distance of 90-feet, the RT-AX86U was near its limit, with an average of only 7.4Mbps, barely enough for watching an HD stream. That said, the TP-Link AX6000 couldn’t even maintain a connection at that distance, while the Netgear RAX80 moved 20.8Mbps and the Netgear XR1000 led the way with 75.0Mbps of bandwidth available. The RT-AX86U had a range of 95-feet, 10-feet short of the XR1000. It was at our terminal testing distance of 150 feet that the RT-AC86U caught up and shined, making it a good choice for larger homes. It moved 487.2Mbps, besting the Archer C2300 by 29 percent (at 342.5Mbps), the Norton Core by 21 percent (at 384.1Mbps) and the Linksys WRT32X by 61 percent (at 302.4Mbps). Note: For anyone that’s interested in the theoretical maximum data transfer rate (which shouldn’t really be used as a reference to real-life performance), know that the Asus RT-AC86U is an AC2900-class router (750Mbps on the 2.4Ghz band and 2,167Mbps on the 5GHz band) and the Asus RT-AX86U is an AX5700-class router (861Mbps on the 2.4GHz band and 4,804Mbps on the 5Ghz band).
Great Deal 
New Comment