Back to Article

  • Etsp - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    "At $79 it looks like a decent enough value for a dual-band router, but the lack of gigabit networking hurts a little bit. " The wireless connection is faster than the wired! It's asinine. You want to put a fileserver on this network, you better buy a wireless card for it.

    Not to mention, gigabit LAN components are dirt cheap these days... I'm not sure why these companies are pulling this crap, but it's ridiculous.
  • FATCamaro - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    100 mbit ethernet > 300 mbit wireless at a distance of 5 feet or more. Reply
  • FATCamaro - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Or if more than 1 computer is transmitting or receiving since ethernet is switched. Reply
  • Souka - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    100Mbps is plenty fast for 95% of home users.

    Most activity is just browsing webpages, watching video, or music.... all of which will be limited by wireless bandwidth far before 100Mbps.

    I suspect NAS performance will be in the 8-12 MB/s... again 100 Mbps is fine for that.

    Also, a 100Mbps WAN port is beyond what 99% people have at home for internet connectivity.

    I run Comcast Blast! at home... about 45/Mbps

    Until recently at home I ran a WRT-54GL router with a 4-port gigabit switch between a few of the systems so I could move files around at 500-800Mbps..... but the 100Mbps router ports were plenty fast for my 20Mbps throughput on the wi-fi.

    Now I have a ASUS N66U and am loving the speed boost, but it's not like 10x faster.
  • Bluestealth - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Well 12 MB/s is maxing out a 100 Mbps link, it might be very annoying if they are browsing the internet at the same time, I just don't think FastEthernet it is fast enough these days for a LAN connection. It is also fairly weird seeing a Fast Ethernet switch these days since basic Gigabit switch ASICs are so cheap.

    You are very correct about the 100Mbps WAN port, although I wish you were not, getting over 50 Mbps anywhere is like asking for a miracle in the United States. My current router maxes out at ~38 Mbps, which is fast enough for my Time Warner connection but if I ever move somewhere better my Cisco 1841 is getting trashed, immediately.
  • heffeque - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Wow... Spain in the middle of a huge crisis yet the main cable operator (Ono) offers up to 200 Mbps with no bandwidth caps.
    What's the matter with the North America!? Something has to be done.
  • Impulses - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Lack of corporate oversight + huge geographical distances. Reply
  • Souka - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Comcast (Xfinity) offer's "Extreme 50" and "Extreme 105" service to residental customers.

    Extreme 50 = 50Mbps down, 15 up
    EXtreme 105=105Mpbs down, 20 up

    So with Extreme 105... the 100Mbps WAN link would in inadequate... but if you're paying $200/mo for service, I'd hope you'd get a better than $60 router! :)

    Far as 12MB/s maxing a 100Mbps...yes that is correct but at $60 the NAS is likely to be well under 10MB/s.... depends on chipset.

    Point is... most people do just fine on 100Mbps LAN ports...and 2.4GHz 802.11n

    YOU (most daily tech readers do not fall under the classifaction of "most users") !
  • iwod - Friday, June 15, 2012 - link

    Yeah, we continue to see replies from Americans crying about no one needs a fast WAN port in the world.
    ( Americans Dictionary explains the World equals US )
    When there are plenty of places in Real World that offer 100Mbps + Internet Speed at affordable price.

    And we do need higher then 12MB/s if you have NAS. NAS are getting popular by day and even if you are transferring files between computer on the LAN you would want faster rate. 12MB/s is slow.

    Yes, this is 2012, we are well over a decade that we stuck with 100Mbps Ethernet. I agree Something NEEDS to be done.
  • Souka - Friday, June 15, 2012 - link

    MOST, not all, routers with NAS functionality have very poor performance to/from the HDD attached to the router.

    A dedicated NAS or a PC sharing files is another story.


    Yes Fast Ethernet needs to go away in the middle-class router market...and it slowly is.
  • Candide08 - Friday, June 15, 2012 - link

    "(Ono) offers up to 200 Mbps with no bandwidth caps.
    What's the matter with the North America!? Something has to be done. "

    Corps do not want to re-tool. They keep the profit for Exec bonuses, rather than reinvesting in company products.
  • prophet001 - Monday, June 18, 2012 - link

    I hope you see the phenomenal amount of irony in this statement.

  • cgeorgescu - Sunday, February 24, 2013 - link

    Wow again... Something is definitely wrong with the net in States. Check this:
    That's FTTB at 100mbps (no download limit) and a complimentary 3G USB stick (with bandwitdh capped if you go over 2GB/mo) for less than $6/mo (19.50LEI, it's a promotion, the regular price is $12/mo), available in all cities. And that's the most expensive offer you can find.

    And that's in Romania, Eastern Europe (like 3rd world but, incidentally, the 2nd country in the world in terms of bandwidth, after South Korea, of course). Because of such cheap net access offers, here is very common to have free wifi, every cafeteria and bar has.
    Again, something is wrong with the net in states, you have to do something. And, after seeing how a torrent comes with 11MBps, you'll never want to go back to ADSL.
  • Makaveli - Monday, June 18, 2012 - link

    12 mb/s fast enough? not on my network.

    I'm currently seeing 30-70mb/s when transferring mkv's from main desktop after I rip them to my HTPC.

    If you want sit and wait 40mins to transfter 4GB+ files then enjoy! i'd be halfway into watching my movie but the time your transfer is completed.

    As fpr WAN sport speed in North America 100mbps is good enough with our lack of competition and government run monopolies for ISP's.

    Visually I like the looks of this router very sleek but I won't be the person to go out and buy it will wait for reviews. As with most routers I find the firmware is key and it will make or break a good product.
  • name99 - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    I'd add:
    - ACTIVE cooling --- for a wireless router. Not a good sign.
    - use of a blue USB port even though no USB3 --- that indicates a pretty shady mindset to me.

    The GigE doesn't upset me as much because that's clearly a low-end issue, and because there really are different households with different needs. The usual household, which barely understands the concept of file sharing via AFP or SMB, and which thinks network is synonymous with internet, is probably just fine with 100Mbps.
  • notposting - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Active cooling seems good to me...better to keep it cool and running than roasting and disconnecting during high load sessions. Shouldn't need to be loud either, just getting the air to cycle in and out of such a small space should be easy to do. Reply
  • name99 - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    My point is that a router+base station should not get hot enough to require active cooling.

    It's not a perfect comparison because it's two separate boxes, not one, but my (4 year old) D-Link Green 8-port GigHub runs cool, not even warm; while my (previous, not current gen) Apple Airport Base Station runs warm, not hot.

    My complaint is not so much the fan as that I want to be sure that a device that is running 24/7 is not wasting a lot of power.
    IMHO my DLINK hub is very good in this respect. The Apple Base Station is, frankly, pretty pathetic --- I have complained to Apple and hopefully one day they'll do better.
    Measured against those, I fear this device is truly bad.

    Maybe I'm unfair --- maybe it does a great job of using very little power while sleeping, and only needs the fan for the worst case scenario --- every single port + both wifi bands running at max. But I fear this is not the case.
  • Souka - Friday, June 15, 2012 - link

    Active cooling is because of the router option which includes a internal HDD.

    Still, I would hope/think they'd be able to design an adequate heatsink but don't hodl your breath.

    small heatsink + cheap fan = cheap solution.

    big heatsink + intelligent thermal mangement + added weight + larger router design = higher cost and not as appealing to typical consumer.
  • JHutch - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Just wondering if this would work as a poor man's file server (SMB based?) or if it is DLNA only. Neither the article, nor WD's page made it clear for me. Reply
  • Dustin Sklavos - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Nearest I can tell, the USB storage should be fine as a poor man's file server. You can manually map network drives within Windows without having to install any applications (like D-Link requires on some of their models). Reply
  • iwod - Friday, June 15, 2012 - link

    My experience with File Server on Router has been very bad. Even though that was a long time i ago i see no difference even now. As Router hasn't much improved.

    You will have File System Problems, as many Router only Support FAT32, so you cant store 4GB+ files. Recent Ones allows EXT3 / 4, which you cant directly access on Windows.
    There are no NTFS support, File Transfer is slow, Router tends to easily crash compare to NAS. Etc.

    I am hoping the recent announced Broadcom ARM Router + NAS Chipset would change that. But we have to wait and see.
  • etamin - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    Great, now we have Asus, Netgear, and WD all with top models with the N900 designation Reply
  • EnzoFX - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    N900 just means it can do 450mbps up and down. Has nothing to do with model number. Reply
  • etamin - Thursday, June 14, 2012 - link

    I'm aware of what it means (I have the Netgear one and considered the Asus). It's actually 450mbps on each band. But I thought N900 was part of model designations. Reply
  • Chillin1248 - Saturday, June 16, 2012 - link

    Here is more information on the Atheros chipsets used inside the WD routers:

    These routers hit the FCC months ago under Alpha Networks' grantee code (RRK).

    The N600 and N750 are Atheros based (AR9344 + AR9382 [N600] or AR9380 [N750]). The N900 routers are Ubicom IP8k based with AR9380 and AR9381 Mini PCIe modules.

    (all credit goes to a guy on Ars)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now