The Best Wi-Fi Router (for Most People)

After more than 200 total hours researching and testing 21 Wi-Fi routers and taking into account reader comments and feedback, the $100 TP-Link Archer C7 (v2) is the router we recommend for most people right now. Over the last 10 months, we’ve tested this dual-band, three-stream wireless-ac router against many different routers across many testing types and locations. Across most of our tests, we found that the Archer C7 was the top-performing router, often by huge margins.

Last Updated: May 20, 2015
According to a new security advisory, 92 different routers from 26 vendors are potentially affected by a vulnerability related to their USB port sharing—including our main pick, TP-Link's Archer C7, and other recommended routers, TP-Link's Archer C8, and Netgear's Nighthawk R7000. Check your router manufacturer's support pages for firmware to fix the exploit (TP-Link already has one for v2 of our pick and many of its other routers). If your manufacturer doesn't have a fix ready, try disabling your router's USB functionality via its Web-based UI (if you can) and blocking port 20005 using your router's firewall. (Each router manufacturer handles port blocking differently, so you'll want to look up how to do it.) If you're a Netgear owner, you'll have to wait, as Netgear routers can only be fixed with a firmware update.
Expand Most Recent Updates
The best part of our pick is that the C7 usually costs between $80 and $100. That’s the same price as many older, slower routers, but it’s cheaper, faster, and able to cover a larger area than many routers that cost $150 or even $200. It supports the top speeds of the latest wireless standard—wireless-ac—which means that any devices you connect to it will run as fast as they can. There’s no other router that does that and is as cheap as the Archer C7—it just so happens that the Archer C7 is one of the best-performing routers, too.

You won’t find a faster router than the Archer C7 for less, and you’ll have to spend a lot more money to get a better one.


Our pick
TP-LINK Archer C7
The Archer C7 is cheaper, faster, and able to cover a large area better than many routers that cost twice as much. It's good for larger apartments and multi-room houses.
$96* on Amazon
*At the time of publishing, the price was $90.

Our pick comes with the features most people need (and a few more): Gigabit Ethernet ports, USB file sharing and media streaming, parental controls, and guest networks. But it’s missing some advanced features, like Quality of Service, an iTunes server, and a VPN server (which most people will never miss). In general, its user interface is a lot harder to use than the competition. Fortunately, the initial setup process is easy, and most people don’t use their router’s interface after that.


$130* on Amazon
*At the time of publishing, the price was $115.

The runner-up
TP-LINK Archer C8
The Archer C8 is more expensive than the C7, but its speed performance is about the same. Its user interface is better, though, and it has USB 3.0 ports.
If the C7 is sold out or you just can’t find it, TP-Link’s follow-up to the Archer C7, its new Archer C8, is our runner-up choice that addresses some of our issues with our pick’s paltry user interface. But unless you plan to spend a lot of time in its configuration screen (you likely won’t), or plan to make ample use of its USB 3.0 ports, we don’t think the $15-40 price difference between it and our pick is worth it for most average users.

Our main pick (the C7) also outperformed the Archer C8 in most of our tests, and Wirecutter readers told us that performance was a top priority. However, the Archer C8’s speed and range still beats many other routers that are $50 to $75 more expensive. Though we prefer the Archer C7 for its performance (and cost), the Archer C8 is a great backup choice if you can’t find the Archer C7, if its price skyrockets, or if you find a great deal and can get the Archer C8 for less than our pick.

Also Great

$182* on Amazon
*At the time of publishing, the price was $198.

The upgrade
NETGEAR Nighthawk R7000
Netgear's R7000 has strong performance and killer features. However, it costs almost twice as much as what experts told us you should be paying for a router right now.
If you don’t mind spending more and you need good speed, range and fancy features, get the Netgear Nighthawk R7000 for around $180. It performed the best in SmallNetBuilder’s benchmarks for AC1900 routers (and even better than more expensive routers). Reviewers praise its raw speed and comprehensive feature set, which includes a built-in VPN server to secure your coffee shop browsing, a QoS feature to prioritize your network’s traffic, and support for Time Machine backups (a good choice for an Apple household). It also has better parental controls and faster USB ports than the Archer C7.

However, the R7000 costs almost twice as much as the Archer C7, and our main pick was faster in most of our tests. You shouldn’t spend close to $200 on a router unless you plan to use those extra features a lot, especially because new, faster top-end routers are coming in mid-2015.

Also great

$25 deposit on T-Mobile
A crazy deal for some people
T-Mobile Personal CellSpot
This modified version of Asus's RT-AC68U is almost as fast as our best router pick. It comes with a few more features and its user interface is a lot cleaner and easier to manage, but only T-Mobile subscribers can get one.
There’s one other router that rivals the speed, range, and price of the Archer C7, but it’s only available in the US—and only for T-Mobile SimpleChoice cell phone subscribers.

If that’s you, you should call T-Mobile and order its Personal Cellspot router. This is a modified version of one of the fastest AC1900 routers, Asus’s RT-AC68U, and it only costs you a $25 deposit. That’s an insane price for a router that normally goes for $200. It’s almost as fast as our pick, but its user interface is a lot easier to navigate and it comes with a few more useful features (though not all of the ones found on Asus’s actual RT-AC68U).

But for most people, the Archer C7 is the best wireless-ac router because it supports all your devices at their top speeds. It’s a better router than anything else in its price range, and it’s even better than very good routers that cost twice as much.

Table of contents

Who should (and shouldn’t) buy this
How we picked
How we tested
Our pick
Features
Flaws but not dealbreakers
The runner-up
The upgrade pick
Also great (for T-Mobile subscribers)
The competition
Care/maintenance
What to look forward to
Wrapping it up

Who should (and shouldn’t) buy this

If you have a mental map of the wireless dead zones around your house or apartment, it’s time to get a new router. If you’re reading this, that probably means it’s time.

You should get a new router if you’re still using the one your ISP gave you when you signed up for your Internet service—or, worse, one from 2007 or earlier. Our pick will give you two Wi-Fi bands, which can help if your neighbors are saturating your area with their own networks. Its range is much greater than that of older routers, so it’ll hit more parts of your house. Its maximum wireless-n speeds are six times faster than your pre-2007 router, and its maximum wireless-ac speeds are 24 times faster.

Even if you have a more recent wireless-n router, and no wireless-ac devices yet, you should consider upgrading your router. Newer routers like the Archer C7 have faster processors, better antennas, and more memory, which give you better performance and more Wi-Fi range, even for your old devices. If you have wireless-ac devices, our pick is a no-brainer—it supports the fastest speeds for any wireless-ac device you can buy right now.

If you already have a wireless-ac router and you’re happy with the range and speeds that you get already, you likely don’t need to upgrade.
If you already have a wireless-ac router and you’re happy with the range and speeds that you get already, you likely don’t need to upgrade. If you don’t own any wireless-ac devices, if you only need to cover a small area (like a one-bedroom apartment), or if you’re on a tight budget, you should consider our cheap router pick instead. If you need a router that’s as easy to use as it is fast, or if you want QoS or a VPN server, you should get our step-up router pick—although it’s twice as expensive.

If you know you want a high-end router with advanced features, though, consider waiting a few months. Routers that support the next version of wireless-ac — which comes with more advanced features and higher speed for supported devices—should arrive in early-to-mid 2015. It’s not yet clear how much better they’ll be for the devices you already have, but it does mean today’s expensive routers (like our step-up pick) should be cheaper soon. However, for most people, the $87 Archer C7 will be fast and capable enough to last you for years.

How we picked

Wireless-ac, or IEEE 802.11ac, is the latest mainstream Wi-Fi version. It’s the new standard in many laptops, smartphones, and tablets from 2013 and later, including many of our recommendations at the Wirecutter. New MacBooks and high-end Windows laptops have wireless-ac, and so do almost all flagship smartphones from the past year: the iPhone 6, HTC One, Moto X, Samsung Galaxy S5, and more.

Unless you go very cheap, your next gadget with Wi-Fi will probably have wireless-ac. If your router and device both support wireless-ac, their connection will be much faster than if one or both only supports wireless-n.

Our Wi-Fi router pick is dual-band, which means it supports both 2.4GHz and 5GHz signals. Every wireless device you own works with the 2.4GHz band—even wireless-ac devices (though not at their top speeds). However, this broad compatibility is also its Achilles’ Heel. Because so many things transmit in the 2.4GHz range, wireless interference from other Wi-Fi routers and Bluetooth devices, as well as microwaves and cordless phones, can affect your router’s signals.

The 5GHz band (used by wireless-n and -ac) is less crowded and can be much faster, but it can have worse range than 2.4GHz and not every device supports it. Any router you buy should be dual-band: a 2.4GHz band for wireless-n and earlier, and a 5GHz band for wireless-n and -ac.

Our pick supports three spatial streams (also called data streams) on each band. The vast majority of laptops, phones and tablets support one or two streams; high-end laptops like the MacBook Pro support three. You’ll get the best performance when your router supports at least as many streams as your devices—and if your devices and routers support wireless-ac, since a wireless-ac stream is almost three times as fast as wireless-n stream. Our pick is a three-stream wireless-ac router: any device you own is going to get the fastest connection it can handle1.

Don’t be fooled by router labelling. An amazing N600 router (a wireless-n router that supports two 150 Mbps wireless-n spatial streams on both 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands) can give you better speed and range than an okay N900 router (which supports three). The extra speed from an N900 router’s extra stream won’t matter if your devices only supports one or two streams.

The same is mostly true for wireless-ac routers, but it gets complicated. For example, today’s AC3200 routers run two different 5GHz Wi-Fi networks at the same time—clients are assigned to one or the other based on how much bandwidth they use. AC3200 is a big number, but these routers might not give you better speed or range than a stronger AC1750 router. They’re designed for situations where around ten (or more) devices of varying wireless configurations are all fighting for bandwidth—like in a super-geeky household or a coworking space. For most people with simpler needs, AC3200 routers aren’t worth the extra $150 or $200.

Four-stream AC2350 routers will probably be faster than our three-stream pick once somebody makes a four-stream device—or when manufacturers enable multi-user multiple-input multiple-output (MU-MIMO) on these routers. However, we don’t yet know how today’s devices will perform with these $250+ routers, so we don’t recommend purchasing them right now. You might be paying extra for performance that isn’t any better than our picks in this guide.

We began our router research a year or so ago by taking a look at the three fastest routers in each of the wireless-ac speed classes, based on SmallNetBuilder’s tests. This let us narrow the field to a total of 13 semifinalists, which we pared down to four finalists by comparing their performance and price, as well as their reviews from CNET, PCWorld, PCMag.com, and TrustedReviews:

AC1600 — Netgear R6250 ($130)
AC1200 — Asus RT-AC56U ($105)
AC1750 — Asus RT-AC66U ($165)
AC1750 — TP-Link Archer C7 (v2) ($87)
When we last updated this guide in June 2014, we chose the Netgear R6250 as our top pick because it had a great combination of speed, features, and an easy-to-use interface. At the time, we acknowledged that it wasn’t the fastest router we had tested—that was the TP-Link Archer C7 (v2), which we recommended as a step-down pick for people more interested in performance than features and usability.

As a number of you told us via comments and emails, you are more interested in performance.
As a number of you told us via comments and emails, you are more interested in performance. We also heard from some people who weren’t happy with the R6250’s range, and some who had trouble when connecting to the router with multiple devices. At the same time, the price for Netgear’s R6300v2 dropped enough to make it a viable alternative to the R6250, so we started testing it as a potential replacement pick—comparing it against its predecessor and the Archer C7.

We also retested the Archer C7 against our $60 cheap router pick and our $75 cheap wireless-ac router, as well as the Netgear Nighthawk R7000, and Asus’s $200 RT-AC68U in the form of the absurdly inexpensive T-Mobile Personal CellSpot (basically free for T-Mobile subscribers). Just before we published that update, TP-Link released the Archer C8, a $120 AC1750 followup to the Archer C7, so we tested that too.

From left to right, the six routers we tested in fall 2014 are TP-Link's TL-WDR3600, Edimax's BR-6478AC, Netgear's R6250, Netgear's R6300v2, TP-Link's Archer C7, and T-Mobile's Personal Cellspot. Not pictured: Apple Airport Extreme, Netgear R7000, TP-Link Archer C8.
From left to right, the six routers we tested in fall 2014 are TP-Link’s TL-WDR3600, Edimax’s BR-6478AC, Netgear’s R6250, Netgear’s R6300v2, TP-Link’s Archer C7, and T-Mobile’s Personal Cellspot. Not pictured: Apple Airport Extreme, Netgear R7000, TP-Link Archer C8.

How we tested

We’ve tested routers in a variety of different configurations over the past year, but the core concept remains the same: Short- and long-range tests of routers’ performance on their 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.

Before November 2014, we put each router in the same location and set up four client testing spots in a 2,577-foot, one-story house. The closest test station was six feet from the router with a clear line of sight. The farthest was 63 feet away with walls, hallways, and whole rooms between the router and the laptop. We also measured two test locations in between the short- and long-range test spots just in case we didn’t get conclusive results from our primary testing.

We recently changed the locations of our router and clients since we were having trouble connecting to any routers’ 5GHz networks at our previous long-distance test location (#4). Our four new test stations consisted of two locations within sight of the router (at 11 feet and 43 feet), and two test stations blocked by walls, rooms, and other objects (at 13 feet and 43 feet).

We've labeled this top-down sketch of our house with the locations of our router, and clients, for both our older testing setup (pre-November 2014) and our latest testing setup. The drawing isn't perfectly to scale, but it's a close approximation of the various rooms, closets, and walls that our routers' signals have to pass through.
We’ve labeled this top-down sketch of our house with the locations of our router, and clients, for both our older testing setup (pre-November 2014) and our latest testing setup. The drawing isn’t perfectly to scale, but it’s a close approximation of the various rooms, closets, and walls that our routers’ signals have to pass through.
We didn’t disable our house’s existing wireless network when testing, but we changed its broadcast channels so that it wouldn’t interfere with the signals from the routers we tested. This let us see how the routers would handle nearby wireless networks2—like you’d see in an apartment complex or even a suburban neighborhood—without overwhelming them with interfering signals.

We tested the routers using Jperf. The server was a desktop PC connected to each router via gigabit Ethernet, and we used a mix of three clients across various iterations of our testing: a 2012 MacBook Air using Asus’s USB-AC56 two-stream wireless-ac adapter, the MacBook Air’s two-stream wireless-n Wi-Fi connection, and a 2014 MacBook Air’s two-stream wireless-ac Wi-Fi connection.

We ran each test multiple times for each router, on each band, at each test location. Most routers can make their 2.4GHz bands run twice as fast by broadcasting the signal across twice as many channels (40MHz mode). Most default to 20MHz, however—and that’s how we’re now testing them.

We also ran Jperf tests to simulate five clients connecting simultaneously —like when you and your housemates surf the Web, stream movies, and play games at the same time. We wanted to see how the routers might handle the increased workload, and whether this networking stress test would reduce the variability we often see between test runs at the same location.

Since we’re testing in the real world, external variables (competing signals, walls, network traffic) affect our results—just like they can affect yours. The purpose of our testing was not to choose a router that’s slightly faster than another; it was to see which routers could deliver consistently strong performance without issues.

We always use our picks for months to get a sense of their reliability, but it’s impossible to come to a direct conclusion based on our individual experiences. That’s why we also look at user reviews on Amazon and Newegg. If a lot of people are having the same problems, they’ll show up in the reviews.

Our pick


Our pick
TP-LINK Archer C7
The Archer C7 is cheaper, faster, and able to cover a large area better than many routers that cost twice as much. It's good for larger apartments and multi-room houses.
$96* on Amazon
*At the time of publishing, the price was $90.

The Archer C7 was the top-performing router across most of our individual tests, often by a lot.
The TP-Link Archer C7 (v2) emerged from our testing as the best router for most people. We’ve tested the Archer C7 against different combinations of routers, at different times, using different setups, for almost an entire year In each testing arrangement, the Archer C7 was the top-performing router across most of our individual tests, often by a lot.

The TP-Link Archer C7 is by far the best router for the money.
The C7 has the performance and range of routers that cost $200 or more, but it usually costs $100 and can often be found for less. It gave a working signal across the entire 2,577 square foot house we tested it in. The router’s user interface is unintuitive for anything but its basic setup, and it lacks a number of fancy features, but it’s by far the best router for the money. Just make sure you’re getting a v2 router. Amazon and Newegg purchasers reported big connectivity issues with the v1 router.

The Archer C7 is one of the larger routers we've tested. It's also prone to smudges and fingerprints as a result of its black, glossy exterior.
The Archer C7 is one of the larger routers we’ve tested. It’s also prone to smudges and fingerprints as a result of its black, glossy exterior.
Using our older test configuration, we compared the Archer C7 to our previous pick, Netgear’s R6250, as well its successor, the R6300v2, and both our Cheap Router main pick and runner-up. The Archer C7 ended up beating all four other routers at long range (on both 2.4GHz and 5GHz) when we used a wireless-n MacBook Air and Asus USB-AC56U AC1200 adapter as the clients. At short range, it tied the R6250 for the highest throughput.

Wireless-n MacBook Air (Older Testing Location #1—Short
Range)
Netgear
R6250
Netgear
R6300
TP-Link TL-
WDR3600
TP-Link
Archer C7
Edimax
BR-6478AC
2.4GHz (20MHz)
5GHz
0
10
20
30
40
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Netgear R6250 Netgear R6300 TP-Link TL-WDR3600 TP-Link Archer C7 Edimax BR-6478AC
2.4GHz (20MHz) 6.9 5.8 11.1 37.3 11.6
5GHz 10 31.2
AC1200 Adapter (Older Testing Location #1—Short Range)
Netgear
R6250
Netgear
R6300
TP-Link TL-
WDR3600
TP-Link
Archer C7
Edimax
BR-6478AC
2.4GHz (20MHz)
5GHz
100
200
300
400
500
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Netgear R6250 Netgear R6300 TP-Link TL-WDR3600 TP-Link Archer C7 Edimax BR-6478AC
2.4GHz (20MHz) 178.3 135.3 173 176.3 106.6
5GHz 389 422.8 176.8 410.5 268.5
AC1200 Adapter (Older Testing Location #4—Long Range)
Netgear
R6250
Netgear
R6300
TP-Link TL-
WDR3600
TP-Link
Archer C7
Edimax
BR-6478AC
2.4GHz (20MHz)
5GHz
0
40
80
120
160
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Netgear R6250 Netgear R6300 TP-Link TL-WDR3600 TP-Link Archer C7 Edimax BR-6478AC
2.4GHz (20MHz) 14.5 34.5 21.8 85.8 31.6
5GHz 60.9 81.7 75.1 140 72.8
We later tested the Archer C7 against T-Mobile’s Personal Cellspot (a modified Asus RT-AC68U), Netgear’s R7000, and the Archer C8, TP-Link’s followup to the C7. The Archer C7 was still the fastest router on a majority of our single-client tests. It did not have amazing performance on 2.4GHz bands out of line of sight and at long range, but it delivered the best 5GHz speeds, and its worst 2.4GHz signal was still over 22Mbps—faster than most peoples’ home internet connection and seven times faster than a 1080p Netflix stream.

Wireless-ac MacBook Air (Newer Testing Location #1—
Short Range, Line of Sight)
Asus RT-
AC68U
Netgear
R7000
TP-Link
Archer C7
TP-Link
Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz)
5GHz
0
150
300
450
600
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Asus RT-AC68U Netgear R7000 TP-Link Archer C7 TP-Link Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz) 76.9 69 85.4 61.1
5GHz 333.5 461.5 522.5 494
Wireless-ac MacBook Air (Newer Testing Location #2—Long
Range, Line of Sight)
Asus RT-
AC68U
Netgear
R7000
TP-Link
Archer C7
TP-Link
Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz)
5GHz
0
100
200
300
400
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Asus RT-AC68U Netgear R7000 TP-Link Archer C7 TP-Link Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz) 67.2 68.9 87.7 66.6
5GHz 226.5 243.5 345.5 289
Wireless-ac MacBook Air (Newer Testing Location #3—Long
Range, No Line of Sight)
Asus RT-
AC68U
Netgear
R7000
TP-Link
Archer C7
TP-Link
Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz)
5GHz
10
25
40
55
70
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Asus RT-AC68U Netgear R7000 TP-Link Archer C7 TP-Link Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz) 42.2 34.2 22.1 38.4
5GHz 60 63.5 69.2 68.5
Wireless-ac MacBook Air (Newer Testing Location #4—
Short Range, No Line of Sight)
Asus RT-
AC68U
Netgear
R7000
TP-Link
Archer C7
TP-Link
Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz)
5GHz
20
90
160
230
300
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Asus RT-AC68U Netgear R7000 TP-Link Archer C7 TP-Link Archer C8
2.4GHz (20MHz) 70.8 70.4 82.6 63.5
5GHz 262 219 236 207
The Archer C7 did well for multi-client testing, either outperforming the other routers or coming just shy of the top router at a given location. Its performance was also pretty consistent across most of our tests. This is important. You’ll have a better experience with a router that’s great most of the time than one that’s amazing some of the time and crappy the rest.

Features

For most people, a router’s performance is more important than advanced features they may never use.
For most people, a router’s performance is more important than advanced features they may never use. The Archer C7 comes with decent extras for its price, but its complex user interface makes them hard to set up.

The Archer C7 covers the basics, unlike many cheaper routers. It comes with four Gigabit ports (1,000 Mbps maximum), the fastest wired connection type. You shouldn’t tolerate anything slower. The router also has a physical switch for turning your Wi-Fi on and off, as well as a WPS button that you can use to add new devices to your Wi-Fi network (though you should really stick to passphrases instead).

We wish TP-Link included a USB 3.0 port in the Archer C7. Otherwise, its physical connections are pretty standard and easy to access.
We wish TP-Link included a USB 3.0 port in the Archer C7. Otherwise, its physical connections are pretty standard and easy to access.
The Archer C7’s two USB 2.0 ports let you share storage devices and printers with PCs and devices on your network. A built-in DLNA media server lets you stream media from your USB storage to set-top boxes, gaming consoles, and televisions. If you don’t want certain people to be able to access your files, you can even restrict access with (rudimentary) user accounts.

“C7’s NAS and print services are sufficient but not quite as rich as what Netgear offers with its ReadyShare and ReadyPrint services in routers such as the Nighthawk,” writes PCMag.com’s Samara Lynn.

The Archer C7 supports one guest network per wireless band. You can control the times these guest networks are active (for added security), and you can limit the total bandwidth guests eat up (so they don’t kill your party’s Netflix stream). Parental controls are present, but limited. We prefer the OpenDNS-based parental controls that Netgear uses in its routers, since they’re more comprehensive, automatic, and easier to use.

Text, text, and more text. The complicated user interface for TP-Link's Archer C7 could use icons, graphics, and a lot more hand-holding.
Text, text, and more text. The complicated user interface for TP-Link’s Archer C7 could use icons, graphics, and a lot more hand-holding.
There are plenty of other settings within the Archer C7’s “utilitarian and entirely text-based” interface, as Lynn describes it. Even though TP-Link provides descriptions for its settings in a sidebar, the entire package feels overwhelming. You can try installing a third-party firmware like DD-WRT to get a simpler UI (and add in support for QoS), but doing so will void your warranty. It’s also hard to figure out whether DD-WRT works perfectly with TP-Link’s router, so be sure you read up on how to flash it back to TP-Link’s firmware if you aren’t thrilled with the results.

Flaws but not dealbreakers

Our pick’s chief flaw is its poor UI—especially when it comes to advanced features.
Our pick’s chief flaw is its poor UI—especially when it comes to advanced features. It’s easy to set up the router for basic use, buts the rest of the Archer C7’s UI is text-heavy and confusing. You can’t do everything you’d like within the router’s configuration—the router’s parental controls aren’t very good compared to those of typical Netgear routers, for example. And router settings that require you to target a particular PC force you to identify devices by their MAC addresses—their unique, 12-digit network identifiers. You can copy and paste these MAC addresses from a buried menu within TP-Link’s UI, but it would be a lot easier if the router let you select devices using a simpler technique (like a drop-down menu).

Unlike competing routers, the Archer C7 lacks a Quality of Service feature (QoS), which you can use to keep high-bandwidth applications like BitTorrent from ruining your Hulu streaming or online gaming. The Archer C7 also lacks an iTunes server. We wish the Archer C7 came with USB 3.0 ports so we could get faster file transfers for USB storage.

We’ve been using the Archer C7 for several months without problems, but our own experiences with a router aren’t enough to assess its reliability. For that, we turn to user reviews on sites like Amazon and Newegg—if a router has a significant issue or is generally unstable for those who buy it, it usually shows up in buyer reviews.

On Amazon, the Archer C7 has a 3.9 star rating, with 71 percent of 557 total reviewers assigning it a four- or a five-star rating. Competing routers like Asus’s RT-AC68U have slightly better ratings (4.1) and many more reviews (1,000+), but TP-Link isn’t the most well-known brand. We don’t feel that TP-Link’s scores (or reviews) indicate any reliability issues beyond the scattered problems reported by buyers of any router: connection loss, poor signal strength, lousy range, et cetera.

Amazon’s reviews also don’t distinguish between the first and second versions of the Archer C7, which might be pulling down its score, since the first version had problems connecting with MacBooks. On Newegg, the router has a three-egg rating with 170 total reviews. Within the last six months, 35 reviewers gave the Archer C7 an average rating of just around 3.4 stars. Complaints centered on common issues we’ve previously mentioned: connection struggles, the router requiring a lot of rebooting to work properly, or the router dying after a short period of use.

We were concerned that some Amazon and Newegg reviewers reported receiving the router’s older “v1″ version. That’s a big deal, due to the aforementioned connection issues. Once you receive the Archer C7, check the router’s base to ensure that it’s a “v2″ version—if not, return it and make sure they send you the right router next time. Above all else, don’t be afraid to set up an RMA with TP-Link—or just return it —if you’re experiencing any issues with your Archer C7. Anyone can get a bad router, regardless of brand.

The runner-up: TP-Link Archer C8


$130* on Amazon
*At the time of publishing, the price was $115.

The runner-up
TP-LINK Archer C8
The Archer C8 is more expensive than the C7, but its speed performance is about the same. Its user interface is better, though, and it has USB 3.0 ports.
The Archer C8 is TP-Link’s vertical followup to the horizontal Archer C7. Its user interface is better than our pick’s, and it also comes with USB 3.0 ports instead of USB 2.0 for faster transfers to connected storage. However, we’ve seen the Archer C8 priced up to $40 more than our primary pick, the C7, and the Archer C8’s wireless speeds weren’t as fast as its predecessor on most of our tests either.

You’re going to spend a lot more time connecting to your router’s Wi-Fi networks than rummaging through its configuration screens or sharing files on USB-connected storage. Most people are more likely to plug in our pick, change its Wi-Fi networks’ names (and passwords), and leave the router otherwise untouched.

TP-Link abandons the horizontal design of its Archer C7 for a vertical style on its Archer C8. Also, the all-white router looks a lot prettier than its older counterpart.
TP-Link abandons the horizontal design of its Archer C7 for a vertical style on its Archer C8. Also, the all-white router looks a lot prettier than its older counterpart.
TP-Link borrowed an idea from Netgear by splitting the Archer C8's Web UI into "basic" and "advanced" modes. There are still some quirks, however; we prefer the Web UI of a typical Netgear or Asus router.
TP-Link borrowed an idea from Netgear by splitting the Archer C8’s Web UI into “basic” and “advanced” modes. There are still some quirks, however; we prefer the web UI of a typical Netgear or Asus router.
The Archer C7 is a better router for most people—cheaper, too. The Archer C8 still outperforms most other routers that are just as expensive (and then some). We wouldn’t hesitate to get it if our main pick was unavailable, more expensive, or if we found a great deal for the Archer C8 that dropped its price below our primary pick’s.

The upgrade pick: Netgear’s R7000

Also Great

$182* on Amazon
*At the time of publishing, the price was $198.

The upgrade
NETGEAR Nighthawk R7000
Netgear's R7000 has strong performance and killer features. However, it costs almost twice as much as what experts told us you should be paying for a router right now.
If you want a router that’s as full-featured as it is fast and don’t mind paying nearly twice as much for it, we recommend the Netgear Nighthawk R7000. It’s the fastest AC1900 router at SmallNetBuilder, beating the performance of the Asus RT-AC68U—its main competition—for both wireless-n and wireless-ac. Though our hands-on testing found that these two routers were evenly matched, the RT-AC68U typically costs more.

You shouldn’t get either of these AC1900 routers if you only care about wireless performance.
That said, you shouldn’t get either of these AC1900 routers if you only care about wireless performance. You should get them if you plan to use their many features, the only real advantage either has over our main router pick. The Archer C7 outperformed or matched both on most of our tests, and it costs a lot less.

Also, if you can get the RT-AC68U for a lot less than the R7000 (say, $25-50 less), there’s no reason to hold out for Netgear’s router. We’d pick it over Asus’s router if they were the same price, but they’re both pretty fast and come with great features.

We couldn’t pick a clear winner when we tested the R7000 against the RT-AC68U. Each outperformed the other on the same number of tests. CNET’s Dong Ngo came to a similar conclusion: “Overall, despite higher specs, the R7000 (powered by a 1GHz processor) is slightly slower than its Asus counterpart (powered by a 800MHz processor), but only within the margin of error. The two routers are by far the fastest on the market.”

The two routers have mostly the same features. However, PCWorld’s Michael Brown found that the R7000’s QoS and parental controls are a bit better than Asus’s router (we think they’re a big improvement over our best router pick, too). Ngo also highlighted the R7000’s support for Time Machine backups, its ReadyShare Vault backup software, iTunes streaming support, and built-in OpenVPN server—none of which are available on the Archer C7. TrustedReviews’ Gordon Kelly praised the router’s DDNS support, which simplifies your ability to connect to the router’s built-in FTP and OpenVPN servers remotely. While the R7000 lacks cloud features like those found in Asus’s router, which let you easily access your home network and USB devices connected to the router while you’re on the go, it’s the R7000’s only major omission.

Roughly the same percentage of all Amazon and Newegg reviewers liked the R7000 and the RT-AC68U: 76 percent rated Netgear’s router with a four- or five-star review, and 77 percent rated Asus’s similarly. As for Newegg, just around 57-60 percent of reviewers rated the routers with four- or five-star reviews. While we did see reports about connectivity issues for both the R7000 and RT-AC68U, it was no more or less than we see for any router. As always, don’t be afraid to return or RMA your router purchase if it isn’t performing up to your standards.

Also great (for T-Mobile subscribers)

Also great

$25 deposit on T-Mobile
A crazy deal for some people
T-Mobile Personal CellSpot
This modified version of Asus's RT-AC68U is almost as fast as our best router pick. It comes with a few more features and its user interface is a lot cleaner and easier to manage, but only T-Mobile subscribers can get one.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, call them right now and order the Personal Cellspot. The carrier offers this modified Asus RT-AC68U to its subscribers for a $25 deposit to go with the the Wi-Fi Calling feature on T-Mobile’s new phones (the router prioritizes those calls over other network traffic). This router is almost as powerful as our main pick, but it has a better interface and some more useful features— CNET’s Dong Ngo calls it “one of the best home Wi-Fi routers on the market.”

The Personal Cellspot is covered in branding, but we wouldn't care if T-Mobile painted the entire thing pink. It's "free," it's fast, and it's a great benefit for T-Mobile subscribers.
The Personal Cellspot is covered in branding, but we wouldn’t care if T-Mobile painted the entire thing pink. It’s “free,” it’s fast, and it’s a great benefit for T-Mobile subscribers.
The bad news is that only T-Mobile subscribers can get this router. When the router first launched, T-Mobile told us that non-subscribers could get it for $100; they have since changed this policy. Last November, a T-Mobile representative told us: “T-Mobile’s Personal CellSpot is available to any qualifying post-paid customer who has a Wi-Fi Calling-enabled device and broadband with just a $25 deposit. The CellSpot is also available for sale to those customers who would like to purchase one for $99.”

When we tested the T-Mobile Personal Cellspot, we found that the Archer C7 was generally faster. It wasn’t a blowout, but our pick was faster up close and at a distance when tested with individual clients; Asus’s router was a bit faster for multiple simultaneous clients.

2014 MacBook Air (wireless-ac)
T-Mobile Cellspot
TP-Link Archer C7
Location #1:…
Location #1:…
Location #1:…
Location #4:…
Location #4:…
Location #4:…
0
80
160
240
320
400
Speed (Mbps)
T-Mobile Cellspot TP-Link Archer C7
Location #1: 2.4GHz (20MHz) 98 Mbps 116 Mbps
Location #1: 2.4GHz (40MHz) 108 Mbps 115 Mbps
Location #1: 5GHz 332 Mbps 392 Mbps
Location #4: 2.4GHz (20MHz) 53 Mbps 55 Mbps
Location #4: 2.4GHz (40MHz) 58 Mbps 60 Mbps
Location #4: 5GHz 26 Mbps
Not every feature on the Asus RT-AC68U is on the T-Mobile version. There’s no AiCloud service or download master, but at least T-Mobile left in the router’s VPN server. You aren’t going to find that feature in most other $100 routers; you can’t even find it in our $173 step-up pick, Netgear’s R7000.

The difference between the user interfaces for the T-Mobile Personal Cellspot and the TP-Link Archer C7 are like night and day.
The difference between the user interfaces for the T-Mobile Personal Cellspot and the TP-Link Archer C7 are like night and day.
The router comes with a USB 3.0 port, giving you faster file transfers to and from USB 3.0 flash drives or portable hard drives. Unlike our pick, it also has an iTunes server, QoS, and two extra guest networks. The router makes it super easy to switch between its normal routing mode, an access point mode, and a media bridge mode. However, Asus’s parental controls aren’t great. Websites you restrict are blocked for everyone who connects to to the router (you can’t whitelist systems).

If the T-Mobile CellSpot were easier to get, it’d be a no-brainer. As is, our main pick is better because of its wider availability and stronger performance.

The competition

Netgear’s R6300v2 ($140) performed better at long range for 2.4GHz than our previous best router pick, Netgear’s R6250. However, the Archer C7 was around six times faster on the same test, and it delivered a working 5GHz signal at range where the R6300v2 could not. The Netgear has a better user interface, but you’re better off with the Archer C7 or Archer C8 even if the R6300v2 goes on steep sale.

Our previous best Wi-Fi router pick, Netgear’s R6250 ($130), has the same user interface as the R6300v2. We don’t think its features are worth the extra price and worse performance compared to the Archer C7. When we tested both with our wireless-ac adapter, our pick was more than twice as fast as the R6250 on 2.4GHz and 5GHz; when we switched to our wireless-n laptop, our pick was six times as fast.

Asus’s RT-AC56U ($105) also has a great user interface (the same as T-Mobile’s Personal Cellspot), but its wireless performance couldn’t come close to the Archer C7’s. We also had problems with this AC1200 router’s 2.4GHz signal during our testing for the last update of this piece. Asus claims to have fixed these with a firmware update, but the C7 is still a much better router for less.

Asus’s RT-AC66U ($165) is a good, solid router with a lot of positive user reviews and a much better user interface than our pick, but it’s a lot more expensive and just isn’t as fast. We doubt this router will ever be cheap enough to rival our pick (or alternate options).

AC1200 Adapter (6 Feet From Router, Line of Sight)
Netgear
R6250
Asus RT-
AC56U
Asus RT-
AC66U
TP-Link
Archer C7
2.4GHz (Default Settings)
5GHz
20
140
260
380
500
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Netgear R6250 Asus RT-AC56U Asus RT-AC66U TP-Link Archer C7
2.4GHz (Default Settings) 76.5 43.95 78.15 93.25
5GHz 436.5 442 400.5 374.5
AC1200 Adapter (48 Feet From Router, No Line of Sight)
Netgear
R6250
Asus RT-
AC56U
Asus RT-
AC66U
TP-Link
Archer C7
2.4GHz (Default Settings)
5GHz
0
60
120
180
240
Wireless Bands
Average Speed (in Mbps)
Netgear R6250 Asus RT-AC56U Asus RT-AC66U TP-Link Archer C7
2.4GHz (Default Settings) 39.45 31.4 64.4 73.7
5GHz 106.5 92.5 99.25 213.5
Apple’s Airport Extreme ($185) performed well on our benchmarks, but our pick—at half the price—was faster on almost every single test. The Airport Extreme has good reviews, is easy to set up and comes with a few Apple-exclusive features, but it costs too much and you need a clunky utility to configure it with Windows computers. It’s also missing DLNA streaming from USB storage, parental controls, 40MHz channels on 2.4GHz, QoS, and VPN support (connecting to one and running as a VPN server are both omitted). Also absent are access logs, bandwidth limits, and any LEDs to show what Ethernet ports are connected or whether your Wi-Fi is transmitting data. It’s a decent choice for a small, all-Apple household that doesn’t need a lot of fancy features, but most people should look elsewhere.

The original four finalists for our best Wi-Fi router article were (from left to right): Asus' RT-AC66U, Netgear's R6250, TP-Link's Archer C7, and Asus' RT-AC56U.
The original four finalists for our best Wi-Fi router article were, from left to right, Asus’s RT-AC66U, Netgear’s R6250, TP-Link’s Archer C7, and Asus’s RT-AC56U.


The second batch of contenders, which Archer C7 outperformed when we benchmarked them at our older testing locations.
The second batch of contenders, which Archer C7 outperformed when we benchmarked them at our older testing locations.
TP-Link’s TL-WDR3600 ($53) is a great router that offers excellent wireless-n performance for its price, and it’s our pick for a cheap router. However, it’s not a wireless-ac router, so it’s much, much slower than our pick when you’re using a wireless-ac device. It’s a good choice if you need a strong, simple router to cover a moderately sized area, but our best router pick was three times as fast at range when tested with a wireless-n MacBook Air.

Our pick also outperformed our cheap router runner-up, Edimax’s wireless-ac BR-6478AC ($55). The Archer C7 was faster on all of our testing, and the difference was almost double at range when we used our USB wireless-ac adapter. Our pick could even deliver a working 5GHz signal to our wireless-n laptop at long distance; Edimax’s AC1200 router could not.

Like our cheap router pick, the BR-6478AC is a good choice if you just need simple wireless-ac connectivity over a smaller amount of space. It’ll give your wireless-ac devices a speed boost compared to your older wireless-n router, but it’s not going to be as fast as the Archer C7 for any three-stream wireless-ac devices you own (like a brand-new MacBook Pro).

None of the other routers we researched when making our best router semifinalist list beat the Archer C7’s performance, three-stream connectivity, and super-low price.

Care and maintenance

Change your router’s administrator password as soon as you’ve set up the router. Use WPA2-AES encryption for your Wi-Fi networks for the best speed and security. Update your router’s firmware as soon as you can, and check once every few months for the latest performance, security, and reliability updates.

Try to place your router in a central location in your house. Don’t put it near the front door and don’t just shove it somewhere in the basement. Connect to your 5GHz network instead of your 2.4GHz for better performance (at the expense of a little range), especially if you want to take advantage of wireless-ac speeds.

Most routers are pretty good at configuring critical settings automatically, but you should grab an app like Wi-Fi Analytics (PC/Android) or WiFi Explorer (Mac) to double-check. Look to see if competing wireless networks are present on channels 1, 6, and 11 on the 2.4GHz band, or if any Wi-Fi networks are on the 5GHz band. And be sure to walk around your home or apartment—wherever you mostly use your Wi-Fi networks—to see how the situation changes.

While your router should run your Wi-Fi networks on the least-populated channels for both 2.4GHz and 5GHz, you should set these channels manually if it’s doing a lousy job. Wi-Fi interference can affect your connection quality even if you have an awesome router, especially at the edges of your home where competing Wi-Fi signals can overpower your router’s.

Your router should also know when to use 40MHz channels or 20MHz channels for your 2.4GHz network. The former will get you better performance, but a good router won’t jump up to 40MHz if it detects competing wireless networks in range. If a bunch of other Wi-Fi networks are overlapping your big, 40MHz-wide Wi-Fi network, that could be a reason why your connection isn’t good or you’re having trouble connecting at range. Set your router to run at 20MHz on 2.4GHz (on the least-populated channel you can find), and you should have a better experience.

And, of course, if you feel your router is being a bit too strict with its interpretation of “competing wireless networks,” you can always try forcing 40MHz channels and see if that improves your performance.

What to look forward to

Expensive four-stream MU-MIMO routers and tri-band routers made up most of the major announcements at this year’s Consumer Electronics Show. Neither type is a good buy for most people right now.

MU-MIMO routers like D-Link’s DIR-885L/R, TP-Link’s Archer AC2600, Linksys’ EA8500, and Trendnet’s TEW-827DRU allow your router to send and transmit data with up to four devices simultaneously in perfect conditions. With today’s routers, devices have to wait their turn to talk to the router; MU-MIMO routers let them all talk at once. That should boost the wireless performance of connected clients over today’s SU-MIMO routers, but here’s the thing: We don’t really know how much better your speeds will get. There aren’t any MU-MIMO devices right now, and manufacturers haven’t enabled this feature on “MU-MIMO-ready” routers yet.

Normal dual-band routers have one 2.4GHz band and one 5GHz band; tri-band routers have the 2.4GHz band and two 5GHz bands. The tri-band routers announced at this year’s CES—like D-Link’s DIR-890L/R, TP-Link’s Archer C3200, and Trendnet’s TEW-828DRU—can give you a performance increase when lots of devices are connected at once. However, CNET’s Dong Ngo noted that these routers are only really helpful if “you have either multiple 5GHz clients of mixed Wi-Fi standards or just a lot of 802.11ac clients (say, a dozen or more).” And SmallNetBuilder found that Linksys’ EA9200 and Netgear’s R8000 tend to speed up already fast three-stream wireless-ac devices much more than others.

And then there’s D-Link DIR-895L/R router. The one looks like the little sibling of that evil talking ship from the first Mass Effect game, and it’s full of just as many surprises. The DIR-895L/R is a four-stream MU-MIMO router with tri-band functionality. It also uses a proprietary Broadcom technology called NitroQAM to boost your 2.4GHz network’s maximum speeds to 1,000 Mbps and up to 2,165 Mbps for each of your 5GHz Wi-Fi networks.

However, NitroQAM is irrelevant for anyone who doesn’t own a NitroQAM-enabled device—and there aren’t any. (Heck, the first USB adapter that supports Broadcom’s older TurboQAM functionality for AC1900 routers was just announced.) We’re willing to bet that this is going to be one of the most expensive routers you can get once D-Link announces the price. Though formidable, this AC5300 router is overkill for just about everyone.

We also saw two new touchscreen routers at this year’s CES: Securifi’s AC1750 Almond+ (which is also a Z-Wave home automation hub) and Amped Wireless’ AC750 TAP-R2. We’re intrigued by the concept of being able to edit your router’s settings without having to fire up a Web browser, but it’s not like this hasn’t been done before (to less-than-ideal results). The idea is fun, but a router’s speed and range are much more important.

Wrapping it up

The TP-Link Archer C7 can’t be beaten for the price. It’s the router we’d recommend to anyone who needs the best performance across the greatest distance. We’re not thrilled with its features or user interface, but these are sacrifices worth making for its great speeds across long ranges. If you want a slightly better UI and USB 3.0 ports, get the Archer C8 for a little more money. If you want more robust features and don’t mind spending nearly twice as much, get the Netgear Nighthawk R7000. And if you’re a T-Mobile customer, consider the Personal Cellspot. But for most people, the Archer C7 is the best router on the market.

Footnotes:


1. Think of the connection between your router and a device like a two-way road that’s always in use. Routers and devices that support multiple streams can pass data back and forth in multiple, simultaneous streams—which is like like adding new lanes to the road. It’s simple: More streams means faster potential speeds between your router and a device. Jump back.


2. We also identified other 2.4GHz wireless networks that were present during our testing. The quality of their signals varied during our tests (and at each test location). Jump back.

Source: www.thewirecutter.com