After putting in more than 250 total hours of research and testing, we recommend the $100 TP-Link Archer C7 (v2) router for most people right now. We tested it against more than 20 other routers over the past year and a half. Though this dual-band, three-stream wireless-ac router wasn’t always the fastest on every single one of our tests, it did provide great wireless performance and is offered at a super affordable price, which makes it an unbeatable value.
The Archer C7 usually costs between $80 and $100. That’s the same price as many older, slower routers, but it’s faster and able to cover a larger area than some routers that cost two to three times as much. 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 inexpensive as the Archer C7.
You won’t find a faster router than the Archer C7 for less, and you’ll have to spend more than half again to get a better one. For most people, the Archer C7 is good enough for everything you’re going to use it for.
Our pick is a great value for its wireless performance, and it comes with the basic features most people need: Gigabit Ethernet ports, USB file sharing and media streaming, parental controls, and guest networks. Though it’s missing some advanced features, like Quality of Service controls, an iTunes server, jumbo frames, and a VPN server, most people don’t use these. Its user interface is uglier than the competition, but the router’s initial setup process is easy. Most people don’t access their router’s UI very much after that (though you should, to check for and perform firmware updates).
Also Great
If the Archer C7 is sold out, its price skyrockets, or you just can’t find it, TP-Link’s follow-up, the Archer C8, is our runner-up choice. The Archer C8 addresses some of our issues with our pick’s user interface. However, unless you plan to spend a lot of time in its configuration screen (you probably won’t), or use its USB 3.0 ports a lot, these features aren’t worth the extra $10 or $20.
Our main pick was faster than the Archer C8 in most of our older tests (though the Archer C8’s speed and range still beat many other routers that are much more expensive), so we still recommend holding out for a C7 if you can.
Also Great
If you don’t mind spending more for great wireless-ac speeds, range, and fancy features, get the AC1750 Netgear R6400 for $150. It was faster than our pick on a majority of our latest wireless-ac tests. Even better, it has all the major features of our previous upgrade pick, the AC1900 Netgear Nighthawk R7000, but it costs less. (You don’t need an AC1900 router.1)
Unlike our pick, the R6400 has 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 (making it a good choice for an Apple household). The R6400 also has better parental controls and faster USB ports than the Archer C7.
If you don’t need that much Wi-Fi coverage, if you aren’t planning to do heavy file transfers around your network, or if you don’t have an incredibly fast Internet plan, our main pick is good enough. More expensive routers can be a little faster in certain situations, but the minor improvements aren’t worth the major price bump over our pick or the R6400.
Also great
There’s one other router that rivals the speed, range, and price of the Archer C7, but it’s available only 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 costs you only a $25 deposit. That’s an insane price for a router that normally goes for $200. It was almost as fast as our pick on our older tests, 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 the Asus-branded RT-AC68U).
Table of contents
Why you should trust us
Who this is for
How we picked
How we tested
Our pick
Who else likes it
Flaws but not dealbreakers
Care, setup, and maintenance
Runner-up
The upgrade pick
Also great (for T-Mobile subscribers)
The competition
What to look forward to
Wrapping it up
Why you should trust us
I have spent more than two years immersed in wireless networking testing and analysis for The Wirecutter. I’ve also tested everything from computer cases to network-attached storage in my decade-plus career as a tech journalist for Maximum PC (formerly an associate editor), PCWorld (formerly a contributing editor), Computer Shopper, PCMag, Laptop Magazine, Tom’s Hardware, PC Gamer, IGN, and HotHardware (to name a few). I also used to be a business analyst for Stanford University—taking a ton of data and transforming it into recommendations is what I do best.
For routers, I’ve spent hundreds of hours testing more than 20 routers for this and our other router guides. I have pored over reviews of every major (consumer-grade) router that has been released. I’ve interviewed independent analysts, as well as router experts, engineers, and product managers from the top router manufacturers. For this guide, I relied on the expert opinions of reviewers from SmallNetBuilder, CNET, PCWorld, PCMag.com, and TrustedReviews. I also went through Amazon comments (and bestseller lists) to get a sense of which routers have been reliable and popular. For the most recent update, I spent more than a week testing the performance of 11 devices—on both Wi-Fi bands, across four different locations in my house.
Who this is for
If you’re tired of being unable to use your Wi-Fi in the same dead zones in your house or apartment, it’s time to get a new router.
You should also 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 maximum wireless-n speeds are eight 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, but no wireless-ac devices, you should consider upgrading. Newer routers like the Archer C7 have faster processors, better antennas, and more memory, which can give you better performance and more Wi-Fi range, even using your old devices. If you have wireless-ac devices, our pick is great. It supports the fastest connection types of any wireless-ac device right now (which isn’t to say it’s the fastest router, period, but your MacBook Pro will be faster with our pick than an AC1200 router).
If you already have a wireless-ac router and you’re happy with its range and speeds, you don’t need to upgrade. If you don’t own any wireless-ac devices and need to cover only 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 do a lot of high-bandwidth activities in your house and need all the wireless-ac performance you can get—for file transfers, screen-sharing, HD movie streaming—or if you want more advanced features like QoS, a VPN server, or Time Machine backups, you should get our upgrade pick. Our primary pick is still the best value of any router we’ve tested, but the Netgear R6400’s wireless-ac performance is generally better. Its performance is also worth the price; more expensive routers might be a little faster in some instances, but they won’t be as good of an investment.
Finally, if ease of setup and use is your most important requirement, Apple’s AirPort Extreme and Google’s OnHub offer dead-simple setup and management, but sacrifice the power, features, and flexibility of our top picks.
How we picked
When we started our router research, we knew we had to go with a wireless-ac router for our recommendation. Wireless-ac, or IEEE 802.11ac, is the latest mainstream Wi-Fi version. It’s the 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 released over the past year: the iPhone 6, HTC One M9, Moto X (first and second generation), Samsung Galaxy S6, and more.
Unless you go very cheap, your next gadget with Wi-Fi will have wireless-ac. If your router and device both support wireless-ac, your speed and range will be much better than if one (or both) supports only wireless-n. You’ll get much better speeds at the limits of the router’s range, and that could mean the difference between an ugly, stuttering Netflix stream and smooth, 1080p loveliness.
Our best router also had to be 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 are backward compatible (though they won’t work 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 performance. The 5GHz band (used by both 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.
We wanted our best router to support 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. Our pick will give any device you own the fastest connection it can handle.2
Spatial streams also factor into the confusing world of router labeling. Don’t get fooled. An amazing N600 router (a wireless-n router that supports two 150Mbps 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 support one or two streams.
The same is mostly true for wireless-ac routers, but the numbering gets even more complicated. For example, today’s AC3200 routers (also known as “tri-band 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 won’t always give you better speed and range than a strong AC1750 or AC1900 router. They’re designed for situations where around 10 (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 be faster than our three-stream pick once somebody makes a four-stream device (or a device that supports MU-MIMO3). However, these routers currently cost a lot for performance that you won’t get with the devices you currently own (or will buy in the near future). Save your money and get our primary pick or upgrade pick instead.
TP-Link’s Archer C7 is one of the faster routers we’ve tested over the past year and a half. It was the top-performing router among our four finalists4 in our first major iteration of this guide. We generated that list by looking at router reviews and performance rankings from SmallNetBuilder, CNET, PCWorld, PCMag.com, and TrustedReviews, which we still use in our research today.
We later retested the Archer C7 against our $60 cheap router pick and our $75 cheap wireless-ac router, as well as the Netgear Nighthawk R7000 ($170), Apple AirPort Extreme ($180), and Asus’s $200 RT-AC68U (the T-Mobile Personal CellSpot, which is basically free for T-Mobile subscribers). Just before we published that update, TP-Link released the Archer C8, a $120 AC1750 follow-up to the Archer C7, so we tested that, too.
From left: 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.
We most recently tested the Archer C7 again against a mix of new and top-rated AC3200 and AC2350/AC2400 routers (manufacturers and reviewers don’t agree on how to describe them):
AC2400 — Asus RT-AC87U ($240)
AC3200 — Asus RT-AC3200 ($280)
AC3200 — Netgear R8000 ($280)
AC3200 — Trendnet TEW-828DRU ($225)
AC2350 — Netgear R7500 ($195)
AC3200 — D-Link DIR-890L/R ($300)
We also retested the Archer C7 against our previous upgrade pick, Netgear’s R7000, as well as TP-Link’s new AC1900 Archer C9 ($150), D-Link’s new AC1750 DIR-859 ($120), Netgear’s new AC1750 R6400 ($150), Google’s OnHub ($200), and Apple’s AirPort Extreme ($180).
From top left to top right (then bottom left to bottom right), the 11 routers we tested in summer 2015: Netgear’s R6400, TP-Link’s Archer C7, D-Link’s DIR-890L/R, TP-Link’s Archer C8, Asus’s RT-AC3200, D-Link’s DIR-859, Netgear’s R7000, Netgear’s R8000, Netgear’s R7500, Trentnet’s TEW-828DRU, and Asus’s RT-AC87U.
How we tested
We’ve tested routers in a variety of different configurations over the past year and a half, but the core concept remains the same: short- and long-range tests of routers’ performance on their 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands.
Our most recent testing setup, which we used to test all 11 routers pictured above, had four different client testing locations in a 2,577-square-foot, one-story house. Two spots were within sight of the router (at 11 feet and 43 feet), and two test stations were 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 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 needed 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 networks—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 two different two-stream wireless-ac clients across the last two major iterations of our testing: a 2014 MacBook Air and an Acer S7-393-7451 Windows laptop.
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 test them, so you can get a better idea of how they might perform in your house or apartment.
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 were testing in the real world, external variables (competing signals, walls, network traffic) affected 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 major issues.
We always use our picks for months to get a sense of their reliability, but we’re just one example. We also look at user reviews on Amazon and Newegg to see if a lot of people are having issues with a router. If they are, they’ll say it in their comments.
Our pick
The TP-Link Archer C7 (v2) is the best router for most people because it’s a great value. We’ve tested the Archer C7 against different combinations of routers, at different times, using different setups, for nearly two years. Though it hasn’t been the fastest router in every test, the Archer C7’s performance at long range—where speed matters most—combined with its low price gives it an incredible advantage over every other router we’ve tested.
The C7 gives you the performance and the 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 not intuitive 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.
Those are the main arguments in favor of our pick. Read on if you’d like to learn more about our specific testing or the Archer C7’s (limited) features, or go ahead and jump to the next section, Who else likes it?
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.
When we 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 follow-up to the C7, the Archer C7 was the fastest router on a majority of our single-client tests. We didn’t get amazing 2.4GHz speeds on our MacBook Air when it was out of the router’s line of site (at long range), but the Archer C7 delivered the best 5GHz speeds. Its worst 2.4GHz signal was still higher than 22 Mbps—faster than most people’s home Internet connections and seven times faster than a 1080p Netflix stream.
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.
The Archer C7 also did well in multiclient testing, either outperforming the other routers or coming just shy of the top router at a given location. Its performance was 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.
In our most recent testing, when we used a two-stream wireless-ac Acer S7-393-7451 laptop instead of a two-stream wireless-ac MacBook Air, the Archer C7 beat every other router on most of our 2.4GHz tests. Its wireless-ac performance wasn’t the strongest, but it did well enough at long range—where Wi-Fi performance really matters. And its long-range speeds are still likely much faster than the Internet service you’re paying for. While several routers performed better, most of them cost anywhere from two to three times the price—not worth it for most people.
We also separately tested the Archer C7 against two brand-new AC1750 routers, D-Link’s DIR-859 ($140) and Netgear’s R6400 ($150). For comparison’s sake, we’ll also include our previous upgrade pick, Netgear’s R7000 ($170), on the charts:
Our pick completely outperformed D-Link’s DIR-859 in our 2.4GHz testing. The two were more evenly matched on our single-client 5GHz tests, and pretty evenly split for short-range and long-range multiclient performance. When we ran a similar price/performance calculation between the two routers, the Archer C7 was a better value based on every single one of our tests.
The Archer C7 also outperformed Netgear’s R6400 on most of our 2.4GHz tests. It wasn’t as fast as Netgear’s router on a majority of our single-client 5GHz tests, but it still did great on our hardest test—long range, with walls and other objects between the laptop and router. The R6400 is generally faster than our primary pick for wireless-ac, but it’s not a total blowout. And our pick is still a better value due to the speeds you’re getting for its sub-$100 price.
Features
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.
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.
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.
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.
Who else likes it
SmallNetBuilder has the Archer C7 in second place on its AC1750 router performance charts, right behind TP-Link’s Archer C8 (which is slower on our tests and a little more expensive) and Asus’s RT-AC66U (slower on our tests and a lot more expensive). Reviewer Tim Higgins says the Archer C7 “isn’t a bad way to get your feet wet in AC class wireless networking for small to mid-sized locations”
PCMag.com’s Samara Lynn said the Archer C7 is pretty sparse when it comes to features, but it’s also a lot cheaper than competing routers with more. Though she wasn’t blown away by the Archer C7’s performance on her tests, she did praise our pick’s range: “When testing in the 2.4GHz band, the C7’s throughput slowed by 10 percent as I moved from 5 to 30 feet away. At 5GHz, the throughput dropped only about 8 percent. This is very good; even with very high performing routers I often see drops of 15 percent and more.”
On Amazon, the Archer C7 has a 4.1-star rating, with 75 percent of 1,477 total reviewers assigning it a four- or a five-star rating. 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, and so on. Some of these complaints are also for the router’s poorer v1 version, which Amazon lumps into the general Archer C7 product listing.
On Newegg, the router has a four-egg rating with 224 total reviews. Within the past six months, 48 reviewers gave the Archer C7 an average rating of just around 4.3 eggs. 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 haven’t experienced these issues ourselves, but that’s not to say you couldn’t. If you have issues within the router’s two-year limited-warranty period, TP-Link suggests you first contact the retailer you bought it from, then try the company’s RMA program.
Flaws but not dealbreakers
Our pick’s chief flaw is its poor UI—especially when it comes to advanced features. It’s easy to set the router up for basic use, but the rest of the Archer C7’s UI is text-heavy and confusing. For example, features that sound useful (like parental controls) are more of a hassle to set up and just not as good as what you’ll find on competing routers.
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 could use to keep high-bandwidth applications like BitTorrent from ruining your Hulu streaming or online gaming. It’s also missing an iTunes server, and it doesn’t support jumbo frames for faster file transfers between wired devices on your home network. We wish the Archer C7 came with USB 3.0 ports so we could get faster file transfers for USB storage.
You’ll want to make sure that you have the right version of the router if you buy it, as this is the second version of the Archer C7 that TP-Link has released. The older one, the v1, has long had a number of connection issues, and we wouldn’t recommend it for anybody. Once you receive it, flip the router over and check its bottom to ensure that it’s a v2 version—if not, return it and make sure wherever you bought it from sends you the right router next time.
Care, setup, and maintenance
Change your router’s administrator password as soon as you set up your router.
Change your router’s administrator password as soon as you set up your router. Use WPA2-PSK (AES) encryption for your Wi-Fi networks for the best speed and security—though you should use your router’s mixed-mode setting (AES and TKIP) if you have older devices that don’t support AES. Immediately check to see if your router has any available firmware updates, and recheck once every few months for the latest performance, security, and reliability updates.
For example, a recent security advisory found that 92 different routers from 26 vendors are potentially affected by a vulnerability related to their USB port sharing—including TP-Link’s Archer C7 and Netgear’s Nighthawk R7000. TP-Link published a firmware update fairly quickly to fix this exploit for our pick and many of its other routers, but you have to download and install it manually. Your router isn’t going to send you an email when a new firmware update is ready. (On the plus side, Netgear told us that an attacker can only exploit the vulnerability, called NetUSB, if he or she is already on your Wi-Fi network. Though its fix for the R7000 will be ready in September, you’ll have to log into your router’s UI to install it—the router isn’t self-updating.)
Try to place your router in a central location in your house. Don’t stash it next to a bunch of other electronics, like in the corner of your media cabinet, and don’t just shove it somewhere in the basement. Make sure you have a mix of vertical and horizontal antennas to give yourself the best potential performance, but check your router’s manual to see if the manufacturer has a specific suggestion. Connect to your 5GHz network instead of your 2.4GHz for better performance at the potential 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.
Your router should run your Wi-Fi networks on the least-populated channels for both 2.4GHz and 5GHz, but 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 could 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.
If you’re having issues connecting to your router from a laptop, make sure that you have the most updated drivers for your laptop’s Wi-Fi card.
If you’re having issues connecting to your router from a laptop, make sure that you have the most updated drivers for your laptop’s Wi-Fi card. You can usually find these on your laptop manufacturer’s website, but it’s possible that the Wi-Fi card’s manufacturer might have more recent drivers. We encountered this issue once during our testing—our laptop would connect to a router’s wireless-ac network, but drop our speeds to almost nothing. When we updated our Acer laptop with Wi-Fi drivers straight from Intel, which were newer than Acer’s, our problem went away.
The runner-up: TP-Link Archer C8
Also Great
The Archer C8 is TP-Link’s vertical follow-up 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 at up to $40 more than our primary pick, and the Archer C8’s wireless speeds weren’t as fast as its predecessor’s on most of our older tests.
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 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. Though the Archer C8 still outperforms most other routers that are just as expensive (and then some), we’d still try to hold out for our pick if it was suddenly unavailable or more expensive. The C8 could be a decent alternative if a great deal dropped its price significantly below the Archer C7, but our pick is still a stronger wireless router.
The upgrade pick: Netgear’s R6400
Also Great
If you want a router that’s as full-featured as it is fast, we recommend Netgear’s R6400. It’s cheaper than our previous upgrade pick, Netgear’s R7000, but it has almost all of the same features and is nearly as fast.
We still think our primary pick is the best value for most people who just want simple, great Wi-Fi for a low price. The R6400 is a better pick if you know that you need strong wireless-ac performance and killer features. It’s a great option if you plan to do a lot of file-copying, streaming, or other high-bandwidth activity, whether you’re in the same room as your router or at the fringes of your Wi-Fi network (on wireless-ac devices, of course).
Though the R6400 was a little slower than the R7000 on most of our tests, the difference between the two is close enough that you are unlikely to notice it in real-world use. (The R6400 did outperform the R7000 by 70 Mbps in one instance, the only major gap we saw during our testing.) Compared with our primary pick, the R6400 was generally faster for wireless-ac on most of our tests, and it held out pretty well against the Archer C7’s formidable 2.4GHz performance.
The R6400’s speeds were in the top 25 percent on four of our 16 tests versus all the other routers we benchmarked. That’s lower than the R7000’s nine. However, the small price difference between the two routers makes a big difference: The R6400 was the best value—the speed you’re getting for what you’re paying—on 12 of our tests (including every single one of our wireless-ac tests) versus the R7000’s eight.
What really sets the R6400 apart from our primary pick, almost more than its wireless performance, is the router’s comprehensive features and easy-to-use UI. It shares almost all of the same features as the R7000, save for ReadyCloud—which lets you access USB-connected storage from anywhere—and its inability to function as a wireless repeater, which most people don’t care about.
CNET’s Dong Ngo noted that the R7000 “offers quite a lot for the price,” including Time Machine backups, ReadyShare Vault backup software, iTunes streaming support, and a built-in OpenVPN server—none of which are available on the Archer C7, and all of which are present in the cheaper R6400. The last feature is especially great, since OpenVPN will give your connection an extra layer of security whenever you’re using public Wi-Fi (like at your favorite coffee shop). Otherwise, you’d have to pay a monthly fee for a third-party VPN service; the R6400 and R7000 secure your connection for free.
The R6400 is brand new, so it had only 36 total reviews on Amazon (with a 4.9-star average) at the time of this update. On Newegg, the router had zero reviews when we updated this guide. Netgear offers a limited one-year hardware warranty for the router. As always, if you’re experiencing any difficulties, don’t be afraid to contact Netgear for support (or to RMA a fussy router).
Also great (for T-Mobile subscribers)
Also great
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 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 bad news is that only T-Mobile subscribers can get this router. 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.”
We benchmarked the T-Mobile Personal CellSpot using an older testing process. Our primary pick, TP-Link’s Archer C7, was faster on our single-client tests when tested using a 2014 MacBook Air’s two-stream wireless-ac connection. (It also gave us a working signal at long range when the Personal CellSpot could not.) The Personal CellSpot was a bit faster on our wireless-ac multiclient tests, but only up close; it still struggled with wireless-ac on our long-distance test.
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 (though our upgrade pick, Netgear’s R6400, can do it).
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 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
Google OnHub
Google’s OnHub is a lot prettier than most other routers you can purchase. However, it buries its ports underneath its external blue shell. The router gets less pretty once you plug everything in and try to smash the shell back down again.
On August 31, Google dropped a hype bomb in the form of the $200 OnHub, its first router (built in collaboration with TP-Link). This AC1900 router is half as fast at long distance as routers half its price, and its current features are very limited compared with the competition—even compared with what Google advertises. Like Google’s Chromecast, there’s a lot of potential for Google to update the OnHub and pack it full of amazing features in the future. Wait to buy it then, if you must; don’t buy it now.
Google bills the OnHub as more than just a router, but right now it’s mostly just a router (and not a great one at that).
Google bills the OnHub as more than just a router, but right now it’s mostly just a router (and not a great one at that). It’s super easy to set up via the Google On app, it updates its own firmware automatically, it has a cool management system for letting others fix your router when you can’t, and it has a good-looking cylindrical design. But other features Google promotes either don’t work yet (Bluetooth 4.0; support for some smarthome protocols, a USB 3.0 connection) or don’t quite work (continuous channel optimization).
We tested the OnHub against our current router pick (TP-Link’s $95 Archer C7), our upgrade pick (Netgear’s $195 R7000), and the Apple AirPort Extreme ($200), its closest competitor in ease of setup. There’s no way to test the OnHub’s 2.4GHz and 5GHz performance separately, as it only gives you a single SSID for both 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands—the idea being that your device will automatically switch from 5GHz to 2.4GHz once the 5GHz signal runs out. In our tests, that part worked, but our devices didn’t switch back from 2.4GHz to 5GHz once they were back in range. This isn’t really a fault of the OnHub, since the device, not the router, chooses which network to connect to, but it is annoying.
Though the OnHub didn’t crap out at our hardest test location—number three—we couldn’t get a working 5GHz connection. Since the OnHub uses one SSID for both bands, there’s no easy way to tell when you’re on the router’s slower 2.4GHz or speedier 5GHz band.
Setup is incredibly easy via the Google On app (Android or iOS)—even simpler than Apple’s AirPort Extreme (for OS X users). Google describes and diagrams each step you take. But once your router is working, Google On becomes too simple.
The main screen for the Google On app presents a simple network map, but not much direction on how you can access the router’s other (few) features.
The main screen shows you what’s connected to your router and how much data it’s using. After you tap on it, you’ll find an icon in the corner which lets you tell the router if certain devices need a priority connection. We almost missed that part, since the icon is in the same spot (and looks a little similar) to the app’s network testing icon on its main screen.
An advanced networking section lets you set up static IP addresses and port forwarding. (Most people are unlikely to mess with these or other advanced settings.) You can also run the OnHub as a router or a bridge and change the brightness of its circular status light on top. Otherwise, the most interesting part of Google On is the app’s manager system, which lets another person edit its settings from afar. That’s great for troubleshooting a family member’s device, even though there’s not much a manager can really change.
You can do more with Apple’s AirPort Extreme router than Google’s, and even more with the Netgear R6400 than either one. You can’t even make full use of the OnHub’s existing features right now. There’s no way yet to access any storage you connect to the OnHub’s USB 3.0 port (which would have been great to be able to stream to, say, a Chromecast), and the integrated speaker doesn’t seem to do anything (other than play a small song about ten minutes after we set it up, for some reason).
Almost every other router we’ve tested has four Gigabit Ethernet ports. Apple’s AirPort Extreme has only three, but that’s still two more than the OnHub’s one. You shouldn’t have to buy a switch for your $200 router.
Most routers still let you access their settings without an Internet connection—you still have an internal network to manage, after all. If the OnHub loses its Internet connection, Google’s smart router gets dumb. Even though you’ll still be connected to the OnHub with your mobile device, the router won’t give you information about any other connected devices. You can’t edit your Wi-Fi network’s name or password, and you lose access to all of its advanced settings (save for changing your WAN configuration). You won’t even be able to restart the OnHub via the Google On app. We’ve never experienced that on a router before. And unlike most routers, there’s no web UI at all. You need a smartphone to access OnHub’s settings.
One of the OnHub’s 13 internal antennas is supposed to survey your wireless environment every five minutes and switch over to a less-crowded Wi-Fi channel if it exists. This didn’t work for us. When we set up the OnHub in the same room as our R7000 and switched the latter to use the same Wi-Fi channel as the former, the OnHub never deviated from the crowded channel—even after we ran it overnight and flooded the R7000’s Wi-Fi network with traffic.
Though the OnHub has hardware support for Bluetooth 4.0 as well as the smarthome protocols Weave, Thread, and IEEE 802.15.4 (what Zigbee uses), none of these are currently enabled. (Support for Z-Wave, another popular smarthome standard, is curiously absent).
The best part of the Google OnHub right now is its setup process. Mac users can get a similar experience with an AirPort Extreme, and it’ll be faster and have more features. If you’re on a PC, setting up something like Netgear’s R6400 is still easy, but not as easy—a trade-off we’d happily make for the Netgear router’s more comprehensive features, better speed, and longer range. Google’s OnHub will never be the fastest router. It might be a great router for some people once Google updates it—especially once the other pieces of Google’s smart home ecosystem start appearing—but it feels more like a beta test right now.
Apple AirPort Extreme
Apple’s AirPort Extreme looks a lot better than most routers, and it’s easier to use, but you can get better range and more features for the price (if you need them).
Apple’s $180 AirPort Extreme might not be the fastest router, but it’s still a pretty good investment for Apple users because of its unrivaled ease-of-use. It looks good on the shelf, and it does a great job handling the basic features you need from a Wi-Fi network. It’s also the easiest router to integrate into your existing Apple network. Its simplicity is its strongest selling point for all-Apple households. But if you need great Wi-Fi range, better compatibility with Windows laptops, or if you plan to really use advanced features like parental controls, OpenVPN servers, or FTP servers, the $150 Netgear R6400 is a stronger choice. It can do almost everything Apple’s router can do (and a lot more that Apple’s router cannot) and it’s pretty easy to configure—just not as easy as the AirPort Extreme (on a MacBook or iOS device). Here’s how the two compare.
On our close-range tests, the AirPort Extreme outperformed our Best Wi-Fi Router pick, TP-Link’s Archer C7, but it wasn’t as fast as the Netgear R6400. But we couldn’t even connect to the AirPort Extreme’s 5GHz network at our most difficult testing location, which combines long range with walls, furniture, and other objects between our client laptop and the router (and its 2.4GHz speeds were slower than our picks’ 5GHz speeds). Our primary pick and upgrade pick are better, since you can stay on your wireless-ac connection for longer and get better speeds across a greater distance.
The AirPort Extreme had the worst price-to-performance ratio of any of the routers we tested it against.
Features
AirPort Extreme
Netgear R7000
Ethernet
1x WAN, 3x LAN (Gigabit Ethernet)
1x WAN, 4x LAN (Gigabit Ethernet)
Setup
OS X Utility
Web-based Interface
Mobile Access
Airport Utility app for iOS
Genie app for iOS, Android
USB Type
1x USB 2.0 (HFS+, FAT16, FAT32)
1x USB 2.0, 1x USB 3.0 (Supports all major file system types)
Remote USB Drive Access
Yes, remote (Back to My Mac) — syncs with existing Apple ID, access USB remotely
Yes, remote (ReadyCloud)
USB Access via Finder
Yes
Yes
USB Backup
Time Machine
ReadyShare Vault, Time Machine
Firmware Updates
Automatically checks; downloads and installs after prompt
Automatically checks; downloads and installs after prompt
2.4GHz Channel Selection
Automatic or manual
Automatic or manual
40MHz Channels for 2.4GHz
No
Yes
5GHz Channel Selection
Automatic or manual
Manual
Can Work as Wi-Fi Extender?
Yes (only another Apple router)
No
Can Work as Wi-Fi Access Point?
Yes
Yes
Can Work as Wi-Fi Bridge?
No
Yes
DNLA Streaming
No
Yes
Guest Networks
Yes
Yes
Access Controls
Yes (MAC address, limit by days and times.)
Yes (Select devices from list, limit by days and times.)
Parental Controls
No
Yes (OpenDNS-based)
QoS
No
Yes—down and up
Other Features
—
DynamicDNS, OpenVPN, remote router management, traffic meter.
Apple makes it easy to set up the AirPort Extreme. Its Airport Utility is baked right into OS X and uses clear, plain language (and graphics) to help you establish a new Wi-Fi network or extend your existing Airport network. You can also configure the router using Apple’s Airport Utility app for iOS—better than trying to navigate our upgrade pick’s Web-based UI on a smartphone.
Both the Airport Extreme and the Netgear R6400 automatically check for new firmware when you set them up. They won’t update themselves, but they’ll let you know new firmware is available in their configuration screens (and can download and install it once you tell them to).
You use your Apple ID or a Netgear account to remotely access the contents of an attached USB storage device. Each router lets you restrict access to the drives via passwords, though you can also disable the R6400’s USB ports if you don’t plan to use them. The AirPort Extreme’s more limited USB file system support (HFS+ or FAT16/32) isn’t an issue for Apple-only households, but it’s a big pain in the butt for Windows users, since Windows doesn’t support HFS+, and FAT32 can’t store files larger than 4GB.
The AirPort Extreme and Netgear R6400 can both run separate SSIDs on the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands, but Apple’s router can’t do 40MHz-wide channels on 2.4GHz. This can give your Wi-Fi speeds a big boost, but most routers that can do this won’t if competing Wi-Fi networks are present—which they almost always are.
Apple’s router can act as a Wi-Fi extender, but only for other Apple routers. Netgear’s R6400 can’t extend an existing wireless signal, though it can create a wireless bridge to connect wired devices to an existing wireless network. Both routers can double as access points—the best way to get a great Wi-Fi signal in an area that needs it.
It’s easy to set up Time Machine backups on both routers (though we prefer the R6400’s much faster USB 3.0 port for that). Netgear’s router also comes with a separate ReadyShare Vault application, which Windows users can install to automate their file backups.
While the Airport Extreme covers the basics about as well as Netgear’s R6400—and its configuration screens are easier for Apple users to navigate—the latter lets you do even more: OpenDNS-based parental controls, QoS to prioritize your limited bandwidth among a number of simultaneously connected clients, Dynamic DNS (for easier remote access to a home FTP server), OpenVPN (to help secure your public Wi-Fi connections), remote router management, and a traffic monitor to see just how close you’re coming to your ISP’s monthly data cap.
Though these are all great features, they are more geared for power users. Most people are unlikely to do much more with their home routers beyond setting them up, connecting to their Wi-Fi, and maybe taking advantage of a single feature or two (like Time Machine). Though our upgrade pick is still a better overall router than the AirPort Extreme, the latter greatly simplifies Wi-Fi networking for Apple users. If you don’t mind trading speed for convenience, the AirPort Extreme is a good option for an all-Apple house.
Other routers
Netgear’s R7000</