Give me one valid reason to "upgrade"

>requiring small power plant to support home network

Attached: 1561373547392.jpg (480x480, 21K)

checked
>implying you have to use a full tower server rack
>not using a small wall mounted rack
moron

Attached: rk619walloh.main.jpg (600x600, 26K)

>not using your server rack sized equipment as a coffee table

checked
>imagine drinking coffee

Attached: Famous-characters-Troll-face-Bad-Poker-Face-564817.png (948x843, 83K)

I've just found 2 fully functional 1Gb/s N routers from the trash, installed tomato on them, mounted a fan + sink and some external antennas.
Total cost = free

You will feel like a nigger if you dont upgrade
I upgraded and now I feel like a white man again

Vulnerabilities. Even if custom firmware. They are outdated.

Based and scavengerpilled

These are still supported to this day.

Attached: mikrotik.jpg (640x480, 62K)

The ultimate reason.

Attached: linksys.png (1500x953, 869K)

>in an environment where you're flooded with tons of 2.4GHz WiFi networks
so pretty much everywhere that anyone currently on this board would be

Eh, I myself am a good 2 kilometers away from any WiFi network

Wireless N/AC.
Supporting speeds above 100mbps.
Security.
Configuring multiple bands/antennas/guest network
Aesthetics.
Management through mobile apps.

Attached: image.jpg (4032x3024, 1.64M)

based

>Not using your coffee table as a rack
plebs

wiki.eth0.nl/index.php/LackRack

checked
nice wires...

Attached: LackRack.jpg (3072x2304, 1.67M)

Neat. I've found a single 8-port switch so far. Not really looking actively though.

I'm jelly that you guys and dive head into a dumpster and find shiny cool tech whereas me living in pizzaland cannot :(

There aren't any trashcans in Epsteins island?

No you retard, 5ghz is also at least 3 times faster than 2.4ghz.
2.4GHz reaches 300Mb/s and 5GHz can easily go into Gigabit range.
I've got a 200MB connection, if I use 2.4GHz my max download speed is 50MB/s and using 5GHz I get the whole 200.
My PC is literally on the other side of the house of where the router is at, going through multiple walls the speed and latency is just fine

Oh gawwd no
let me outta here
we got some guy onboard
who read wikipedia and is now an expert
OK Joe 90
thanks for the info

>200MB connection
>200MB
>MB

The absolute state of Jow Forums, an alternate reality where B = b

Attached: dwihgt.png (550x307, 250K)

Sorry mate, I dont need to read wikipedia to know such trivial information. Every dualband 5GHz adapter you buy will tell you that 300MB/s is the max speed on 2,4GHz, it literally says so on the box. Just taking a look on amazon will tell you how fast they go

that thing maxes out at 54Mbps

No? I've got 200 MegaByte connection. I messed up about the speeds earlier, those are Megabit

...thats what he's saying

my internet connection is faster than that thing.

>i got 200MB
>those are Megabit
make up your fucking mind

>speeds over 100
>cant even do 100

Can you fucking read? I said I messed up about the SPEEDS, so I meant to say 50Mb/s

how the fuck do you mess up 200 and 50 you absolute mongrel

Networks are measured in Mbs, storage is measured in MBs.....

Attached: pee_looking_thing.png (450x401, 183K)

Wireless g is slow as fuck these days.

Done.

Have this exact. I'd. Got it refurbished for like 1/5 the price. Happy so far it drives all my Sonos systems, wireless devices and gaming

You're calling me an absolute mongrel while you're still too retarded to read. A 200MB connection is not a fucking speed unit. My connection is 200 MB, I simply misstated the "50MB/s" I was talking about afterwards, those are meant to be Mb/s. I also made the same typo here .

That's literally what I said "[...] so I meant to say 50Mb/s"

If your internet link is something like 10Mbps then sure, it works.

based retard in his thread who doesn't understand the guy was responding to the rhetorical question

Gbps Ethernet
5GHz

so what the fuck is your connection speed then

2020 is in the 2000s

Attached: 1565671793160.jpg (499x481, 28K)

2000s is 2000-2010 you fucking moron

200MB/s, my ISP measures it in MBytes

>A 200MB connection is not a fucking speed unit
>My connection is 200 MB

It's a 200 (non-speed-unit)

Attached: ginger_is_an_anagram.jpg (1241x1779, 139K)

Who's your ISP?

do you even know what that is in actual units?

also, prove it.

It does have 100mb ethernet, no?

it does not. it's even in the fucking model name, and i have one myself, if you dont believe it just fucking google it.

>2.4ghz
>thinkpad NONchiclet
>wireless G
>thicass plastic running windows XP extra warm at 1280x800

now that was mobile computing boy

Attached: boomer thinkpad.jpg (380x349, 35K)

I just looked it up and yeah its 10/100 ethernet
Ports:
>1x 10/100 WAN, 4x 10/100 Switched LAN, 1x Power

no it's not

Attached: file.png (608x216, 59K)

Oh I see you are retarded and don't know the difference between wired and wireless.

5Ghz said and done.

I work as a broadband technician. If you live in an average sized home in the city, you're probably going it greatly benefit by using 5Ghz over 2.4Ghz for many reasons. Mostly because labtesting achieves 54Mb/s for 2.4Ghz(though occasionally I do see devices hitting 70-90). But your 5Ghz band is going to support roughly in the

On a wired connection I get around 50MB/s on a download with my ~400Mb/s connection over coaxial.

You're telling me you have a 1600+Mb/s connection and your ISP measures in BYTES and not bits? Because this is not a standard of practice in America, you can understand the skepticism from me and others. In America,and in fact most first world countries, data transfer speeds are listed in bits per second. This is because you don't transfer bytes, you transfer bits. And software dictates when and how those bits turn to bytes.

So please answer the question of which ISP you use, because we want to check the website to see whether you're retarded, or the company is retarded. Which in turn will result in either a roasting of you or a user feedback report to the company and potentially an putting about lying to their customers, respectively.

i have one and you dont.
guess why it says 10/100 ports.

Attached: wrt54gl.jpg (3024x4032, 3.91M)

Because it's wireless g which means over wireless you are only going to get 54Mbps. Ethernet ports are 10/100 over ethernet you would have wired transfers of 100mbps....

>still dont get it
oh boy, you're a smart guy arent you

Attached: 1549220495717.jpg (638x1000, 62K)

You do know the difference between Mb vs MB? please show me where I ever stated that it was 100 MB/s

I had to retire mine, started randomly rebooting, replaced caps, didn't help. Replaced it with cheap mikrotik.
It maxes around ~20mbit with torrents. 50mb/s maybe in direct download. With qos it realistically can't get over 8mbit on wan port. I would still using it tho if not for hardware problems.

Attached: 4323.jpg (1280x720, 95K)

>MB/s
hahahahaha that's not even what im talking about you fucking retard.
i already told you, it cant go over 54Mbps, even if the fucking ports say 10/100 it doesnt matter if you use wire or wireless. you stupid cunt

by Cisco products looser

Right and it has nothing to do with the limit of wireless g being 54Mbps. I think you might actually be retarded.

>i think you might actually be retarded
funny you say that when you cant even read a short sentence

Attached: file.png (253x43, 2K)

>2.4GHz
it garbage

read the convo/thread, dipshit

>convo/thread
what?

my conversation with the guy that post was to, and/or the fucking thread, you stupid nigger

i dont want to

still waiting for your guess, brainlet.

I honestly don't know what to say, either it's a shit router and can't sustain 100mb/s over ethernet or you are just retarded.

like i said several times, it maxes out at 54Mbit, you dumb fuck.

now guess why it does that while saying 10/100 ports

>Cisco buys great product
>Cisco promises to not influence original design but only "help" with better supply chain, etc.
>Influences design
>Product is mediocre now
>Influences design again
>Product is garbage
>Consumers/Enterprises stop buying product
>Cisco dumps product and integrates .005% of the IP into new products
RInse, wash, repeat 5x a year for the next 30 years.
This is Cisco - The Human Network

Wireless g maxes out at 54 mbit hence the sticker. I have a wireless N router with gigabit ethernet ports. Now if I do a file transfer over wireless the max speed it will achieve is 300mb/s but over ethernet it will achieve 1gb/s.

the wired ports dont go any faster. guess why it says 10/100 on them while the whole thing is hardware locked to max out at 54Mbit.
just guess once and i'll tell you the correct answer.

>freenetworktard
show me a better offer

Better offer for what?

Cisco has a major problem with acquiring good companies and then destroying them.

>He fell for the wireless jew
Not gonna make it

Attached: 1450349494_1204486.jpg (2500x2500, 319K)

based autism user BTFO the faggot retard

This was a comfy router back in the day. But it's time for something newer.
>gigabit ports
>USB file hosting
>faster wireless speed and range

The wires ports DO go faster. I didn't read any kind of comment chain. You might be referring specifically to a certain router. But Ethernet is not held to the same standard as wireless. If your wireless is capped at 54Mbps that does not in any way affect your Ethernet.

Again, I didn't read your comment chain but this is not the same thing as using an old computer on new wifi and having the wifi locked to the old speeds. You can have devices running on 2.4Ghz doing 54mbps while simultaneously taking advantage of gigabit transfer speeds over Ethernet. If you couldn't, nobody would market speeds and 5Ghz/Ethernet would be obsolete and never developed anymore.

>Cisco has a major problem with acquiring good companies and then destroying them.
i dont get into that those are cheap and reliable maybe the best network components in the world.

>Not wanting this in your house to hunt your fears

Attached: asus-rt-ac5300.png (600x416, 510K)

What fucking ignorance in this thread concerning basic routing and wireless functionality, including the "broadband technician" who apparently isn't even aware of 802.11n operation on the 2.4GHz band being the reason they've seen throughput above 54mbps. Also a bunch of WLAN feebs who don't realize that link rate doesn't equal actual performance. WRT54G is hardware limited for anything but the most simple use of a slow internet connection in 2019, enjoy your weak CPU, low flash space and limited RAM.

This thread feels like a bunch of idiots stumbled on the old "turn your $50 router into a $300 router!!!!!" DD-WRT guides from last decade.

The WRT54G v1/2 ?
Sure, they are/were some of the best consumer routers ever released - they were also released before the Cisco acquisition.

WRT56GL? Shortly after the acquisition, already in development, they sold in high numbers but were essentially WRT54G routers.

Take a look as time goes on with the models, rather than adding more memory and flash they start REMOVING memory and flash...even using leftover stock flash from previous revs and then software locking the flash so 50% isn't available. Then the lowered the proc speeds in some cases.

The point is they took a good company, destroyed it, then spun out the remains for way less than it paid for it to a garbage tier vendor.

It was slow as fuck when it came out but it worked better than anything before it.

I remember trying to file transfer between my desktop and new wifi laptop. 2.3megabytes/s is all I could get. Thought there was a fault but nope that was wireless g at it's max.

That said my 320GB hard drive could only do 70MB/s but Ethernet was 1gb. Guess it really shows you how bloody long we've been stuck on 1gb eth, especially now wifi is faster

>the whole thing is hardware locked to max out at 54Mbit.
dslreports.com/forum/r21538777-Benchmarking-WRT-Firmware-Some-Surprises
ctrl+f "lan-to-lan"

The 2000s are any year after 2000 but before 3000.
When will trogs like you learn the decade your refering to(2000-2010) is called the 'noughties'?

Vulnerabilities out the ass. Enjoy your not-patched-firmware-from-10+-years.

>noughties

Attached: 1559756180754.jpg (580x435, 30K)

>54Mbps
I mean, it's fine for shitposting if that's your thing

>Enjoy your not-patched-firmware-from-10+-years.
>Latest version: 2019.3.118-beta - 2019-07-06
nope.jpg