not convincing, the 2nd cpu is much weaker than the 1st and the cpu on the 66 is more powerful than the cpu on the 56.

I am still thinking getting the N65U from amazon and try stock firmware / moded from Padavan.
If no luck will send it back....

Next question I guess is - is there any other routers with more than 1CPU/cores?
Fastest CPU?

I have an Asus RT56U and I am also getting FTTH/P in the next 2 weeks. I also have been running Various Firewalls in a VM using a HP Microserver N36L. This has been ideal for this purpose and costs with rebate around £120. Its been very useful I also recorded all my TV through it using DVB Viewer.

I am not sure if it will suffice for your requirements, but I have a Intel CT 1Gb card and with the Broadcom onboard I can saturate the LAN with my Adaptec Raided drives. It's more powerful than an Intel draws 45 watts with all drives in place. It presently has Untangle on providing my internal network .
Just a thought you might want to consider. I haven't though as yet tried PPPoe connection. I am currently using a Draytek Vigor 100 in between before the Asus on my present connection, and then to the Untangle box This has been an interesting read and perhaps now that you have also posted your power usuage for the N66. Perhaps I will try the Microserver when i get the new connection, and just use the Asus as a access point.

Maybe you should look into this hardware.
@ post above I also have padavans firmware the Asus was rubbish on the standard firmware before. Port 21 was open all time etc. I don't know if this also would have been worth trying on the router you are returning.

A question though regarding the points you made Rotor.

I know this is a different router the 56, but from the same family of routers. In this firmware of padavans he has enabled

In reference to rt-n56u.googlecode.com/git/changes.eng.txt:

Activated complete HW_NAT offload on both directions for WAN PPPoE (~900 Mbit/s)

Padavans firmware.

You also stated how did smallnetbuilders test their routers. I have found an interesting test/review from Bjorn3d.com, but no real mention of PPPoE loading though.

Bjorn3D Review

My initial connection will be FFTP/H but I will be only taking 76 service at first so no real problem I have the hardware here to move to higher if the Asus isn't upto spec, but when I subscribe to 160 and above then perhaps I will test your assumptions.

Further research has lead me to believe that the router doesn't suffer the CPU problem as some are getting over 430mpbs via PPPoE with this router and the firmware. Also if you see this post they show a speedtest and padavan replies to inform the actual throughput available with PPPoE enabled.

To Gon�alo

N56U performance on IPoE and PPPoE connection:
WAN -> LAN 930Mbps
WAN <- LAN 890Mbps

Tested by iperf

Edited by deleted (Wed 20-Feb-13 07:47:28)

Got RT-N65U yesterday and have it running.
Tried with stock firmware first and got the same connection speed as HH3 (280 down)
Changed to padavan's firmware and getting the same 280. This what I get with direct PPPoE via laptop.
Padavan's also shows router CPU utilization and the utilization is very low - under 5% even when running speed tests.
I have nothing connected to USB, but overall pretty happy with both wifi and wired

Well i been running RouterOS 6.11 and for a intel p4 hyperthreading @ 3ghz, 1gb ram and 20gb sata 3gb/s connected to an cisco sr224 24 port switch, The CPU uses 4% at 55Mb However making 2 bridges incrased it by 19% CPU.

Edited by francisuk25 (Mon 07-Apr-14 20:19:47)

In reply to a post by rotor2k:

I bought an Asus RT-N66U router, which is widely regarded to be the top Gigabit/Wireless router. However, to my great disappointment, the Asus only achieves roughly 200 Mbps (tested via speedtest.net and by downloading the 1 GB test file from thinkbroadband). Using the BT-provided Home Hub 3 I can achieve around 310 Mbps. I don't want to use the HH3 as it is very restricted in its configuration, and e.g. I have no control over the BT-Wifi sharing of my connection to the general public.

The RT-N66U has already been succeeded by the RT-N68U, and in a few months that will be succeeded by the RT-AC87U based on Quantenna�s QSR1000 4x4 MIMO chipset, which will deliver throughput up to 1.7Gbps.

Why not wait the short while until that is released and use the Home Hub 3 to tide you over until then, even if it's not ideal?

In reply to a post by dabotsonline:

The RT-N66U has already been succeeded by the RT-N68U, and in a few months that will be succeeded by the RT-AC87U based on Quantenna�s QSR1000 4x4 MIMO chipset, which will deliver throughput up to 1.7Gbps.

Why not wait the short while until that is released and use the Home Hub 3 to tide you over until then, even if it's not ideal?

Mainly 'cause I posted in January 2013. =)

Ironically the Router upgrade will be the cheapest component upgrade in this process.
Has anyone compared recent portable wifi devices and their compatibility with the various incarnations of 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz wireless technologies?
Taking Apple products from the iPhone 4 / iPad 2 upwards as an example.
In reality, finding a portable wireless device which can support 50Mbps+ over wifi is harder than you'd think.

Edited by deleted (Wed 16-Apr-14 21:10:25)

In reply to a post by flipdee:

Taking Apple products from the iPhone 4 / iPad 2 upwards as an example.

iPad 1 and later support 5GHz band, iPhone 5 and later support 5GHz band.

iPad Air and iPad Mini with Retina Display both from late 2013 have MIMO antenna support, and I've seen an iPad Air manage a speed test of 70Mbps that an iPad 3 and 4 couldn't get to in the same location. (BT Infinity 2 user) using an Apple Airport Extreme 2012 as the router and 5GHz network.

However for most people "it varies" is the real answer due to the variability of WiFi technology anyway.

jchamier, well said.
I just find it funny that quite a number of friends have got 70Mbps FTTC (with some very suspect wireless routers - plusnet i'm looking at you) and when they run speedtest.net and don't get 70Mbps in an ipad 2 ( 25Mbps if your lucky) they are rather miffed. Obviously it's useful to have 70Mbps to share amongst several wired and wireless devices but it doesn't help when the ISP's don't even provide wireless routers capable of 78Mbps on the wireless side.